HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_Soundview Wetland Assessment Response_20180209_v1Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 1
2907 Harborview Drive, Suite D
Gig Harbor, WA 98335
Technical Memorandum
To: Alex Morganroth, Associate Planner
From: Don Babineau, Environmental Planner, Soundview Consultants LLC
File Number: 1155.0024
Date: January 31, 2018
Re: 14120 160th Ave. SE- Technical Memorandum - Ref. No.: 32847.B
Dear Alex Morganroth,
Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) has been assisting Harbour Homes LLC with a response to the
third-party review conducted by OTAK, Inc. (OTAK) of the Revised Critical Areas Report written
and submitted to the City of Renton by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. (Sewall) regarding the
proposed Cedars at the Highlands preliminary plat located at 14120 160th Avenue Southeast in Renton,
Washington, 98059 (King County Parcel number 145750-0110).
SVC reviewed the Sewall and the OTAK documents and made a brief site visit on December 15, 2017
to preliminarily assess the situation. Upon the initial site visit, SVC shared OTAK’s concerns
regarding the area of ponded water in the northwest portion of the site and the additional wetland
areas extending from the property to the north onto the site in its northeast corner.
Following the initial site visit, SVC conducted a formal wetland and fish and wildlife assessment in
early January 2018 and upon encountering signs of fill activity enlisted the use of an excavator to
expand the depth of investigation. SVC concurs with OTAK’s general observation of wetland
presence in the northwest corner of the subject property but found no type Ns stream on the subject
property or on the property to the north. Wetland A is classified as a Palustrine Forested/Shrub
Scrub Seasonally Saturated, slope wetland. Using the correct slope hydrogeomorphic class, Wetland A
is a Category IV slope wetland. The drainage observed on the property north of the subject property
discharging to Wetland A is an excavated ditch. This ditch conveys water from a pipe installed to
drain a wetland on the adjacent property north of the Mindy’s Place plat. In addition, this ditch receives
water from the Mindy’s Place detention pond outfall prior to draining into Wetland A. A separate
manmade drainage crosses the subject property entering at the northwest end and flows to the
southeast by a series of drain pipes, upland drainage swales, and areas of sheet flow draining to a ditch
and culvert system flowing south from the southeast corner of the property along the east side of an
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 2
existing gravel trail. The onsite manmade drainage system originates from the roadside ditch along
the west side of the property.
During SVC’s assessment, five hand-dug data plots (DP1-DP5) were taken in the northwest portion
of the site where surface water was observed by Otak during their third-party review and by SVC staff
during our initial site visit. Four of the five preliminary data plots (DP2-DP5) revealed a distinct layer
of compacted fill above the native soil horizon. However, due to the compacted soils conditions,
digging these pits to depth was not possible before the surrounding perched water flooded them and
compromised the hydrologic analysis rendering the data inconclusive.
To assist in reliable soils data collection, an excavator was brought in on the afternoon of the site
assessment to dig deeper data pits across this area of concern. Biologists were present during
excavation to observe immediate hydrologic soils conditions before they could be compromised by
surface water flooding the pits. In addition, the excavated pits were observed 30 minutes after
excavation for to allow depth of groundwater to equalize. Further investigation with the excavator
revealed two layers of compacted fill in portions of the flooded area below the perched surface water
and above the native soil horizon. In these areas, a recent layer of compacted fill is clearly visible above
an undecomposed layer of vegetation which formed over an older layer of fill. The combination of
the two compacted fill layers is creating a perched surface water condition during wet weather.
Analysis of aerial imagery confirmed that new fill was placed in portions of the area in June or July of
2016 after Sewall’s early spring 2016 investigation which would explain the shift in vegetation from
the established upland species Sewall describes in their assessment of the area, to the aggressive, early
successional, facultative, invasive vegetation currently found in the area. The filled area lacked
indications of wetland hydrology within or below the compacted fill surface. This area of concern
also lacked hydric soil formation below the fill layers in the native profile. Although the fill layers
appear to meet for hydric soil indicators, they were clearly sourced from offsite subsoils of
indeterminate depth. Additionally, the native, non-hydric soil profile observed below the fill
corresponds with onsite undisturbed upland soils as demonstrated by data pits (DP1, DP6, EP4, EP6,
and EP9). The presence of aggressive, facultative vegetation supports SVC’s results of non-wetland
findings within this area of multiple disturbance events in the northwest portion of the subject
property (see results for further detail).
Methods
Formal site investigations were performed by qualified SVC staff in January of 2018. The investigation
consisted of a walk-through survey of the subject property and any publicly accessible areas within
300 feet of this area for potentially-regulated wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority habitat
species as specified in City of Renton Municipal Code (RMC) Title IV, Chapter 3 (Environmental
Regulations and Overlay Districts).
Wetlands, streams, and select fish and wildlife habitats and species are regulated features per RMC
Chapter 3 and subject to restricted uses/activities under the same title. Wetland boundaries were
determined in accordance with RMC Title IV, Chapter 3: 4-3-050 (9)(b), and as outlined in the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers’ (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) as
modified according to the guidelines established in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 3
Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, Version 2.0 (USACE, 2010).
Qualified SVC wetland scientists marked boundaries of any onsite wetlands with orange surveyor’s
flagging labeled alpha-numerically and tied to 3-foot lath or vegetation along the wetland boundary.
Pink surveyor’s flagging was labeled alpha-numerically and tied to 3-foot lath or vegetation at formal
sampling locations (DP-1 through DP-8 for hand-dug pits) and (EP-1 through EP-9 for excavated
pits) to mark the points where detailed data was collected.
Wetlands were classified using both the hydrogeomorphic (Brinson, 1993) and Cowardin (Cowardin,
1979; Federal Geographic Data Committee, 2013) classification systems, and evaluated using the
Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear Projects (Null et al, 2000). Following
classification, wetlands were assessed and categorized using the current Washington State Wetland Rating
System for Western Washington (Hruby, 2014) and guidelines established in RMC Title IV, Chapter 3: 4-
3-050 (9)(c).
The fish and wildlife habitat assessment was conducted during the same site visit by qualified fish and
wildlife biologists. Experienced biologists made visual observations using stationary and walking
survey methods for both aquatic and upland habitats noting any special habitat features or signs of
fish and wildlife presence potentially regulated under RMC Title IV, Chapter 3.
Results
The 4.16-acre subject property currently contains a single-family residence and associated
infrastructure with a recently closed home mechanic business. The site is heavily disturbed and
historically manipulated. Upland forest vegetation on the subject property is dominated by an
overstory of Douglas fir (Pseudostuga menziesii), black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), and bigleaf maple
(Acer macrophyllum) with an understory of salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), western swordfern (Polystichum
munitum), salal (Gaultheria shallon), and bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum).
The site investigation identified one onsite wetland (Wetland A) in the northeast corner of the subject
property, as depicted on the site map in Attachment A. The identified wetland contained indicators
of wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation according to current
wetland delineation methodology. A Type Ns stream was also identified offsite approximately 100
feet east of the subject property to which Wetland A drains. No stream was found within or upstream
of Wetland A. No other potentially-regulated wetlands and/or fish and wildlife habitat were observed
on or within 300 feet of the site. Wetland data and rating forms are provided in Attachments B and
C, respectively.
