HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP272264(20) Wetland Delineation Report
Maplewood Creek Flooding and
Habitat Improvement Projects
November 1995
Prepared for
City of Renton, Washington
Prepared by
HARZA
Wetland Delineation Report
Maplewood Creek Flooding and
Habitat Improvement Projects
November 1995
Prepared for
City of Renton, Washington
Prepared by
HARZA
Wetland Delineation Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction......................................................................................................1
2.0 Methods.............................................................................................................1
3.0 Results...............................................................................................................3
3.1 Sedimentation Ponds.....................................................................................................3
3.1.1 Soils .................................................................................................................3
3.1.2 Hydrology ...........................................................................................................4
3.1.3 Vegetation...........................................................................................................4
3.1.4 Functions and Values..........................................................................................5
3.2 Maplewood Creek High-Flow Channel........................................................................5
3.2.1 Soils .................................................................................................................5
3.2.2 Hydrology ...........................................................................................................6
3.2.3 Vegetation...........................................................................................................6
3.2.4 Functions and Values..........................................................................................7
4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations...............................................................7
5.0 Literature Cited ...............................................................................................9
Figure
1. Existing and Future Wetlands
Tables
1. Wetland Types, Acres and Conditions
2. Plants Encountered in the Project Area
3. Wetland Functions and Values - Upper Sediment Basin
4. Wetland Functions and Values - Lower Sediment Basin
5. Wetland Functions and Values - High-Flow Channel (Maplewood Creek)
Photo Sheets
1. Upper Sedimentation Basin,November 1993 and November 1995
2. Lower Sedimentation Basin,November 1993 and November 1995
3. High-Flow Channel (Maplewood Creek)November 1993 and November 1995
Appendix
1. Field Data Sheets showing Soils, Hydrology, and Vegetation Data for each Soil Pit
Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Page ii
WPC\95PROJ\7163G\WETLAND.DOC\01/23/96\10:27 AM\SDC
Wetland Delineation Report
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
MAPLEWOOD CREEK FLOODING AND HABITAT
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
1.0 Introduction
The Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects includes three
separate projects: 1) diversion of Maplewood Creek flows into a new, low-flow fish passage
channel that will be constructed through the golf course; 2)reconstruction and improvement of
the existing sedimentation basin; 3)high-flow capacity improvements in the existing Maplewood
Creek channel as it traverses Maplewood Golf Course. Project features are shown on Figure 1.
Engineering design and more detailed information about each of these components is provided in
separate reports (Maplewood Creek Sedimentation Basin Reconstruction and Improvement
Project Phase 1 Design Report,November 1994; and Maplewood Creek Fish Passage Channel
Riparian and Instream Habitat Report, July, 1995).
This wetland delineation report addresses the effects of the project on approximately 0.42
acres of open water, perennial stream, and palustrine emergent wetlands associated with two
man-made sedimentation ponds and a channelized reach of Maplewood Creek. (Photos of these
areas are included at the end of this report.) The proposed low-flow channel would not affect
wetlands, but would convert approximately 1 acre of uplands that are now maintained as
fairways, tees, greens and cart paths to 0.34 acres of perennial stream and 0.68 acres of palustrine
shrub wetland. Together with the expanded sediment pond and riparian plantings adjacent to the
ponds, a total of 1.45 acres of wetland would be created or enhanced.
The sediment basins and their associated wetlands do not meet the City of Renton
definition for regulated wetlands because they are maintained as stormwater management
facilities. Wetlands along the existing Maplewood Creek channel meet the City's definition of
Category 3 wetlands because they have been disturbed by channelization, grading, excavation,
and mowing. According to the City's Wetland Management Ordinance, buffer areas for a
Category 3 wetland within the urban area designation would usually include 25 feet on either
side of a wetland. At this site the proposed construction and maintenance activities are similar to
current existing activities, and no impacts are expected.
Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Page I
WPC\95PROA7163G\WEMAND.DOC\01/23/96\10:27 AM\SDC
Wetland Delineation Report
Under the City's Ordinance a ratio of 1.5: 1 is typically required for Category 3 wetlands.
The proposed low flow channel is designed to provide on-site mitigation at a ratio of 3:1 for all
wetland impacts, including those associated with the sedimentation basins. Although some of
the mitigation will be out-of-kind(i.e. palustrine scrub shrub instead of palustrine emergent
vegetation), wetland functions and values are expected to be much higher than the existing
wetlands that will be affected. All wetlands in the Project area will fall under Corps of Engineer
jurisdiction, and it is anticipated that the proposed mitigation will be adequate to meet Corps
requirements.
A summary of existing conditions and proposed actions is provided in Table 1. Tables 2,
3 and 4 summarize existing and future wetland functions and values. Mitigation plans at the
conceptual level are included in the reports mentioned above.
2.0 Methods
The following maps and documents were reviewed prior to conducting site visits in April
of 1994 and in March, April and November of 1995:
• 1:12,000 aerial photograph(1989)
• Soil Conservation Service maps (1973)
• National Wetland Inventory (NWI) map, Renton quad(1973)
• Critical Areas Inventory (City of Renton, June 1991)
• King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio (1990)
• Maplewood Creek Basin Plan (1989)
• Cedar River Current and Future Conditions Report (1993)
Neither the sedimentation ponds nor the creek channel are mapped as wetland on the
NWI maps or on Renton's Critical Areas Inventory. Based on the initial site visit in April, 1994,
the occurrence of wetlands was observed to follow topographic contours, with no wetlands
appearing outside the ordinary high water mark of the sediment ponds or Maplewood Creek.
Office delineation was selected as an appropriate methodology, but site visits conducted in
March, April and November of 1995 were used to obtain soils,hydrology and vegetation data to
support office delineation of wetland boundaries.
Soils, hydrology and vegetation data for each soil pit were recorded on routine site field
data sheets taken from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1987 Manual for Delineation of
Jurisdictional Wetlands. These data sheets are appended to this report (Appendix 1).
Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Page 2
WP095PROA7163G\WE7LAND.DCIC\01/23/96\10:27 WSDC
Wetland Delineation Report
The King County Soil Conservation Service was contacted to determine whether mapped
soils are listed as hydric. In the field, soil pits were dug at certain locations to determine the
presence or absence of hydric soil indicators, such as gleying, mottling, low chroma, streaking,
rhizospheres or organic pans. Colors were determined using Munsell Soil Color Charts (1990).
Hydrologic data was obtained through continuous HSPF simulations (King County Department
of Public Works, Surface Water Management Division, 1993) and field observations.
All plants encountered in the field are listed in Table 5. Plants that could not be
identified in the field were keyed in the office according to Hitchcock and Cronquist (1973).
Their status as wetland indicators was determined according to Reed (1988) and Reed (1993) as
NL (not listed); FACU, FACU-, or FACU+(facultative upland); FAC, FAC-, or FAC+
(facultative); FACW, FACW-, or FACW+ (facultative wetland); or OBL (obligate).
Wetland functions were evaluated for the upper sediment pond, lower sediment pond and
high-flow channel separately, according to a rating system developed by King County (Surface
Water Management Division, Ruth Schaefer, 1993). Existing and future values (summarized in
Tables 3, 4 and 5) were estimated in the ability of these wetlands to improve water quality,
moderate flood flows and store flood water, recharge groundwater, provide wildlife habitat
(including primary productivity, species diversity, structural diversity for forage and cover),
reduce erosion, and support aquatic resources (including fish and aquatic macroinvertebrates).
The wetlands' function in socioeconomics and aesthetics was also evaluated. Cultural and
education functions were not evaluated, since they are essentially absent at this site.
3.0 Results
3.1 Sedimentation Ponds
Two existing sedimentation ponds will be affected by this project. The upper pond
consists of a small concrete dam that was built in the 1930's to provide irrigation for an orchard
that was later converted to the present-day golf course. The lower pond was built for sediment
control. However, the two ponds together have proven inadequate for this purpose, are filled
with sediments, and have been damaged by floods. Both ponds are maintained by the City of
Renton Department of Parks and Recreation through excavation of accumulated sediment,
usually on an annual basis.
Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Page 3
WPC\95PROA7163G\WETLAND.DOC\01/23/96\10:27 AM\SDC
Wetland Delineation Report
3.1.1 Soils
In April, 1994, the upper pond was approximately 0.07 acres in size, with water depths of
1 to 2 feet. Since that time, the pond has filled with silts, sands and gravels, covering an area
approximately 0.05 acres in size, with 0.02 acres of stream running through it.
The lower sediment pond is similar in character to the upper basin. Much of the area that
was defined as open water in 1994 has been replaced with a vegetated sand/gravel bar that is now
approximately 0.12 acres in size. The area of open water is approximately 0.06 acres in size.
Soils at both the upper and lower sediment ponds are mapped as Alderwood gravelly
sandy loam-Kitsap silt loam (SCS 1973). This soil type is listed by the County as having hydric
soil inclusions. Soil pit#1 (see Figure 1) contained gravelly, silty sand, without hydric soil
indicators. This material has been recently deposited, and likely originated on adjacent unstable
banks or from upstream erosion. No organic component was present. Soil pit#2 contained dark
brown sandy loam (10 YR 3/3). No hydric soil indicators were observed.
Soil pit#3 contained gravelly sand, without hydric soil indicators, and is also of recent
origin. Soil pit#4 contained gravelly sand with large cobbles and appeared to be native material,
rather than imported fill. No hydric soil indicators were observed.
3.1.2 Hydrology
Water depths observed on April 26, 1994, March 4, 1995, April 11, 1995, and November
4, 1995 were variable in the stream and ponds. Although groundwater seeps were noted along
both sideslopes of the ravine, the primary source of hydrology is surface flow from Maplewood
Creek. Based on continuous HSPF simulation of over 42 years (October 1948-June 1991),
annual average flow is 3.2 cfs, with highest flows occurring from December through March, and
lowest flows occurring between July and October. Modeled daily flows indicate that flows
exceed 20 cfs from 5 to 7 days per year, primarily during the winter. The peak flow for the 2-
year, 24-hour storm was 118 cfs.
Soil on the bars in both the upper and lower sediment ponds were saturated at the surface.
Soil in the pits on the east bank of the upper pond and the southwest dike of the lower basin were
not saturated at 24 inches.
Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Page 4
WPC\95PROR7163G\WETLAND.DOC\01/23/96\10:27 AM\SDC
Wetland Delineation Report
3.1.3 Vegetation
The west bank of the upper pond is rip-rapped and appears stable. It is sparsely vegetated
with grasses, such as annual bluegrass (Poa annua, FAC, and Agrostis tenuis, FAC ) and forbs,
predominantly Robert's geranium (Geranium robertianum, not listed).
The east bank of the pond is steep and unstable; slumps and slides are evident. Riparian
vegetation on the east bank consists of Douglas fir(Pseudotsuga menziesii, FACU), alder (Alnus
rubra, FAC), western hemlock(Tsuga heterophylla, FACU-) and western redcedar(Thuja
plicata, FAC). Swordfern(Polytichum munitum, FACU) predominates in the understory, and
very little herbaceous vegetation is present. Red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa, FACU),
salmonberry(Rubus spectabilis, FAC+) and maidenhair fern (Adiantum pedatum, FAC) are
present in a small seep near the head of the pond.
Within the pond, the dominant species were few-seeded bittercress (Cardamine
oligosperma, FAC), fountain miner's lettuce (Montia fontana, OBL) and creeping bentgrass
(Agrostis alba, FAC).
Vegetation on the east bank of the lower sediment pond is similar to that described for the
upper sediment pond, and does not meet wetland vegetation criteria. A fringe of palustrine
emergent vegetation is present on the dike south and west of the pond, and adjacent to the dam
abutment on the east side of the pond. Species include common horsetail (Equisetum arvense,
FAC), giant horsetail (Equisetum telmateia, FACW) and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens,
FACW). Wetland vegetation criteria are met. Higher on the bank, the dominant species are
FACU, including hairy cat's ear(Hypochaeris radicata), dandelion(Taraxacum officinale), white
clover(Trifolium repens), creeping thistle (Cirsium arvense) and FAC to FAC-, including annual
bluegrass, colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis), and velvet grass (Holcus lanatus).