Wetland A
Wetland A is approximately 4,721 square feet in size, of which approximately 2,414 square feet is
located onsite. Wetland A is fed by stormwater and a seasonal drainage ditch to the north. The source
of this drainage is a stormwater pond to the northwest and a wetland much further to the north
drained by a storm pipe. In addition, hydrology for Wetland A may be partly provided by a seasonally-
high groundwater table, direct precipitation, and surface sheet flow from surrounding uplands. The
drainage to the north has been heavily manipulated, channelized, and culverted resulting in areas of
scour and sorting within the wetland unit; however, no defined bed or bank was observed upstream
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 4
or within the wetland. Wetland vegetation is dominated by a canopy of red alder (Alnus rubra), and
red cedar (Thuja plicata) with an understory of salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), creeping buttercup
(Ranunculus repens), and lady fern (Athyrium cyclosorum). Wetland A is a Palustrine Forested,
Continuously Saturated (PFOD) wetland. Chapter 3, using Washington State Wetland Rating System for
Western Washington (Hruby, 2014), Wetland A is classified as a Category IV slope wetland.
Table 1. Wetlands Summary.
Wetland Predominant Wetland Classification / Rating Wetland Size
On site (acres)
Buffer Width
(feet)5 Cowardin1 HGM2 WSDOE3 City of Renton
A PFOD Slope IV IV 0.05 40
Notes:
1. Cowardin et al. (1979) Federal Geographic Data Committee 2013 or NWI Class based on vegetation: PFO = Palustrine Forested; Modifier for
Water Regime or Special Situations: C= Seasonally Flooded, D=Permanently Saturated
2. Brinson, M. M. (1993).
3. WSDOE rating according to Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington – Revised Hruby (2014).
4. FWRC 19.145.420(1)(c) definition.
5. FWRC 19.145.420(2) buffer standards.
Table 3. Wetland Summary.
WETLAND A – INFORMATION SUMMARY
Location: Located northeast corner of subject property
Local Jurisdiction City of Renton
WRIA Lower Cedar River
WSDOE Rating
(Hruby, 2014) IV
City of Renton Rating IV
City of Renton Buffer
Width 40 feet
Wetland Size 0.11 acre
Cowardin Classification PFOCD
HGM Classification Slope
Wetland Data Sheet(s) DP-7W
Upland Data Sheet (s) DP-6U
Boundary Flag color Orange
Dominant
Vegetation
Wetland A is dominated by a canopy of red alder and red cedar, with an understory of
salmonberry, creeping buttercup, and lady fern
Soils Hydric soil indicator A4 (hydrogen sulfide) and A12 (thick dark surface) was observed
Hydrology Hydrology for Wetland A is provided by a seasonal drainage to the north, surface sheet
flow, direct precipitation, and a seasonally-high groundwater table.
Rationale for
Delineation
Wetland boundaries were determined by point of saturation and a transition to a
hydrophytic plant community.
Rationale for
Local Rating
Local rating is based upon WSDOE’s current rating system and
RMC T-IV, Ch.3: 4-3-050 (9)(c)
Wetland Functions Summary
Water Quality
Wetland A has a low potential to retain sediments and pollutants from surface runoff due
to its sloped topography and lack of herbaceous vegetation. Wetland A’s score for Water
Quality Functions using the 2014 method is moderate (6).
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 5
Hydrologic
Wetland A has a very limited potential to provide hydrologic function to the landscape
due to sloped topography, a lack of dense, ridged vegetation and position in the
surrounding landscape. Wetland A’s score for Hydrologic Functions using the 2014
method is low (4).
Habitat
Wildlife habitat functions provided by Wetland A are moderate and may include general
habitat suitability for small mammal and bird species but is limited for amphibian or
aquatic species due to its sloped topography and seasonal flow. Wetland A’s score for
Habitat Functions using the 2014 method is moderate (5).
Buffer
Condition
The buffer surrounding Wetland A is highly disturbed and dominated by Himalayan
blackberry, red cedar, red alder, and sword fern.
Discussion of Non-Wetland Areas
Initially, five hand-dug data plots were taken in the northwest portion of the site where surface water
was observed by Otak during their review and SVC staff during our initial site visit. However, due to
the compacted soils conditions, digging the pits to depth was not possible before the surrounding
perched water flooded them and compromised the hydrologic analysis rendering the data inconclusive.
The hand dug profiles revealed a distinct layer of compacted fill above the native soil horizon. Further
investigation with an excavator revealed two layers of compacted fill in some areas below the perched
surface water and above the native non-hydric soil horizon. In these areas, a recent layer of compacted
fill is clearly visible above an undecomposed layer of vegetation which is present above an older layer
of fill. The combination of two compacted fill layers is limiting infiltration to form perched surface
water conditions. Although the fill appears to potentially meet for hydric conditions, it was clearly
sourced from offsite subsoils of indeterminate depth and not from its current location. Analysis of
aerial imagery confirmed that new fill was placed in portions of the area in June or July of 2016 after
Sewall’s early spring 2016 investigation. The identification of recent fill accounts for the shift in
vegetation from the established upland species Sewall describes in their assessment of the area, to the
aggressive, early successional, facultative, invasive species currently found in the area. Lack of
hydrology and hydric soils in the native soil horizon, suggests this area was likely a non-wetland swale
that was repeatedly filled in an attempt to re-direct stormwater from entering the subject property
from the roadside ditch. In current condition the area is acting as an anthropogenically-caused
impervious surface and not providing any wetland functions. In addition, the historic soils profile
demonstrates the area did not provide any wetland function prior to the imported fill.
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 6
Figure 1 shows the location of all data points taken including excavated pits (EP) and hand dug pits
(DP).
Figure 1. Data Point Location and Wetland Map
Figure 2. Data Point Summary (area of concern only)
Data
Point
Surface Water
Hydrology
Groundwater
Hydrology
New
Fill
Historic
Fill
Native
Soil
Vegetation
(Current)
Data collected in and around perched surface water
DP-1 1" 0"-16" FACU
DP-2 6" 0"-4" 4"-22" FAC
DP-3 -14" 0"-18" 18"-32" FAC
DP-4 6" 0"-10" 10"-16" FAC
DP-5 4" 0"-14" 11"-26" FAC
EP-1 -14" 0"-16" 16"-36" FAC
EP-2 -32" 0"-10" 10"-14" 14"-55" FAC
EP-3 -32" 0"-8" 8"-20" 20"-40" FAC
EP-4 -14" 0"-26" FAC
EP-5 -21" 0"-5" 5"-14" 14"-40" FAC
EP-6 -6" 0"-40" FACU
EP-7 -30" 0"-6" 6"-10" 10"-45" FAC
EP-8 -40" 0"-18" 18"-48" FAC
EP-9 -34" 0"-43" FAC
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 7
Figure 2 shows the wetland status for soils, hydrology and vegetation criteria for each data point within
the area of concern. Data point forms are located in Attachment B. From Figure 2 it is clear to see
the depth to groundwater is a negative for wetland hydrology in all but possibly one of the data points
in the area of concern. The data point potentially positive for hydrology (EP 6) is negative for hydric
soils and hydrophytic vegetation criteria. Likewise, all of the data points within the area of concern
lack hydric soils with the exception of EP8. Data point EP8 is negative for hydrology with
groundwater at 22 inches below the top of native soils. Most of the data pits were positive for
facultative vegetation meeting the FAC neutral test; however, the facultative vegetation present
(cottonwood, Himalayan blackberry, bent grasses, and creeping buttercup) are not reliably diagnostic
of hydric conditions and likely indicative of a disturbed, problematic situation.
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 8
Figure 3. Soil Profile Graphic
Figure 3 is a graphic representation of the soils profile showing depth of perched surface water, new
fill, historic fill, seasonal groundwater, and native soils.
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 9
Three additional hand-dug data plots were collected throughout the site to confirm Wetland A
boundaries and non-wetland findings associated with the southern drainage ditch. Although the
southern drainage ditch does transport a moderate amount of stormwater during high precipitation,
it fails to meet wetland or stream criteria. Additionally, the native soils observed elsewhere on site
correspond to the native soil profile observed below the fill layers discussed previously.
In summary, the lack of hydrology within or below the compacted fill, the lack of hydric soil formation
below the historic fill layers, and the presence of aggressive, facultative species all help confirm that
the area of multiple disturbance events does not meet wetland criteria and did not likely meet wetland
criteria before successive fills (see results for further detail).
Conclusion
Based on the above observed results from the site visits in January 2017, the northwest portion of
the site where surface water was observed by Otak and by SVC staff does not meet all three
necessary wetland criteria. Below the distinct layers of fill, no indicators of hydric soils are present
with suitable hydrology. Additionally, the disturbed nature of the site, aggressive, facultative
vegetation, and perched surface hydrology appear to be recent conditions resulting from site
modification, excess rainfall, and the offsite water source to the northwest. Although these factors
produce challenging conditions for wetland delineation, SVC is confident Wetland A, is a Category
IV slope wetland and not a Type Ns stream and the only critical area present on the subject property.
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 10
References
Brinson, M. M., 1993. “A Hydrogeomorphic Classification for Wetlands,” Technical Report WRP
DE-4, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Washington D.C.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-
87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2013. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of
the United States. FGDC-STD-004-2013. Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal
Geographic Data Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington – Revised.
Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 14-06-029.
Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant
List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153
733X
Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. New Windsor, New York.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1995. Hydric Soils of Washington. U.S. Department
of Agriculture. Washington D.C.
NRCS. 2001. Hydric Soils List: King County, Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington
D.C.
Null, William, Skinner, Gloria, and Leonard, William. 2000. Wetland Functions Characterization
Tool for Linear Projects. Washington State Department of Transportation.
OTAK, Inc. 2017. Review of Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. Critical Areas Report. Redmond,
WA.
Renton Municipal Code (RMC). 2017. Title IV, Chapter 3 – Environmental Regulations and
Overlay Districts. Passed December 11, 2017.
Snyder, Dale E., Gale, Philip S., and Pringle, Russell F. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area,
Washington. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar,
and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development.
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 11
Attachment A – Site Photographs
Site investigations took place January 4th and 5th, 2017. The following is a photographic series of
sampled data plots (DP-1 through DP-8).
Photograph 1 -DP-1
Photograph 2 -DP-1
Photograph 3 -DP-2
Photograph 4 – DP-2
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 12
Photograph 5-DP-3
Photograph 6 – DP-3
Photograph 7-DP-4
Photograph 8 – DP-4
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 13
Photograph 9- Buried cottonwood trunk
near DP-5
Photograph 10- Buried cottonwood trunk and
damage from machinery near DP-5
Photograph 11-DP-6
Photograph 12 – DP-6
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 14
Photograph 13-DP-7
Photograph 14 – DP-7
Photograph 15-DP-8
Photograph 16 – DP-8
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 15
Photograph Series taken January 4th and 5th, 2018 of excavated plots (EP-1 through EP-9) soil and
hydrology.
Photograph 13-EP-1
Photograph 14 – EP-1
Photograph 15-EP-2
Photograph 16 – EP-2
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 16
Photograph 13-EP-3
Photograph 14 – EP-3
Photograph 15-EP-4
Photograph 16 – EP-4
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 17
Photograph 13-EP-5
Photograph 14 – EP-5
Photograph 15-EP-7
Photograph 16 – EP-7
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 18
Photograph 13-EP-7
Photograph 14 – EP-7
Photograph 15-EP-8
Photograph 15-EP-8
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 19
Photograph 16-EP-9
Photograph 17 EP-9
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 20
Attachment B – Data Forms
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes, Geonerco Properties LLC WA DP-1U
Richard Peel, Emily Swaim 14, T23N, R 5E
Valley Floor Concave 0
A2 47.4755832258041 -122.125776688075 WGS84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes N/A
4
Reliable, relitively undisturbed forested area within area of review. Vegetation and soils are representative of site
conditions pre-disturbance. However, hydro is unreliable/compromised due to adjacent perched surface water.
Thuja plicata 90 Yes FAC 1
2
90 50%
0 0
0 0
90 270
0 10 40
0 0
Hedera helix 10 Yes FACU 100 310
3.1
10
No
0
90
Facultative and upland species are consistent with status of documented species previously observed (Sewall,
2017).
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
DP-1U
0 - 4 10YR 2/1 100 SaLo Duff loam with organics
4 - 16 10YR 3/4 100 SaLo Some organics
Soil data is reliably representative of undisturbed, native soil profile. No hydric soil conditions observed.
Perched
0
0
Primary hydrologic indicators A1-A3 present. However, hydro data is non-conclusive due to compromise from adjacent
perched surface water flowing in over compacted fill. Soils suggest no persistent high water table.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes Geonerco Properties LLC WA DP-2U
Richard Peel, Emily Swaim 14, T23N, R5E
Valley Floor Concave 0
A2 47.4762059748615 -122.126094102973 WGS84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes N/A
4 4 4
Vegetation and soils heavily disturbed. Area recently partially cleared, filled and compacted. Hydro data from
this data point is unreliable/compromised due to adjacent perched surface water entering pit.
Thuja plicata 50 Yes FAC 3
Alnus rubra 10 No FAC
Populus balsamifera 5 No FAC 3
65 100%
1 1
0 0
159 477
0 0 0
0 0
Ranunculus repens 50 Yes FAC 160 478
Agrostis capillaris 49 Yes FAC
Carex obnupta 1 No OBL 2.99
100
0
0
Recently disturbed area vegetated by early successional, non-native, aggressive, facultative species.
Vegetation is not conclusive when compared against prior data (Sewall 2017) which noted FAC-FACU species.
Single Carex shoot observed but not representative of strata.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
DP-2U
0 - 4 ------FILL Compacted fill
4 - 7 10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Compacted gravelly sandy loam
7 - 22 10YR 3/3 100 ----SaLo Sandy Loam
Compacted Fill
0-4
Compacted fill layer observed above native, non-hydric soil profile. Native soil horizon encountered at 4 inches below
ground surface. Compacted fill at surface potentially sourced from adjacent development actions and from indeterminate
depth. However, fill clearly sourced from subsoils.