3.1.4 Functions and Values
Current values are low in all areas evaluated. Values are low due primarily to small size
and the effects of flooding, sediment deposition, erosion, and excavation. It is anticipated that
the proposed project will increase wetland values in the areas of water quality improvement,
erosion protection, aquatic resources (primarily fisheries), socioeconomics and aesthetics. No
significant adverse impacts are anticipated, and no net loss of wetlands would occur. An area
that currently supports annual herbaceous wetland vegetation would be removed, but palustrine
scrub-shrub habitat, and a more stable riparian environment, would be created.
Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Page 5
WPC\95PROA71630\WETLAND.DOC\01/23/96\10:27 AM\SDC
Wetland Delineation Report
3.2 Maplewood Creek High-Flow Channel
The project reach of Maplewood Creek has been channelized to run in a straight course
from the lower sediment pond through the Maplewood Golf Course to State Route 169, where it
enters a 72-inch RCP culvert buried adjacent to the railroad bed, before emptying into the Cedar
River. Until the spring of 1995, vegetation along the channel was mowed regularly so that it
would not interfere with golf course play. Mowing has been temporarily discontinued while
grading and landscaping activities for the golf course are underway. One large-diameter (34
inches) cottonwood is present on the west bank. Several Douglas fir saplings were recently
planted along the east bank.
3.2.1 Soils
The existing creek channel is narrow and confined as it traverses approximately 300 feet
from the existing dam at the lower sediment pond to the bridge leading to the abandoned
clubhouse. Soils are mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam-Kitsap silt loam. In the reach
crossing the golf course, soils are mapped as Puyallup fine sandy loam, also with hydric
inclusions. Length of the open channel as the stream crosses the golf course is approximately
950 feet, with a shallower gradient, i.e., 2 to 4 percent. The wetted width varies, with short
stretches 2 feet wide, increasing to as much as 12 feet where gravel deposition has occurred. The
average wetted width is 3 feet, and the bank angle varies from almost vertical to 3:1.
Four soil pits (pits 5, 6, 7 and 8) were dug along the channel (Figure 1). Pit#5, located 1
foot from the ordinary high water mark(OHWM) contained very dark grayish brown sandy loam
(10YR 3/2), with inclusions of coarse gray sand at 18 inches. Soils were saturated and the pit
filled rapidly. Pit#6, located 4 feet from the OHWM contained dark brown gravelly, sandy
loam, (IOYR 3/3). Soil was not saturated at 24 inches.
Pit#7 was located 4 feet above the OHMW approximately 120 feet downstream from the
Pits#5 and#6. It contained dark brown(10 YR 3/3) gravelly, sandy loam with many cobbles.
Pit#8 was located 3 feet from the OHWM approximately 400 feet downstream from Pit
#7. It contained very dark grayish brown sandy loam, with a low chroma(IOYR 3/2) and bright
mottles (IOYR 4/6 and 5YR 4/6). Inclusions of coarse gray sand and gray clay were noted at 18
inches. Soil was saturated at 18 inches.
Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Page 6
WPC\95PROJ\7163G\WETLAND.DOC\01/23/96\1027 A"SDC
Wetland Delineation Report
3.2.2 Hydrology
In addition to surface flows from Maplewood Creek(described above), hydrology is
contributed by regular golf course irrigation. The depth to seasonal water table is listed as 4 to 5
feet for this soil type, but is probably higher in this particular vicinity, representing an additional
source of hydrology.
3.2.3 Vegetation
From the dam at the lower sediment pond, the banks of Maplewood Creek are vertical
and overgrown with dense Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, FACU), with young western
redcedar and alder growing along the east side beyond the blackberry thicket. Some snowberry
(Symphoricarpus albus, FACU) is also present.
As the creek crosses the golf course, vegetation along the channel is mixed, and
predominantly herbaceous. Vegetation in the channel is no longer being mowed, and patches of
Himalayan blackberry and scattered locust (Robinia pseudo-acacia, FACU), butterfly bush
(Buddleja davidii, not listed), alder, cottonwood(Populus trichocarpa, FAC), Scouler willow
(Salix scouleriana, FAC) and Pacific willow(Salix lasiandra, FACW) seedlings and saplings
have appeared since the spring of 1994.
Herbaceous species within the channel are predominantly grasses, and include annual
bluegrass, velvet grass, reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW) and turf grasses
(colonial bentgrass, perennial rye, and fescue varieties). Non-wetland forbs include a mix of
weedy species, such as dandelion, hairy cat's ear, common and lance-leaved plantain (Plantago
major, P. lanceolata), white clover and red clover(Trifolium pratense).
In addition to patches of reed canarygrass, scattered wetland plants include soft rush
(Juncus effusus, FACW), creeping buttercup, smartweed(Polygonum spp., FACW), brooklime
(Veronica americana, OBL), large-leaved avens (Geum macrophyllum, FACW+), and Watson's
willow-herb (Epilobium watsonii, FACW-).
3.2.4 Functions and Values
Current low values in all areas are due primarily to the creation and maintenance of this
channel as a drainage ditch to convey water across the golf course, disturbance due to
maintenance,the presence of blocks to fish passage, and the absence of high-quality riparian
habitat. The proposed low flow channel is expected to have moderate to high values in all
Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Page 7
WPC195PROA7163G\WETLAND.DOC\01/23/96\10:27 AM\SDC
Wetland Delineation Report
wetland functions except flood flow alteration and groundwater exchange. No significant
adverse impacts are expected, and no net loss of wetlands would occur. Approximately 0.17
acres of weedy herbaceous wetland and 0.09 acres of perennial stream would be replaced by 0.34
acres of perennial stream and 0.68 acres of palustrine scrub-shrub.
4.0 Conclusions and Reconunendations
Wetland soil indicators were found in only 1 of 8 soil pits, presumably due to natural
events, i.e., sediment deposition, or human activities, such as excavation, diking, damming and
channelizing, which have created an "atypical situation". Therefore, where both hydrology and
wetland vegetation criteria were met, hydric soils were presumed and the area was defined as
wetland. Where hydrology indicators were also missing, and wetland vegetation was FAC only,
the area was defined as upland.
At the upper sediment pond, wetland areas were defined as the area filled in within the
ordinary high water mark, including approximately 0.02 acres of perennial stream and 0.05 acres
of herbaceous emergent wetland.