Perched
Primary hydrologic indicators A1-A3 present. However, hydro data is non-conclusive due to compromise from adjacent
perched surface water flowing over compacted fill. Please see EP-5 for reliable soil and hydro profile.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes, Geonerco Properties LLC WA DP-3U
Emily Swaim, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Terrace Concave 0
A2 47.4758461357048 -122.126203031025 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes N/A
4 4 4
Vegetation and soils heavily disturbed. Area recently cleared, filled and compacted. Vegetation is inconclusive
as species are facultative, aggressive, and non-diagnostic.
Populus balsamifera 20 Yes FAC 5
5
20 100%
0 0
0
0
0 0 0
0 0
Agrostis capillaris 25 Yes FAC 0 0
Ranunculus repens 20 Yes FAC
Holcus lanatus 20 Yes FAC 0
Juncus effusus 20 Yes FACW
Juncus species*10 No FAC*
95
No
0
5
Vegetation recently disturbed and replaced by early successional, non-native, aggressive, facultative species.
Vegetation is not conclusive when compared against prior data (Sewall 2017) which noted FAC-FACU species.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
DP-3U
0 - 18 5Y 4/1 97 7.5YR 4/6 3 CS M/PL FILL FILL
18 - 24 10YR 2/2 100 ----SaLo Sandy Loam with organics
24 - 32 10YR 3/4 100 ----SaLo Sandy Loam
Fill
0 to 18 bgs
Thick, compacted fill layer observed above native, non-hydric soil profile. Native soil horizon encountered at 18 inches
below surface. Compacted fill at surface potentially sourced from adjacent development actions and from indeterminate
depth. Fill is clearly sourced from subsoils and non-diagnostic of hydric soils.
No primary or secondary hydrologic indicators observed. Hydrology observed but compromised due to adjacent hydro
flowing into pit. Soil data suggests hydro is not persistent at 14 inches but likely much lower in the soil table. See nearest
excavated pit EP-1.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes, Geonerco Properties LLC WA DP-4U
Richard Peel,Emily Swaim 14, T23N, R5E
Terrace Concave 0
A2 47.4752258103897 -122.126210496796 WGS84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes N/A
4 4 4
Data collected at base of established Populus to establish native soil horizon. Vegetation is faculative,
aggressive, non-native, and non-conclusive. Hydro data compromised by adjacent perched surface water. See
EP-2 for conclusive soil and hydro data.
Populus balsamifera 80 Yes FAC 5
5
80 100%
Rubus armeniacus 10 Yes FAC
0 0
20 40
150 450
10 0 0
0 0
Agrostis capillaris 30 Yes FAC 170 490
Ranunculus repens 30 Yes FAC
Phalaris arundinacea 20 Yes FACW 2.88
80
No
0
20
Early successional, non-native, aggressive, facultative species observed. Large Populus faculative but not
conclusive when compared against prior data (Sewall 2017) which noted majority FAC-FACU species.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
DP-4U
0 - 10 10YR 4/2 98 10YR 5/6 2 CS M FILL Compacted FILL
10 - 11 10YR 2/2 100 ----SaLo Sandy Loam
11-16 10YR 3/4 100 ----SaLo Sandy Loam
Compacted fill
11
Compacted fill observed above native soil horizon. No hydric soils noted in native soil profile. Fill clearly sourced from
subsoils and likely from adjacent development actions.
Primary hydrologic indicators A2-A3 present. However, hydro data is non-conclusive due to compromise from adjacent
perched surface water flowing over compacted fill. Please see EP-5 for reliable soil and hydro profile.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes, Geonerco Properties LLC WA DP-5U
Richard Peel,Emily Swaim 14, T23N, R5E
Valley Floor Concave 0
A2 47.4757839075375 -122.127275813379 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes N/A
4 4 4
Data collected near drainage pipe through filled area. Area is highly disturbed, partially cleared, filled, and
compacted. Collected adjacent to perched surface water. Faculative, invasive, aggressive vegetation observed.
Populus balsamifera 90 Yes FAC 3
3
90 100%
0 0
30 60
100 300
0 0 0
0 0
Phalaris arundinacea 30 Yes FACW 130 360
Agrostis capillaris 10 Yes FAC
2.77
40
No
0
60
Non-diagnostic, non-native, aggressive, facultative vegetation observed. Established Populus appears
damaged by large machinery and partially buried at base in fill. Vegetation observed by prior consultant
appears to have been removed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
DP-5U
0 - 14 5Y 5/1 98 10YR 5/4 2 CS M FILL Compacted fill
14 - 26+10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy loam
Compacted fill
0 to 14
14 inches of compacted fill observed above native, non-hydric soil profile. Compacted fill at surface potentially sourced
from adjacent development actions and from indeterminate depth. Fill is clearly sourced from subsoils and
non-diagnostic of hydric soils. Native soil profile appears consistent with previous pits (DP1-DP4).
Perched surface water observed adjacent to data pit but not observed in pit until after waiting 30 minutes for water table
to normalize. Hydro not conclusive as capillary action may have compromised data pit. See EP-3 for reliable data.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/05/2018
Harbour Homes, Geonerco Properties LLC WA DP-6U
Kyla Caddey, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Hillslope Concave 15
A2 47.4769398 -122.1239371 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes N/A
Data collected upland of Wetland A. Majority upland vegetation observed along clear boundary. Soils
representative of non-hydric native profile.
Thuja plicata 80 Yes FAC 1
5
80 20%
Vaccinium parvifolium 15 Yes FACU
Oemleria cerasiformis 10 Yes FACU
Symphoricarpos albus 10 Yes FACU 0 0
0 0
80 240
35 80 320
0 0
Polystichum munitum 45 Yes FACU 160 560
3.5
45
0
55
Majority FACU upland vegetation along wetland upland edge.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
DP-6U
0 - 2 10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
2 - 18 10YR 3/3 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
No hydric soil indicators observed. Representative soil profile of undisturbed native non-hydric soil.
No primary nor secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed. Data collected upland of clear hydrologic wetland
edge.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/05/2018
Harbour Homes, Geonerco Properties LLC WA DP-7W
Kyla Caddey,Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Hillslope Concave 1
A2 47.4768419 -122.1239639 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes N/A
Data collected within Wetland A. Vegetation FAC-FACW and distinct from uplands.
Alnus rubra 95 Yes FAC 5
5
95 100%
Rubus spectabilis 45 Yes FAC
Rubus armeniacus 35 Yes FAC
0 0
0 0
265 795
80 0 0
0 0
Tolmiea menziesii 45 Yes FAC 265 795
Ranunculus repens 30 Yes FAC
Athyrium cyclosorum 10 No FAC 3
Urtica dioica 5 No FAC
90
0
10
Vegetation FAC-FACW and distinct from uplands.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
DP-7W
0 - 24+10YR 2/1 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
Hydric soil indicators A4 and presumed A12 observed. Unable to reach depleted layer below black (10YR 2/1) layer.
+2
surface
0
Primary hydrologic indicators A1-A3 and C1 observed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/05/2018
Harbour Homes, Geonerco Properties LLC WA DP-8U
Kyla Caddey, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Hillslope Concave 3
A2 47.4751897 -122.1262292 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes N/A
Data collected adjacent to drainage on southeast border. Vegetation disturbed and invasive. Not all three
wetland criteria observed.