The objectives of the project are to notch the existing upper concrete dam to allow fish
passage, excavate sediments from behind the dam, and return the upper sediment pond to natural
stream flows. The east bank will be stabilized using rip-rap and/or geotextiles and willow and
dogwood cuttings will be planted to provide palustrine shrub cover. It is expected that native
vegetation also will re-establish along the new shoreline of the stream.
At the lower sediment pond, wetlands were delineated as the filled in area of the pond
within the ordinary high water mark, and a narrow fringe of weedy herbaceous wetland along the
lower portion of the dike. Approximately 0.06 acres of the pond's substrate and 0.03 acres of
herbaceous wetland vegetation will be excavated.
The objectives for the lower sediment pond are to remove the existing dike, expand the
sediment pond into an existing paved parking area, and install a fish passage facility and high-
flow spillway. All disturbed soils would then be revegetated, using primarily hydrophytic
shrubs. In order to maintain access into the pond for regular excavation of sediments, only a
small portion of the new shoreline will be planted with emergent vegetation.
Wetlands along the creek were delineated as the perennial stream itself and a band of
palustrine emergent wetland following the contours along the creek, with an average width of 3
horizontal feet on either side of the ordinary high water mark.
Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Page 8
WPC\95PROJ\7163G\WETLAND.DOC\01/23/96\11:05 AMISDC
Wetland Delineation Report
Water will be diverted from the existing Maplewood Creek high-flow channel to the
proposed low-flow channel. It is anticipated that the high-flow channel will carry surface water
only when flows from the sediment ponds are 20 cfs or greater. However, due to the high water
table in the reach through the golf course, many of the same FAC and FACW plant species will
continue to grow in the dewatered channel, unless it is graded and revegetated with turf grasses,
consistent with adjacent fairways.
The objectives for the new low-flow channel are to excavate a meandering stream course,
installing log weirs, boulders and a gravel substrate that will create high-quality fish habitat. The
banks of the channel cross-sections, depending on elevation, will be planted with palustrine
scrub-shrub species, including a mix of native and native hybrid willows, dogwoods, spiraeas,
and Pacific ninebark closest to the water. Vine maple, salal, Oregon grape and honeysuckle will
be planted at higher elevations.
The proposed projects are not expected to have significant adverse effects. The area of
existing wetland that will be affected is small (less than 0.5 acres), and wetland functions are
low. It is anticipated that slope stabilization at the upper sediment pond, expansion of the lower
pond, and creation of a low-flow channel, together with revegetation focusing on native species
and provision of high-quality riparian habitat, will adequately compensate for the effects of the
projects on wetlands.
Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Page 9
WPC\95PROA7163G\WEfLAND.DOC\O 1/23/96\11:05 AM\SDC
Wetland Delineation Report
5.0 Literature Cited
Harza Northwest. 1994. Maplewood Creek Sedimentation Basin Reconstruction and
Improvement Project. Phase 1 Design Report.
Harza Northwest. 1995. Maplewood Creek Fish Passage Channel: Riparian and Instream
Habitat Report.
Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of
Washington Press, Seattle and London. 730pp.
King County Department of Public Works. 1993. Cedar River Current and Future Conditions
Report. Surface Water Management Division.
Munsell Color. 1990. Munsell Soil Color Charts, 1990 Edition Revised. Munsell Color.
MacBeth Division of Kollmorgen Instruments Corporation. Baltimore, MD.
Parametrix. 1989. Maplewood Creek Basin Plan. City of Renton, Public Works Department,
Stormwater Utility Division.
Reed, Jr., P.B. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S.
Department of Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (26.9), May
1988.
Reed, Jr., P.B. 1993. 1993 Supplement to list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest
(Region 9). Supplement to U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Biological Report 88(26.9) May 1988.
Schaefer, R. 1993. Wetland Functions and Values Rating Form. King County Department of
Public Works.
Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil Survey: King County Area, Washington. U.S.
Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and Washington Agricultural
Experiment Station.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1. Environmental Laboratory. Department of the Army.
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Page 10
WPC\95PRO1\7163G\WHTLAND.DOC\OIR3/96\1027 A1vnSDC
0
Wetland Delineation Report
w
M
UPPER SEDIMENT POND
/A
5. EXISTING CONCRETE DAM TO BE REMOVED EXISTING CONCRETE DAM TO BE NOTCHED
` ,......
I �' '' rap ° — EXISTING SED!MENT POND
M :�...
• r:::::::I!P€!'3 PROPOSED FISH LADDERPROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
—
•
..,..... � TO SEDIMENT POND
....,.
x i r.......,�� ............ ..
............
•.,, -, �: :•-, R EXISTING PARKING LOT
1.
(
...........
c..i ..
.......... :,... :, •-.....-... "';•s �e' , - 0 BE ABANDONED)
.�l
T Dl
EXISTING CLUBHOUSE
t ......._.
..................
................
_..._.._.-.._ .............
• ( v BE REMOVED"
r _..._.
: {
4•. vit% 4
• ,
........:.. "-a
c
D;
•:
. •........................................................................_......._.........._.......
.........................._.................,....................... ei...... j�'
-f
6 z ..a„•• t� r
It.
i -...... :. , .ai..._.........
.ray ....::•. . .�� � ,
d
y ia•j" � .... « ...`� �. jay}
%
. .:....:...... ..
�~ g�'; PROPOSED LOW—FLOW
PASSAGE CHANNEL
... FISH
x ............
, .. .... ...........
t•v
"•�/ 7 AD
r., * j. Ti
_::: �::::,. .. • �raa '` ''�! ♦ #LEGE
SOIL PITS
�........