2
2
0 100%
Rubus armeniacus 40 Yes FAC
Rubus laciniatus 10 No FACU
0 0
0 0
60 180
50 10 40
0 0
Ranunculus repens 20 Yes FAC 70 220
3.14
20
0
80
FAC-FACU invasive, aggressive vegetation observed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
DP-8U
0 - 6 10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
6 - 16 10YR 3/4 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
No hydric soil indicators observed. Soils representative of native, non-hydric soil profile.
No primary nor secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed. Surface hydrology immediately adjacent to data pit.
No infiltration observed below surface.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes Geonerco Properties LLC WA EP-1U
Emily Swaim, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Terrace Concave 0
A2 47.476257 -122.12607264 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slope N/A
4 4
Mechanically excavated pit in recently disturbed and historically filled area. Vegetation recently partially removed
and inconclusive. Pit dug directly adjacent to perched surface water above compacted fill.
Populus balsamifera 20 Yes FAC 6
Thuja plicata 5 Yes FAC
6
25 100%
Rubus armeniacus 5 Yes FAC
0
0
0
5 0
0
Holcus lanatus 20 Yes FAC 0 0
Ranunculus repens 20 Yes FAC
Agrostis capillaris 25 Yes FAC 0
65
No
0
35
Previously observed upland vegetation (Sewall 2017) removed and early succession, aggressive, non-native
vegetation has populated the disturbed area. Vegetation is not diagnostic of hydric conditions.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
EP-1U
0 - 16 5Y 4/1 97 7.5YR 4/6 3 cs M/PL FILL Compacted fill
16 - 22 10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
22 - 36+10YR 4/4 99 10YR 3/6 1 C M GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
Fill
0 to 16
Compacted gravelly, sandy fill observed above native soil horizon. Native, non-hydric soil observed at and below 16
inches. Lower, native soil profile is consistent with undisturbed, upland soil profiles nearby on site. Compacted fill clearly
sourced from subsoils of indeterminate depth.
14
Small amount of hydrology observed entering pit at 14 inches. However, based on soil data it is likely this is a result of a
seep and not the natural water table depth. Perched surface water was observed adjacent to pit but does not penetrate
below compacted fill layer.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes Geonerco Properties LLC WA EP-2U
Emily Swaim, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Terrace Concave 0
A2 47.476196 -122.12608272 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slope N/A
4 4
Pit mechanically excavated directly abutting perched surface water. Area is highly disturbed, filled, and cleared.
Vegetation is early successional, faculative, aggressive and non-diagnostic. In and around pit is clearly
compacted fill.
Populus balsamifera 10 Yes FAC 3
3
10 100%
Rubus armeniacus 5 Yes FAC
0
0
0
5 0
0
Ranunculus repens 50 Yes FAC 0 0
0
50
No
0
50
Previously observed upland species have been cleared (Sewall 2017). Majority early successional, aggressive,
non-native species observed. Mature Populus partially buried in fill, and scraped by equipment. Populus is
faculative but non-diagnostic.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
EP-2U
0 - 5 10YR 4/1 100 ----FILL New fill
5 -10 10YR 5/2 98 7.5YR 4/4 2 Conc M FILL Historic fill
10 - 14 5Y5/1 97 7.5YR 4/6 3 C M FILL Historic fill
14 - 40 10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
40 - 55+10YR 4/4 97 10YR 3/6 3 C M GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
Fill
0 to 14
Non-hydric, native soil profile beginning at 14 inches. Multiple layers of compacted fill suggests area has been
historically filled. Fill colors not recognized as hydric as they are imported and clearly sourced from subsoils of
indeterminate depth.
51
32
No primary or diagnostic secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed. Pit excavated directly adjacent to perched
surface water. Hydrology clearly not penetrating compacted surface fill. Pit left open for 30 minutes to allow natural water
table to normalize at 51 inches. Water table depth is confirmed by native soil profile.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes Geonerco Properties LLC WA EP-3U
Emily Swaim, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Terrace Concave 0
A2 47.476196 -122.12608272 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slope N/A
4 4
Pit mechanically excavated in heavily disturbed area. Area has been partially cleared, filled, and compacted.
Majority of diagnostic vegetation removed. Adjacent to perched surface water.
Populus balsamifera 10 Yes FAC 3
3
10 100%
Rubus armeniacus 5 Yes FAC
0
0
0
5 0
0
Ranunculus repens 50 Yes FAC 0 0
0
50
No
0
50
Previously observed upland species have been cleared (Sewall 2017). Majority early successional, aggressive,
non-native species observed. Mature Populus partially buried in fill, and scraped by equipment.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
EP-3U
0 - 8 10YR 5/1 95 10YR 3/6 5 Conc PL/M FILL New fill
8 - 20 10YR 4/2 93 10YR 3/4 7 C PL/M FILL Historic fill layer
20 - 32 10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
32 - 40+10YR 4/4 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
Fill
0 to 20
Heavily compacted fill observed about native profile. Non-hydric, native soil layer beginning at 20 inches. Fill layers
above native soil horizon appear to be both historic and new.
27
32
No primary or diagnostic secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed. Pit excavated directly adjacent to perched
surface water. Hydrology clearly not penetrating compacted surface fill. Pit left open for 30 minutes to allow water table
to normalize at 27 inches. Soils suggest water table is transitory and likely drains rapidly.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes Geonerco Properties LLC WA EP-4U
Emily Swaim, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Terrace Concave 0
A2 47.476234 -122.12637610 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slope N/A
Pit mechanically excavated in relatively undisturbed upland area. Majority of vegetation has been removed but
native soil profile remains intact. Pit hydrology was compromised by adjacent perched surface water.
Thuja plicata 90 Yes FAC 5
5
90 100%
Rubus armeniacus 15 Yes FAC
Rubus spectabilis 15 Yes FAC
0
0
0
30 0
0
Ranunculus repens 50 Yes FAC 0 0
Hedera helix 25 Yes FACU
0
75
No
0
25
Majority of previously observed upland vegetation has been removed (Sewall 2017). FAC-FACU, aggressive,
non-native vegetation now dominating site. Remaining vegetation coincides with previous assessment.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
EP-4U
0 - 19 10YR 2/1 100 ----SaLo Sandy Loam duff w/ organics
19-26 10YR 3/4 100 ----SaLo Sandy Loam with organics
No hydric soils observed. Soil profile is likely representative of conditions on site before new or historic fill disturbance.
14
19
No primary nor secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed. However, hydrology compromised by adjacent
perched surface water.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes Geonerco Properties LLC WA EP-5U
Emily Swaim, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Terrace Concave 0
A2 47.476190 -122.12619856 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slope N/A
4 4
Pit mechanically excavated in heavily disturbed upland area directly adjacent to perched surface water. Area
has been cleared, filled, and occupied by non-determinate, invasive species.