/; `' �• r/ EXISTING WETLANDS
`1, ''' '-_1 :,Y•� • °° • �. / + EXISTING MAPLEWGv� .AFFECTED BY PROJECT
PROPOSED PONDS
p { s. ,G AND WETLANDS
Ex:iII ING WSDOT a`,� . \ •t-�":::::....,'` / _ ,: Rs;s•ATI pl
FISH LADDER ? EXISTING GOLF COURSE GREENS
EXISTING v / G :. ':
.. \ Sri '•.f '•y P'�.,;.,_,
PONn EXiSTING TREES
\ """ ...,, \_._ PROPOSED BRIDGE (TYPICAL)
PROPOSED HIGH—FLOW
ART \ CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS
E \ EXISTING CONTOURS
:'
\\ .. / t (2.0 FT INTERVALS)
\\
300 0 300
CZ — 1
t
r_cie In Feet
Figure I
Lower Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects Existing and Future Wetlands
Table 1. Wetland Types,Acres and Conditions
bExisting Existing Proposed Actions and Future Future
8 Location Type Acres Existing Conditions Future Conditions Type Acres
N p
Upper perennial stream 0.02 Shallow pond now filled with sediments;Remove fish passage barrier; perennial stream 0.02
n Sediment recently vegetated with herbaceous stabilize banks;return to polustrine shrub 0.06
$ Basin polustrine emergent 0.05 wetland plants. Regularly excavated natural stream flows;plant
to remove sediments. rip-rap and new shoreline with
willow and dogwood cuttings.
00
Lower open water 0.15 Shallow pond with bank failure on Replace existing dam with fish open water pond 0.28
A Sediment (0.06 east bank:dike on south and west passage facility;expand pond
Basin excavated) banks. Annually excavated to into uplands. Contour east
remove sediments,recently bank and replant. Regular
o. palustrine emergent 0.12 vegetated with reed canarygrass excavation of sediments at
Q' (0.03 and creeping buttercup. Narrow lower end of pond only.
excavated) band of similar vegetation at
a waterline on existing dike. Plant new shoreline with polustrine shrub 0.05
o polustrine shrub and emergent polustrine emergent 0.02
species.
High-Flow perennial stream 0.09 Channel'¢ed stream;staight route Divert water into new low-flow upland
oChannel through golf course to culvert under channel.
(existing SR 169;substrate varies;bank
y Maplewood failures repaired with rip-rap and
Creek) quarry spa Its.
polustrine emergent 0.17 Narrow band of riparian vegetation Grade,contour and replant
includes Himalayan blackberry,turf consistent with existing
grasses,reed canorygrass,soft rush; golf course features.
no tree or shrub cover. Regularly
mowed.
^
Proposed upland Golf course fairways,greens,tees Excavate meandering stream perennial stream 0.34
Low-Flow and cart paths. Regular mowing,plus course;line with bentonite clay; palustrine shrub 0.68 b
Channel current construction/landscaping install log weirs,boulders,
projects. gravel substrate;plant banks
with mix of hydrophytic and Q
upland shrub species. a
Total Wetland Acres Affected 0.,V Total Wetland Acres Created I 1 1 1.45 o
Wetland Delineation Report
Table 2. Plants Encountered in the Project Area
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME
TREES
Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum
Red alder Alnus rubro
Cottonwood Populus trichocarpo
Douglas fir Pseudotsugo menziesii
Black locust Robinia pseudo-acacia
Western redcedar Thuja plicato
Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla
SHRUBS AND WOODY VINES
Vine maple Acer circinatum
Butterfly bush Buddleja davidii
Salal Gaultheria shallon
Indian plum Oemleria cerasiformes
Devil's club Oplopanox horridum
Currant Ribes spp.
Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor
Thimbleberry Rubus parviflora
Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis
Pacific blackberry Rubus ursinus
Red elderberry Sambucus racemoso
Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus
Pacific willow Solix lasiandra
Scouler willow Solix scouleriona
FORBS
Few-seeded bittercress Cardamine occidentalis
Western bittercress Cardamine oligosperma
Enchanter's nightshade Circaea alpina
Creeping thistle Cirsium arvense
Scouler's corydalis Corydolis scouled
Common horsetail Equisetum arvense
Giant horsetail Equisetum telmateia
Catchweed bedstraw Galium aparine
Bedstraw Galium spp.
Robert's geranium Geranium robertianum
Large-leaved avers Geum macrophyllum
Slender-stemmed waterieaf Hydrophyllum tenuipes
Common St. John's wort Hypericum perforatum
Hairy cat's ear Hypochaeris rodicato
Touch-me-not Impatiens noli-tongere
Fountain miners lettuce Montio fontono
Lower Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects
WPCl95PRW71630\P1aPa2.DOCJt1/2719LU4a AM\SDC
Wetland Delineation Report
Table 2., continued
Forget-me-not Myosotis laxa
Small-flowered nemophila Nemophilo porviflora
Lance-leaved plantain Plantago lanceolate
Common plantain Plantago major
Smartweed Polygonum spp.
Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens
Sheep sorrel Rumex ocetosello
Curly dock Rumex crispus
Bittersweet nightshade Solonum dulcomoro
Dandelion Taroxocum officinole
Fringe-cup Tellimo grondifloro
Youth-on-age Tolmeio menzlesii
Red clover Trifolium pretense
White clover Trifolium repens
Stinging nettle Urtica dioica
Brooklime Veronica americans
Tiny vetch Vicio hirsute
GRASSES, SEDGES, RUSHES
Creeping bentgrass Agrostis albs
Colonial bentgross Agrostis tenuis
Dewey's sedge Corex deweyano
Red fescus Festuco rubro
Velvet grass Holcus lonotus
Soft rush Juncus effuses
Perennial rye Lolium perenne
Reed canarygrass Pholoris arundinaceo
Annual bluegrass Poo onnuo
FERNS and CLUBMOSSES
Maidenhair fern Adiontum pedatum
Lady fern Athyrium filix-femino
Spike clubmoss Lycopodium clovatum
Swordfern Polystichum munitum
Lower Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects
WPC,95PROT171630%FlOP02DOCll lrn/WWO4 AM\SDC
Wetland Delineation Report
Table 3. Wetland Functions and Values - Upper Sediment Basin
Function Existing Values Future Values Notched Dam)
Water Quality Low: pond is filled with Moderate: stabilized east bank,rip-rap
Improvement sediment; east bank is unstable; joint-planted with palustrine shrub species.
riparian vegetation insufficient Additional native riparian species
to fitter or retain sediments. anticipated to re-establish along
new streambank,
Flood Flow Alteration/ Low: pond is filled with Low to moderate: increased
Storm Water Control sediment; banks steep and density would help to slow
riparian vegetation insufficient flood water, but little storage anticipated.
to slow water velocities.
Groundwater Low: size is small, but Low: size somewhat smaller,
Exchange permanent Inundation and no other effects.
underlying permeable strata
may allow pond to recharge
groundwater.
Natural Biological Low: little vegetation structure, Low to moderate: improved species
Support(terrestrial low species diversity,no diversity and structure.
habitat) habitat features (I.e.,snags,
dead and down material)
Erosion/Shoreline Low: riparian vegetation High: biostabil¢ation would
Protection insufficient to protect shoreline reduce erosion potential
Aquatic Resources Low: barrier to fish passage; High: barrier removed; return to
poor habitat for resident fish. natural flow regime.
Socioeconomics Low: does not provide flood Moderate: would not provide
protection or improve water flood protection, but would improve
quality; little fish production. water quality and fisheries resources.
Aesthetics Low- barren rip-rap,unstable Moderate-bank stabilization and
slide; riparian vegetation plantings would blend into
typical of disturbed areas. forested hillside.
Lower Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects
W7095PROA716UPIOP02DOG1I=t"9M AM%MC
Wetland Delineation Report
Table 4. Wetland Functions and Values-Lower Sediment Basin
Function Existing Values Future Values (Expanded Basin)
Water Quality Low: pond is filled with Moderate to high; Increased sediment storage
Improvement sediment;east bank is unstable; capacity;plantings would help to filter and
riparian vegetation insufficient and retain sediments.
to filter or retain sediments.
Flood Flow Alteration/ Low: pond Is filled with Low to moderate: Increased flood storage and
Storm Water Control sediment; banks steep and Increased stem density would help to attenuate
riparian vegetation Insufficient floods.
to slow water velocities.
Groundwater Low:size is small,but Low: Increase in size not likely to
Exchange permanent Inundation and significantly Increase groundwater recharge.
underlying permeable strata
may allow pond to recharge
roundwater.
Natural Biological Low: little vegetation structure, Moderate: plantings would Increase species
Support(terrestrial low species diversity,no diversity and structure.
habitat) habitat features(i.e.,snags,
dead and down material)
Eroslon/Shoreline Low: riparian vegetation Moderate to high: shoreline plantings would help
Protection Insufficient to protect shoreline to reduce erosion potential
Aquatic Resources Low: barrier to fish passage; High: barrier replaced with passage facility;
or habitat for resident fish, riparian plantings would Improve fish habitat.
Socioeconomics Low: does not provide flood Moderate:would provide limited flood
protection or Improve water protection;would Improve water quality
quality;little fish production. and fish production.
Aesthetics Low: riparian vegetation weedy, Moderate: bank stabilization and
typical of disturbed areas. plantings would blend Into
forested hillside.
Lower Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects
vm%"PROAn6)"ar02.00aIimnvo 04AWn=
Wetland Delineation Report
Table 5. Wetland Functions and Values- High-Flow Channel (Maplewood Creek)
Function Existing Values Future Values Low-Flow Channel)
Water Quality Low: banks are unstable; Moderate: palustrine shrub and herbaceous
Improvement riparian vegetation insufficient plantings would help to filter and retain
to filter or retain sediments. sediments;flood routing to high-flow channel
would reduce sediment contribution.
Flood Flow Alteration/ Low: creek is channelized and Low to moderate: channel design provides
Storm Water Control flows direct to Cedar River with overbank floodway; riparian plantings and
no overbank floodway;riparian increased stem densities would help to slow
vegetation insufficient to flood velocities.
attenuate flood flows.
Groundwater Moderate: permanent flow and Low to moderate: bentonite clay liner may
Exchange underlying permeable strata reduce opportunity for groundwater recharge.
allow groundwater recharge.
Natural Biological Low: little vegetation structure, Moderate: plantings would increase species
Support(terrestrial low species diversity,no diversity and structure. Less maintenance
habitat) habitat features,high levels disturbance,but recreation disturbance would
of disturbance due to both continue to limit wildlife use.
maintenance and recreation.
Erosion/Shoreline Low: riparian vegetation Moderate: high-flood routing to high-flow
protection• insufficient to protect shoreline; channel,channel shape,and bank plantings
several areas of instability. would help to reduce erosion potential.
Aquatic Resources Low: poor habitat for resident High: flood routing to high-flow channel would
fish due to winter floods, prevent winter flooding; channel cross-sections
insufficient flows in summer,no would stabilize summer flows; log weirs and
streamside cover,no instream boulder placement would create instream
habitat features. diversity and improved conditions for aquatic
invertebrates;plantings would provide shade
and cover.
Socioeconomics Low:winter floods deposit silts, High: flood routing to high-flow channel would
sands and gravels on fairways, reduce maintenance costs and improve water
requiring frequent maintenance; quality and fish production.
fish production is low.
Aesthetics Low: channel has the High: meandering configuration,instream habitat
appearance of a weedy ditch. habitat features and riparian plantings
would create views similar to natural stream.
Lower Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects
WPC\95PRQr.7163(Y,AOPO2.D=1 IMMSMO 0-4 AXTISDC
Wetland Delineation Re
5 r.
y .i� ♦K
I �
/ 4 '
G •rt
a
••_ Sedimentation
Basin,November 1993.
Upper Sedimentation
November
/! 1995.
• • Sheet I
Lower Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects
i'i .•
Wetland Delineation Report
Lower Sedimentation
= Basin,November 1993
_•f
:F
Lower Sedimentation
- _ Basin,November 1995.
Photo Sheet 2
Lower Maplewood Creek Flooding and Habitat Improvement Projects
WPL195PROA7166301P10P62.DOC/11122/95/09:04 AWSDC
Wetland Delineation Rerr
Ld
.
High-Flow
• Channel
(Maplewood Creek)
November 1993.
.:♦-y(yV�4 '.gyp�' 4+ �'M.i `�i... f
Ire
. � S
� i•
'r f
l 1'
t 1/
High-Flow
- ' I 1•, (Maplewood
Photo Sheet 3
Lowerrr iir Creek Floodingand Habitat ImprovementProjects
G.