Populus balsamifera 40 Yes FAC 5
5
40 100%
Rubus armeniacus 10 Yes FAC
0
0
0
10 0
0
Agrostis capillaris 30 Yes FAC 0 0
Ranunculus repens 30 Yes FAC
Phalaris arundinacea 20 Yes FACW 0
80
No
0
20
Aggressive, invasive, non-native species observed. Mature Populus is faculative but non-diagnostic. Vegetation
is not conclusive when weighed against prior non-hydrophytic data (Sewall, 2017)
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
EP-5U
0 - 5 10YR 5/1 95 10YR 3/6 5 C M/PL FILL New compacted fill
5 - 14 10YR 4/2 93 10YR 3/4 7 C M/PL FILL Historic compacted fill
14 - 36 10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
36 - 40+5Y5/1 48 10YR 3/6 3 C M GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
2.5Y5/3 47 10YR 3/6 2 C M GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
Mixed Matrix ^
Compacted Fill
0 to 14
No hydric soil indicators observed. Native soil profile observed at 14 inches below compacted fill layers. Does not meet
thick dark surface requirements as the layer above the depleted layer (5Y5/1) does not have a chroma of 1 or less.
Compacted fill layers clearly sourced from subsoils of indeterminate origin.
Perched
21
20
No primary nor secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed. Perched water not counted towards actual primary
indicators. Soil profile completely dry from 6-20 inches.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes Geonerco Properties LLC WA EP-6U
Emily Swaim, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Terrace Concave 0
A2 47.476253 -122.12615053 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slope N/A
Pit mechanically excavated on perimeter of mature cedar canopy. Soils and vegetation likely representative of
per-disturbance conditions. Hydrology compromised by adjacent perched surface water entering pit.
Thuja plicata 90 Yes FAC 2
5
90 40%
Gaultheria shallon 20 Yes FACU
0
0
95 285
20 40 160
0
Rubus ursinus 15 Yes FACU 135 445
Ranunculus repens 5 Yes FAC
Hedera helix 5 Yes FACU 3.3
25
No
0
75
Canopy of mature cedars likely representative of per-disturbance conditions. Vegetative status is consistent with
prior data (Sewall, 2017).
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
EP-6U
0 - 4 10YR 2/1 100 ----SaLo Sandy Loam duff w/organics
4 -16 10YR 3/4 100 ----SaLo Sandy Loam w/organics
Native soil profile is consistent with other undisturbed plots on site. Likely representative of per-disturbance/fill
conditions.
6
4
Hydrology compromised by adjacent perches surface water entering excavated pit.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes Geonerco Properties LLC WA EP-7U
Emily Swaim, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Terrace Concave 0
A2 47.476030 -122.12621037 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slope N/A
4 4
Pit mechanically excavated south of perched surface water. Vegetation partially cleared from area and
populated by aggressive species.
Populus balsamifera 10 Yes FAC 5
5
10 100%
Rubus armeniacus 5 Yes FAC
0
0
0
5 0
0
Ranunculus repens 65 Yes FAC 0 0
Agrostis capillaris 20 Yes FAC
Holcus lanatus 5 Yes FAC 0
90
No
0
10
Vegetation partially cleared from area and replaced by aggressive, early successioal, invasive species. Mature
Populus appears damages by machinery and is likely not-diagnostic of hydric conditions.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
EP-7U
0 - 6 10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Recent compacted fill
6 - 10 5Y 4/1 98 7.5YR 2.5/3 2 C M FILL Historic compacted fill
10 - 15 10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
15 - 22 10YR 4/4 99 10YR 3/6 1 C M GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
22 - 35 10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
35 - 45+10YR 3/3 98 10YR 3/6 2 C M GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
Compacted Fill
0 to 10
Multiple compacted fill layers observed above non-hydric native soil profile. Native soil layers correspond to excavated
profiles from undisturbed portions of the site.
30
33
No primary nor secondary indicators observed. Hydrology observed after 30 minutes to allow hydrology to normalize.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes Geonerco Properties LLC WA EP-8U
Emily Swaim, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Terrace Concave 0
A2 47.476030 -122.12621037 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slope N/A
4 4
Mechanically excavated pit to the southeast of the perched surface water. Vegetation has been removed and
populated by early successional, aggressive species. Native soils are borderline but hydro is negative.
Populus balsamifera 10 Yes FAC 5
5
10 100%
Rubus armeniacus 5 Yes FAC
0
0
0
5 0
0
Ranunculus repens 65 Yes FAC 0 0
Agrostis capillaris 20 Yes FAC
Holcus lanatus 5 Yes FAC 0
90
No
0
10
Hydrophytic vegetation criteria observed. Met via dominance test.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
EP-8U
0 - 18 10YR 3/2 100 ----FILL Compacted fill
18 - 21 10YR 4/4 100 ----SaLo Sandy Loam
21 - 48 10YR 5/1 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
Compacted Fill
0 to 18
Compacted fill observed above native soil horizon. Native soil profile meets for hydric indicator F3.
No primary nor secondary indicators observed. No water encountered at or above 48 inches.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1155.0024 - Cedars at the Highlands Renton / King 01/04/2018
Harbour Homes Geonerco Properties LLC WA EP-9U
Emily Swaim, Richard Peel 14, T23N, R5E
Terrace Concave 0
A2 47.476030 -122.12621037 WGS 84
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 6 to 15 percent slope N/A
mechanically excavated pit to the southwest of the perched water table. Likely soil conditions of undisturbed
profile. Vegetation is consistent with prior observations of site (Sewall, 2017).
Pseduotsuga menziesii 50 Yes FACU 3
Alnus rubra 25 Yes FAC
5
75 60%
Ilex aquifolium 10 Yes FACU
Rubus armeniacus 5 Yes FAC
0 0
0 0
95 285
15 85 340
0 0
Ranunculus repens 60 Yes FAC 180 625
Geranium robertianum 15 No FACU
Carex leptopoda 5 No FAC 3.47
Rubus ursinus 5 No FACU
Tanacetum vulgare 5 No FACU
90
No
0
10
Vegetation FAC-FACU and majority aggressive, invasive species. Vegetation is positive as per the dominance
test but does not meet as per the prevalence index.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
EP-9U
0 - 8 10YR 2/2 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
8-26 10YR 4/6 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
26-43 2.5Y 5/3 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
43+10YR 5/2 100 ----GrSaLo Gravelly Sandy Loam
Soil represents a mostly undisturbed, native soil profile. No compacted fill observed.
40
34
No primary nor secondary indicators observed. Water table encountered near 3 feet after 30 minutes to allow the height
to naturalize.
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 21
Attachment C – Wetland Rating Form
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!aaa
a
a
a
a
aaaPictometry International Corp. 2015
¢
www.soundviewconsultants.com
2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954
Soundview ConsultantsEnvironmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions LLC
DATE:
JOB:
BY:
SCALE:
FIGURE NO.
1/23/2018
DLS
1
CEDARS AT THE HIGHLANDS - WETLAND RATING MAP
14120 160TH AVE SE, RENTON, WA 98059
KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS:45750-0106
CEDARS AT THE HIGHLANDS 1155.0024
1 " = 90 '
0 90 18045 Feet
Cowardin Map
Forested
Scrub-Shrub
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !Ditch
a a OHW
Wetland Channel
Site Boundary
150' BoundaryBuried
Plastic Pipe
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!aaa
a
a
a
a
aaaPictometry International Corp. 2015
¢
www.soundviewconsultants.com
2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954
Soundview ConsultantsEnvironmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions LLC
DATE:
JOB:
BY:
SCALE:
FIGURE NO.