APPENDIX 1
Field Data Sheets Showing Soils,
Hydrology, and Vegetation Data for each Soil Pit
DATA. FORK 1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Applicant 7 Application Project /��
Name. �'� Number: Name: ^^/''"� ll'�-✓�"�
State: County: ! Legal Description: Township: Z3/ Range:
: �
Dat e Plor Section: �S
� -
Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (S if
only 1 or 2 layers) ] . Indicate species with observed morphological or known
physiological adaptations with an asterisk.
Indicator Indicator
Species Status Species Status
Tre Herbs /� `` 7o
7.
2. 8. M swt-CCi. �a� GVi�t G. 01J t-- ZQ
r6 fis r 5
Sa 1 n s/shrubs Woo vines ���k�Vll 14 ��5 '� 5 FAG w �_
c. 10. ,;o S ��0001- �►J L-
S. 11.
6. 12.
z of species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: j�O . Other indicators:
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes No Basis-
Soil
Series and phase: S� �` On hydric soils list? Yes ; No .
Mottled: Yes ; No Mottle color: Matrix color: 10J
Gleyed: Yes No_X_ Other indicators:
{ Hydr.ic soils: Yes No Basis:
i
i
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes No X, Depth of standing water:
Saturated soils: Yes 1V1 ; No Depth to saturated soil:
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes V ; No Basis: W�4vyl\ (04WM
Atypical situation. Yes V ; No
Normal Circumstance�? Yes V_ No
Wetland Determin ion: Wetland ✓ Nonwetland gClQ�
Comments: �� G/
o
was -/G� Deterr+ined by: a, ,1,
Imo/ 5 1 Y�
�� */" �x
DATA. FORM 1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Applicant AppliC Number:
ProName : /4,0 �✓O� (—
state: b Number: Name:
state:�_County: Legal Description: Township:Z N Range: S
Date: 15 Plot lEd. : L _ Section:
Vegetation (list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if
only 1 or 2 layers) ) . Indicate species with observed morphological or known
physiological adaptations with an asterisk.
Indicator Indicator
Species Status Species Status
Trees Herbs DD l / c
�C�R�"��y l IOU �� — 15 7. l 0 5 7""r/WI. K �'''1 u✓1!�k'''� 1A G 20
2. f5 A r wn'f��s ri k=A . 5 s. M.YL,4w - r&4wm_ F/74 G T
(� F,,4G S
3. �k tT 9.
J P
Saplings/shrubs Woody vines
4. kt-,tJ fAc*-rSa FAOA Z 10. //-- w5 5 '�' Gs E�C 30
5. 1 1. �I�ks o�!SGo lcN— . 7-6
6. 12.
z of species that are OBL. FACW, and/or FAC: 5 Other indicators:
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes No -X—. Basis:
Soil A!d'.r nVfj� 50 uv�.;1 /04y"—
Series and phase: "� 19104K'l On hydric soils list? Yes No
Mottled: Yes No x Mottle color: :Matrix color: 10.YQ 3 �
Gleyed: Yes No Other indicators:
Hydr.ic soils: Yes No I ; Basis:
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes No k Depth of standing water:
Saturated soils: Yes No x Depth to saturated soil :
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes ; No X Basis:
Atypical situation: Yes ; NoL.
Normal Circumstances? Yes _ No
Wetland Determination: Wetland Nonvetland
Comments: �1 /m ks
Determined by:
( B2
•
DATk FORM I
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Applicant ( � �7� Application Project
Name: � vl / V Number: Name:_ [�1�✓Oa/�,
State: VVTY County: f Legal Description: Township:Z Ranger F
Date: ! l 1=j �j5 Plot . : 3 Section:
Jr--
Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if
only 1 or 2 layers) ] . Indicate species with observed morphological or known
physiological adaptations with an asterisk.
Indicator Indicator
Species Status Species Status
Tr Herbs pp�� �tl 1�
1. 7. (�r.�h6vvlKS 1" JF�G�✓ `
3. 9, A ro 6�t's x
Saplings/shrubs Woody vines W-�JG4 ��`� �GG� �C_� Ic�
4. S',jC Sl�v�.,(//-/�DVY1Q' FA r 10. h ev—ec. FAC-tA S�
5. �Pw(�Sac�rP� F'l�i T 11.
6. 12.
z of species that are OBL, FACW,, and/or FAC: 100. Other indicators:
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes V No Basis:
Soil A(nlwwoad G ijq 10( w.
Series and phase: �J (Onfhydric sails list? Yes No4
Mottled: Yes ; No X Mottle color: Matrix color: [0
Gleyed: Yes No X •Other indicators:
Hydr.ic soils: Yes No__X_; Basis:
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes No X Depth of standing water:
Saturated soils: Yes ; No Depth to saturated soil: SGi%`7"�?4.�
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes�V ; No Basis: W�A,w cow/tt
Atypical situation: Yes ✓ ; No
Normal Circum ces? Yes No
Wetla Determination: Wetland V Nonvetland
Comm nis: Z
�j e � .
Determined b v: ��
N (ct✓ CAS �ti B2
C
DATA. FORM 1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Applicant �f �- Application Project ,{ /
Name: a l�^'Vl�✓l_ Number: Name: Y/' 0
State: County: Legal Description: Township:Z3 V Range: r E
Date: ( l Plot q Section:
Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if
only 1 or 2 layers) ) . Indicate species with observed morphological or known
physiological adaptations with an asterisk.
Indicator Indicator
Species Status Species Status
Trees Herbs7.
r: G
2. 8. '�'�" FACE✓
u vn �"'a�"�'°`- Q
3. 9. vlu h L �L-t 12 s Gtit/
Saplings/shrubs _Woody vines �7t� � �� s
4. ��KS p i SCP loY G�,f lD 10. L10 l
5. wr61 v1�tS =�Gl� l� 11.
6. 12. /
1 of species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 65 . Other. indicators:
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes No Basis:
Soil AMt�b::,-A
gy.e ��
Series and phase: II--ate �oalb.� OnVhydrlc soils list .' Yes No/L .
Mottled: Yes ; No�_. Mottle color: yatrix color: 10� .