1/23/2018
DLS
2
CEDARS AT THE HIGHLANDS - WETLAND RATING MAP
14120 160TH AVE SE, RENTON, WA 98059 KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS:45750-0106
CEDARS AT THE HIGHLANDS 1155.0024
1 " = 90 '
0 90 18045 Feet
Hydroperiod Map
Saturated
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !Ditch
a a OHW
Wetland Channel
Site Boundary
150' Boundary
Pictometry International Corp. 2015
¢
www.soundviewconsultants.com
2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954
Soundview ConsultantsEnvironmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions LLC
DATE:
JOB:
BY:
SCALE:
FIGURE NO.
1/16/2018
DLS
3
CEDARS AT THE HIGHLANDS - WETLAND RATING MAP
14120 160TH AVE SE, RENTON, WA 98059
KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS:45750-0106
CEDARS AT THE HIGHLANDS 1155.0024
1 " = 1,500 '
0 1,500 3,000750 Feet
Habitat Map
High Intensity
Undisturbed Habitat
Moderate & Low Intensity
1 KM Polygon
Abutting Undisturbed Habitat 0.49%
Abutting Moderate & Low Intensity Land Uses 2.05%
Accessible Habitat 1.51%
Undisturbed Habitat 8.96%
Moderate & Low Intensity Land Uses 12.22%
Undisturbed Habitat in 1 KM Polygon 15.07%
High Intensity Land Use in 1 KM Polygon 78.82%
H.2.2
H.2.3
H.2.0 Wetland A
H.2.1
USGS, NGA, NASA, CGIAR,N
Robinson,NCEAS,NLS,OS,NMA,Geodatastyrelsen and the GIS User
Community
¢
www.soundviewconsultants.com
2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954
Soundview ConsultantsEnvironmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions LLC
DATE:
JOB:
BY:
SCALE:
FIGURE NO.
1/16/2018
DLS
4
CEDARS AT THE HIGHLANDS - WETLAND RATING MAP
14120 160TH AVE SE, RENTON, WA 98059
KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS:45750-0106
CEDARS AT THE HIGHLANDS 1155.0024
1 " = 2 mi
0 2 41 Miles
303d Map
303d Assessed Waters
Hydrography
Sub Basin
SITE
Listing ID Category Parameter Media Waterbody Waterbody Type
70688 5 Total Phosphorus Water FRANCIS LAKE Lakes
10655 5 pH Water CEDAR RIVER Rivers/Streams
72584 5 Temperature Water TAYLOR CREEK Rivers/Streams
72569 5 Temperature Water MAPLEWOOD CREEK Rivers/Streams
70140 5 Bioassessment Other UNNAMED CREEK (TRIB TO LAKE WASHINGTON)Rivers/Streams
70078 5 Bioassessment Other MOLASSES CREEK Rivers/Streams
72581 5 Temperature Water PETERSON (LAYTON) CREEK Rivers/Streams
70079 5 Bioassessment Other MADSEN CREEK, S.F.Rivers/Streams
4816 5 Temperature Water CEDAR RIVER Rivers/Streams
70077 5 Bioassessment Other UNNAMED CREEK (TRIB TO CEDAR RIVER)Rivers/Streams
10654 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water CEDAR RIVER Rivers/Streams
Wetland name or number
Name of wetland (or ID #): Date of site visit: 1/5/2018
Rated by Trained by Ecology? Yes No Date of training 9/29/2016
HGM Class used for rating Wetland has multiple HGM classes? Yes No
NOTE: Form is not complete with out the figures requested (figures can be combined ).
Source of base aerial photo/map
OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY IV (based on functions or special characteristics )
1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS
Category I - Total score = 23 - 27 Score for each
Category II - Total score = 20 - 22 function based
Category III - Total score = 16 - 19 on three
X Category IV - Total score = 9 - 15 ratings
(order of ratings
is not
important )
L L 9 = H, H, H
L L 8 = H, H, M
LHTotal 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
2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland
X
Esri Arc GIS
Wetland A
Richard Peel
Coastal Lagoon
Interdunal
Value
Score Based on
Ratings 63514
H
Improving
Water Quality
LSite Potential
Landscape Potential
Habitat
M
FUNCTION
None of the above
CHARACTERISTIC Category
Estuarine
Wetland of High Conservation Value
Bog
Mature Forest
Old Growth Forest
Slope
RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington
List appropriate rating (H, M, L)
Hydrologic
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 1 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
Maps and Figures required to answer questions correctly for
Western Washington
Depressional Wetlands
Map of: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes
Hydroperiods
Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods )
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure )
Map of the contributing basin
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)
Riverine Wetlands
Map of: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes
Hydroperiods
Ponded depressions
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure )
Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure )
Map of the contributing basin
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)
Lake Fringe Wetlands
Map of: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes
Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure )
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)
Slope Wetlands
Map of: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes
Hydroperiods
Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
(can be added to another figure )
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure )
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
To answer questions:
D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4
D 1.4, H 1.2
D 1.1, D 4.1
D 2.2, D 5.2
D 4.3, D 5.3
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
D 3.1, D 3.2
D 3.3
To answer questions:
H 1.1, H 1.4
H 1.2
R 1.1
R 2.4
R 1.2, R 4.2
R 4.1
R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
L 1.2
L 2.2
L 3.1, L 3.2
L 3.3
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
R 3.1
R 3.2, R 3.3
To answer questions:
L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4
S 4.1
S 2.1, S 5.1
To answer questions:
H 1.1, H 1.4
H 1.2
S 1.3
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 2 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)
S 3.1, S 3.2
S 3.3
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 3 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
For questions 1 -7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated.
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
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?
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 leaves the wetland without being impounded.
NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope
5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years.
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.
If 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.
HGM Classification of Wetland in Western Washington
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.
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;
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.
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).
The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding
from that stream or river,
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.
At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m).
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 4 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional
NO - go to 8 YES - The wetland class is Depressional
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
Slope + Riverine
Slope + Depressional
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.
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other
class of freshwater wetland
HGM class to
use in rating
Riverine
Depressional
Lake Fringe
Depressional
Depressional
Riverine
Treat as
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.
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.
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.
ESTUARINE
Slope + Lake Fringe
Depressional + Riverine along stream
within boundary of depression
Depressional + Lake Fringe
Riverine + Lake Fringe
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 5 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 6 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
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
Yes = 3 No = 0
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 2
Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12 = H 6 - 11 = M 0 - 5 = L Record the rating on the first page
Yes = 1 No = 0
Other Sources Yes = 1 No = 0
Total for S 2 Add the points in the boxes above 1
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 1 - 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
Yes = 1 No = 0
Yes = 1 No = 0
Yes = 2 No = 0
Total for S 3 Add the points in the boxes above 3
Rating of Value If score is: 2 - 4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
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 )
0
S 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic
(use NRCS definitions ):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.
2
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?0
S 2.2. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are
not listed in question S 2.1?1
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?0
1
2
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.
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 the unit is found ?
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 7 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 8 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
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
Yes = 1 No = 0
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
S 6.1. Distance to the nearest areas downstream that have flooding problems:
points = 2
Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient points = 1
No flooding problems anywhere downstream points = 0
Yes = 2 No = 0
Total for S 6 Add the points in the boxes above 0
Rating of Value If score is: 2 - 4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
SLOPE WETLANDS
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)0
S 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society?
0
S 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood
conveyance in a regional flood control plan?0
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 0
S 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support 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?