Cleyed: Yes No Other indicators:
Hydr.ic soils: Yes No Basis:
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes No_41—c . Depth of standing water:
Saturated soils: Yes NoILL—. Depth to saturated soil:
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes �; Nox_. Basis:
Atypical situat::es?
: Yes V7 ; No
Normal Circumat Yes No
Wetland De rlination: wetland `tonwetiand
Comments: �� �,h5'�Y
d' c� '
V
Detemined by:
B2
DATk FORM i
WETLAND DETERMINATIO`7
A licant 0 _flyA lication Pro ec
Name: dZi � Number: Name: t IrA,
e,4_
State: V_A _County: ' Le el Description: Township:x{ Range:�
Date: (1C2 AZ5Plot Section: Z-
Vegetation (list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if
only 1 or 2 layers) ) . Indicate species with observed morphological or known
physiological adaptations with an asterisk.
Indicator Indicator
Species Status Species Status
Trees Herbs J p
1. 7.2. 8. G L���,�ar�S 6l'f H.►'�L� v1 R.L�4�-- ���1� O�
'^i 5�/�wwt �L✓'v�ivl ��G J�
3. 9. ( o' a a�n FA 5
Saplings/shrubs Woody vines Y�'! / FA `J
4. f 5 (�i S G% 5 10. 5o r� " 'L h ^ c4 w l G G vvi(,r r rA6-t-
5. 11.
6. 12.
nr—
z of species that Are OBL. FACW. and/or FAC: _') . Other indicators:
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes No Basis:
Soil
a�
Series and phase: �u�k �-�!� On hydric soils list? Yes No
Mottled: Yes No Mottle color: Matrix color: 0 �3
Cleyed: Yes No .Other indicators: (oL✓ c,&no- D0.�
Hydric soils: Yes 17 No Basis:
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes ; Depth of standing water:
• II rr �i
Saturated soils: Yes No ; No Depth to saturated soil: `Z
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes No Basis:
Atypical situation: Yes No
Normal Circumstances? Yes V No
Wetland Determination: Vet land ; Nonwetland
�C
Determined bv:
B2
s
DATk FORM 1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Applicant Application Project Name: C /
o � Number: Name:_ 1ewevo(_
State: W/C County: Legal Description: Township:Z3NRange:S E_
Date: _w5 Plot Section: zZ
Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if
only 1 or 2 layers) ] . Indicate species with observed morphological or known
physiological adaptations with an asterisk.
Indicator Indicator
Species Status Species Status
Trees Herbs 1. 7. Ey ill�twl arve O_CCj FAG J�
2. 8. A ►r)Sf�S ��k;S FAL to
3. 9.
Saplings/shrubs Woody vines
4. A I n�+S rw T 10. f ha la
5. l V i 4'r-6ty t—A G ( 11.
6. �w��S O{�sCo 1 FfIG� ZO 12.
Z of species that are OBL. FACW,, and/or FAC: 5. Other indicators:
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes No Basis-
Soil ��jj77 � Savt�
Series and phase: l�4�` 04*VL On hydric soils list? Yes No_X_.
Mottled: Yes No _. Mottle color: Matrix color:
Gleyed: Yes No Other indicators:
Hydr.ic soils: Yes No X Basis:
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes No Y . Depth of standing water:
Saturated soils: Yes ; No . Depth to saturated soil:
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes
�—; No Basis:
Atypical situation: Yes `J ;/ No
Normal Circumstances? Yes V No
Wetland Determination: Wetland yonwetland X
Comments: /
C/t t 4 r1 v1L'I-ze
Deternined by: ��/LC1�L,/� �L
B2
e
•
DATA, FOR.( I
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Applicant Application Project
Name:_ Number: Name: (Ll�✓0111fl
State: County: Legal Description: Township:�Range:6-F
Date: !l Plo_ LZ—
Section:
Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if
only 1 or 2 layers) ] . Indicate species with observed morphological or known
physiological adaptations with an asterisk.
Indicator Indicator
Species Status Species Status
Trees Herbs
1. 7. P Ya srs k � �30
2. er, aki►7L-t t r7G
Saplings/shrubs Woody vines
4. fi/,rcGG�G�rPC� Ci T 10. 1�a� c(�lKss F6G+�
5. A J h tAS r wtoY Ff l C '� 11.
b. 12.
z of species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: . Other indicators:
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes No Basis:
Soil
Series and phase:41AC' T' c1CtW�- On�(hhydric soils list'. Yes ; No
Mottled: Yes No- Mottle color: matrix color: /o
Gleyed: Yes No--19— Other indicators:
Hydr.ic soils: Yes No Basis:
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes No Depth of standing water:
Saturated soils: Yes ; No X Depth to saturated soil:
Ocher indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes ; NoX. Basis:
Atypical situation: Yes
/; No
Normal Circumstances? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Determination: Wetland Nonvetland
Comments:
h� l �
Dete mined bv: C
B2
DATA, FORM I
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Applicant Application Project
Name: L, ' Number: Name: /V(o����✓CO�
State: County: Legal Description: Township:Z L nge:S
Date: { � b Plot Section: ZZ
Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if
only 1 or 2 layers) ). Indicate species with observed morphological or known
physiological adaptations with an asterisk.
Indicator Indicator
Species Status Species Status
Tree Herbs 1. 7. A ro5�i.S f ��.j FA
2. 8. Ret 10'yyS AV'WL 0 44,4 Fq GW
3. 9. P6- ,1 v) k,7 �- R4 G �d
Saplings/shrubs Woody vines
4. PoP� �S �Y��o ccr r�� T 10. G us -e- C't.s F46-W ) �
6. 12.
z of species that Are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: Other indicators:
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes No Basis:
Soil
Series and phase:K Q11V-10 Sck'141 On hydric soils list? Yes ; No
Mottled: . Yes V/' No Mottle color: f0 y 4 ; Matrix color: �0 R
Cleyed:' Yes No •Other indicators:
Hydr.ic soils: Yes�o ; Basis:
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes No . Depth of standing water:
Saturated soils: Yes ; No Depth to saturated soil :,.�&��
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes No Basis:
Atypical situation: Yes VIL
No
Normal Circumstances? Yes No /
Wetland Determination: Wetland v Nonvetland
Comments: / ��/rZ _ /
(mil ��G�„�
Determined by:
B2
f