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 9 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
S6.0 - please see Technical Information Report for downstream flood analysis
Wetland name or number
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 10 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat
H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat?
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 :
H 1.2. 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 types present: points = 0
Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland
Seasonally flowing stream or in, or adjacent to, the wetland
Lake Fringe wetland 2 points
Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points
H 1.3. Richness of plant species
If you counted: > 19 species points = 2
5 - 19 species points = 1
< 5 species points = 0
H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats
These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes.
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
1
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.
None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points
All three diagrams
in this row are
HIGH = 3 points
1
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 ).
1
Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2.
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 1
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.
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 11 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 12 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
H 1.5. Special habitat features:
Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long)
Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland
Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above 4
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 function of the site?
H 2.1 Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit ).
Calculate:
0.49 % undisturbed habitat + ( 2.05 % moderate & low intensity land uses / 2 ) = 1.515%
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:
8.96 % undisturbed habitat + ( 12.22 % moderate & low intensity land uses / 2 ) = 15.07%
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 1km Polygon is high intensity points = 0
Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above -1
Rating of Landscape Potential If Score is: 4 - 6 = H 1 - 3 = M < 1 = L Record the rating on the first page
Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2
It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)
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
2
Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see
H 1.1 for list of strata )
0
0
1
-2
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 .
It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant
or animal on the state or federal lists)
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 )
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
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number
of points.
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 13 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) with in 100m 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
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 14 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha).
Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation.
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 ).
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.
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.
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.
WDFW Priority Habitats
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.
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 ).
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.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/
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.
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 15 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are
addressed elsewhere.
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 16 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
Wetland Type Category
Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. List the category when the appropriate criteria are met.
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.
Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 1.2
SC 1.2.Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions?
Yes = Category I No = Category II
SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV)
SC 2.1.
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 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 to SC 2.4 No = Not WHCV
SC 2.4.
Yes = Category I No = Not WHCV
SC 3.0. Bogs
SC 3.1.
Yes - Go to SC 3.3 No - Go to SC 3.2
SC 3.2.
Yes - Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog
SC 3.3.
Yes = Is a Category I bog No - Go to SC 3.4
SC 3.4.
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
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?
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.
Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation
Value and listed it on their website?
Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list
of Wetlands of High Conservation Value?
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 .
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?
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?
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?
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.
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)
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 17 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog
p, p, y p ( p )
listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy?
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 18 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Wetland name or number
SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands
Yes = Category I No = Not a forested wetland for this section
SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
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 larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2)
Yes = Category I No = Category II
SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands
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.
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.
Yes = Category III No = Category IV
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
If you answered No for all types, enter “Not Applicable” on Summary Form
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).
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).
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 )
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.
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.
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.
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)?
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?
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 19 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 22
Attachment D – Qualifications
Don Babineau
Environmental Planner/Project Manager
Professional Experience: >10 years
Don Babineau is an Environmental Planner and Project Manager with a diverse background in urban
and commercial forestry, land planning, landscape architecture, stormwater monitoring and civil
engineering. Don has experience as a Forester with Washington State Department of Natural
Resources stream typing and delineating stream protection zones, as well as implementing Washington
State’s Habitat Conservation Plan to foster the creation of old-growth forest characteristics on state
trust lands. Don earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Forest Ecosystems Management and a
Bachelor of Landscape Architecture degree, both from the University Of Idaho.
Don has been formally trained by the Washington State Department of Ecology in the use of the
Washington State Wetland Rating System. In addition, he has received formal training in wetland
delineation from the Northwest Environmental Training Center and is an experienced certified
erosion and sediment control lead (CESCL). He is also a Pierce County qualified Professional
Forester.
Emily Swaim
Wetland Scientist/Field Geologist
Professional Experience: 4 years
Emily Swaim is a Wetland Scientist and Field Geologist with a background in conducting Phase I, II
and III Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs), underground natural gas pipeline and overhead
electrical transmission line project assessment and environmental inspections, construction oversight,
stormwater compliance inspections, soil sampling, delineating and assessing wetland and aquatic
systems, and stormwater, floodplain, and wetland permitting. Ms. Swaim’s expertise focuses on
projects involving sensitive wetland and stream habitats where extensive team coordination and
various regulatory challenges must be carefully and intelligently managed from project inception to
completion.
Emily earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Geology from Illinois State Un iversity and Wetland
Science and Management Professional Certification from the University of Washington, Seattle. She
is also educated in Environmental Science from Iowa State University. Her education and experience
has provided her with extensive knowledge on soils, wetland science, hydrogeology, sedimentology,
environmental law, environmental geology, landscape ecology, and structural geology. Ms. Swaim has
been formally trained in Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) and
is Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) 30-hour Construction and 10-hour
Construction certified. She is also a Pierce County Qualified Wetland Specialist and Wetland
Professional In-Training (WPIT) through the Society of Wetland Scientists.
Soundview Consultants LLC January 31, 2018
1155.0024 – Harbour Homes Page 23
Richard Peel
Wetland Scientist
Professional Experience: 5 years
Richard Peel is a Wetland Scientist with professional experience in wetland ecology, monitoring, and
delineation throughout Washington and Oregon. Richard is Washington State trained in conducting
wetland delineations, assessing wetland systems, mitigation planning and design, implementation of
monitoring programs, mitigation monitoring and reporting. He also has extensive experience in an
analytical laboratory using state-of-the-art equipment in bacteriological and chemical analysis of soil and
water samples.
Richard is a graduate of The Evergreen State College, with dual degrees in Ecology and Economics. He
has focused his academic career on ecology, disturbance ecology, chemistry, and the economic impacts of
current environmental management. Richard has extensive training and field experience in wetland related
disciplines, and has experience in wetlands both east and west of the Cascades. He has been trained by the
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Wetland Ecology and Monitoring team in the
use of the wetland delineation, mitigation, monitoring, and restoration techniques. In addition, he was
directed by WSDOT’s Wetland Protection and Preservation Policy to ensure wetlands are preserved and
protected whenever possible. This direction ensures no net loss in the quantity or quality of wetlands in
the future and minimization of impacts to wetlands in the present.
Erin Harker
Staff Scientist
Professional Experience: 3 years
Erin Harker is a Staff Scientist with diverse ecological experience in both field and laboratory settings
in the Pacific Northwest. She has gained hands-on experience involving research on water quality,
salmon runs, restoration project performance, and marine mammal hydro-acoustics. Erin is proficient
in collecting and analyzing environmental data; riparian restoration and wetland mitigation monitoring
principles and techniques; analyzing local, state, and federal environmental code and regulations; and
technical writing. Erin has additional experience engaging students in a suite of environmental
curriculums. She currently assists clients through the various stages of land use planning by conducting
environmental code analysis; preparing environmental assessments, mitigation reports, and biological
evaluations; and completing permit applications.
Erin graduated from Western Washington University with a Bachelor of Science degree in
Environmental Science with a Marine Ecology focus. She has recei ved formal training through the
WSDOE and Coastal Training Program in conducting forage fish surveys; amphibian identification
and survey guidance; using the credit-debit system for estimating wetland mitigation needs,
determining the ordinary high water mark; Puget Sound coastal processes; conducting eelgrass
delineations; using the 2014 wetland rating system; and using field indicators for hydric soils.