Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
RS_Biological_Assessment_and_Critical_Areas_Study_Re-Align_Environmental_240729_v1.pdf
Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St., Renton, Wa. T 23N R5E S5 - Renton , WA Prepared for: Yin Yin Leong c/o Ms. Tracy Hung 1828 NE 20th St. Renton, WA 98056 Prepared by: Re-Align Environmental Bill Granger, Owner 14056 180th Ave SE Renton, WA (206) 790-6132 Bill@Re-alignenv.com November XX, 2023 Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 i Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Background .................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 METHODS .................................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Wetland Delineation Protocol .................................................................................................. 2 2.1.1 Wetland Hydrology Parameter ......................................................................................... 2 2.1.2 Hydric Soils Parameter...................................................................................................... 2 2.1.3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Parameter .................................................................................. 3 2.2 Waters of the United States Delineation Protocol .................................................................... 3 3.0 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Offsite Review .......................................................................................................................... 4 3.1.2 Topography ...................................................................................................................... 4 3.1.3 National Wetlands Inventory ............................................................................................ 4 3.1.4 PHS Database ................................................................................................................... 4 3.1.5 Soils .................................................................................................................................. 4 3.1.6 Previous Studies ............................................................................................................... 5 3.2 Onsite Field Review .................................................................................................................. 6 3.2.1 Wetlands .......................................................................................................................... 6 3.2.2 Wetland Rating ................................................................................................................. 7 3.2.3 Streams ............................................................................................................................ 7 3.2.4 Summary .......................................................................................................................... 7 4.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND REGULATORY FINDINGS ..................................................................... 8 4.1 Wetland and Buffer Condition, Restoration, and Enhancement ................................................ 9 4.1.1 Buffer Restoration and Wetland Enhancement Plan ......................................................... 9 4.1.2 Monitoring Plan .............................................................................................................. 12 4.1.3 Maintenance Plan........................................................................................................... 13 4.1.3 Contingency Plan ............................................................................................................ 13 5.0 QUALIFICATIONS OF THE AUTHOR ............................................................................................. 14 6.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 15 Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a wetlands delineation conducted by Re-Align Environmental on the 1.17 acre parcel located at 1828 NE 20th Street, Renton, WA (Parcel #3343903201). The parcel is located within of Section 5, Township 2 North, Range 5 East W.M, within the City of Renton, WA (Figures 1 and 2). Bill Granger, a wetland ecologist, originally visited the site during 2016 and 2017 to conduct a delineation of wetlands on the site. Since that time, the property has been acquired by a new owner and a new delineation was conducted in 2023. The site was visited several times through 2023 for a wetland delineation and data collection. Wetlands were found on the property (Figure 2). The wetland was rated as a Category IV wetland with a prescribed 50-foot buffer. The land owner, Yin Yin Leong, seeks approval of the wetland delineation, wetland rating, and wetland buffer. In addition, a plan has been prepared to develop the site into a single-family residential homesite with an accessory dwelling unit. The driveway into the homesite will be located in a pipestem that is located within wetlands buffer, and will require impacts to the wetland buffer that do not qualify for a standard buffer reduction. Therefore, this report addresses a proposed reasonable use variance for these impacts. Field datasheets are attached for reference in Appendix A. Appendix B presents the soil survey information for the site. Appendix C includes photographs of the site. Appendix D presents the wetland rating. 1.1 Project Background The subject property consists of one undeveloped, single-family parcel. The parcel is irregularly shaped and is surrounded by single-family residential development on the south and eastern boundaries, and undeveloped forest and shrub areas on the north and west. The site contains evidence of past development, including an existing driveway (see Figure 2) in a pipestem that is overgrown with Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) as well as a concrete building foundation in the center of the site. The previous landowner, Mr. Terry Dutro of Masterbuilder Construction, reports that he removed several buildings on the property because the buildings were unsafe (Dutro, 2018). The site is currently vegetated with a dense cover of young trees and shrubs. To access the site from I-405 North, take Exit 6 and turn right onto Kennewick Pl. NE. Turn right onto Jones Ave NE and take Jones Ave. NE to NE 20th St. As NE 20th St. turns left (east), the access to the site is located on the north side of the street. 2.0 METHODS This section describes the methodology used by Re-Align Environmental to complete the wetlands evaluation and stream mapping. Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 2 2.1 Wetland Delineation Protocol To ensure consistency with Federal, Washington State, and City of Renton regulations, Re-Align Environmental evaluated the site for the presence of wetlands consistent with the methodology outlined in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region (Regional Supplement) (Environmental Laboratory, 2010), which is consistent with and updates the Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Corps Manual) (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and other pertinent federal and local guidance. A three-parameter approach is used when making wetland determinations, wherein positive indicators of wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and hydrophytic vegetation all must be present in order to determine that an area is a jurisdictional wetland (Environmental Laboratory, 2010). The primary objectives of the evaluation performed by Re-Align Environmental include the following: • Determine the presence of, and geographic extent of jurisdictional wetlands and other Waters of the U.S. on or near of the project site; • Produce an accurate map that depicts the location of any wetlands and streams on the project site, and estimate the location of these resources on adjacent properties; • Rate any wetlands, type any stream, and determine the appropriate buffers based on the Renton Critical Area Regulations; and • Assess and propose a wetland variance for the required buffer impacts, including a code analysis, mitigation proposal, and monitoring plan. 2.1.1 Wetland Hydrology Parameter The presence of wetland hydrology can be determined using a variety of direct and indirect indicators, consistent with the Regional Supplement. Direct hydrology indicators, such as stream gauging station data or historical records, pertaining to the project area can be used to satisfy the wetland hydrology parameter. The wetland hydrology parameter can also be determined using field indicators, which include, but are not limited to: visual observation of inundation, high water table or soil saturation, sediment deposits, water-stained leaves, watermarks, oxidized rhizospheres along living roots, drift deposits, and hydrogen sulfide odor (USACE, 2010). Wetland hydrology must be present during the growing season, which is defined as that portion of the year when soil temperatures at 19.7 inches (50 cm) below the soil surface are higher than biological zero (41° F). The wetland hydrology parameter may be met if an area is inundated and/or saturated to the surface for a total of 5 to 12.5 percent of the growing season (USACE, 2010). The wetland hydrology parameter is met if an area is inundated or saturated for more than 12.5 percent of the growing season. 2.1.2 Hydric Soils Parameter Fulfillment of the hydric soils parameter can be satisfied by using published soils information and field indicators. Field indicators for determining whether a soil meets the hydric soils parameter are listed in Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 8.1 (USDA- NRCS, 2017) and in the Regional Supplement (Environmental Laboratory, 2010). Published soils information Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 3 for the project site was obtained from the NRCS Web Soil Survey program at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov (Appendix B). Soil colors were determined in the field using standard NRCS sampling techniques and Munsell Soil Color Charts (Munsell 2000). 2.1.3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Parameter An area meets the hydrophytic vegetation parameter when more than 50% of the dominant species from each stratum have an assigned indicator status of obligate wetland (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), and/or facultative (FAC). According to the Regional Supplement, an area can meet the hydrophytic vegetation parameter even when it does not pass the dominance test (described above) if it passes the prevalence index, a weighted ratio of the total percent cover of all species identified in the area (Environmental Laboratory, 2010). The indicator status of each species was assigned using the National Plant List specific to the Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region (Lichvar et. al, 2016) and regionally specific plant taxonomy texts (Pojar and MacKinnon, 1994; Guard, 1995). An indicator status refers to the relative frequency with which a particular species occurs in jurisdictional wetlands (see Table 1). Dominant species in each of four strata (i.e., tree, sapling/shrub, herb, and woody vine) are identified as the most abundant species that, combined, immediately exceed 50% of the total aerial cover for that stratum, plus any additional species that comprise 20% or more the total aerial cover for that stratum. Table 1: Plant Indicator Status Categories Indicator Status Definition Obligate Wetland (OBL) Occur almost always in wetlands under natural conditions (probability >99%). Facultative Wetland (FACW) Usually occur in wetlands (probability >67% to 99%), but occasionally found in non-wetlands. Facultative (FAC) Equally likely to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands (probability 33% to 67%). Facultative Upland (FACU) Usually occur in non-wetlands, but occasionally found in wetlands (probability 1% to <33%). Obligate Upland (UPL) Occur rarely in wetlands under natural conditions (probability <1%). No Indicator Status (NI) Insufficient information exists to assign an indicator status. 2.2 Waters of the United States Delineation Protocol Re-Align Environmental evaluated other jurisdictional waters of the United States within the project area consistent with the definitions provided in 33 CFR 328.3 (a)(1-5). The applicable portions of the Waters of the U.S. definition are as follows, "all other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams) ...the use, degradation, or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce..." and "tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (a)(1)-(4) of this section" (33 CFR 328.3 [a][3 and 5]). In applying these definitions to conditions encountered in the project site, Re-Align Environmental used the following criteria for identifying waters of the United States: (1) presence of distinct bed and bank features that have been produced by surface waters, and (2) presence of an identifiable Ordinary High Water mark (OHWM). Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 4 3.0 RESULTS The following sections present the results of the wetland and stream assessment. 3.1 Offsite Review Prior to conducting the fieldwork, Re-Align Environmental researched available information concerning soils, hydrology, and vegetation on the project site. The following sections summarize the findings of this research. 3.1.2 Topography Figure 2 shows a survey of the subject property. The site ranges in elevation from 254 feet in the southwest corner to 264 feet in the northeast corner. The site slopes gently downward (~1-2% gradient) to the west and south, where the site drains to the west. At the northeast corner of the site, the topography rises from elevation 260 feet to 264 feet over a distance of approximately 30 feet at its steepest pitch. In this small area, the maximum slope is approximately 13%. 3.1.3 National Wetlands Inventory Figure 3 depicts the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map for the area (http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html). The NWI map shows no wetlands on the subject property. A Palustrine Forested/shrub wetland is depicted immediately south of the subject property, across NE 20th Street. The subject property appears to be densely forested in the NWI aerial photography. 3.1.4 PHS Database The Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) Database map of the subject property is shown in Figure 4. The PHS mapping appears to use a similar wetland polygon on the property to the south, with no wetlands mapped on the 1828 property. No other Priority Habitats are shown on the site. 3.1.5 Soils Soil information was obtained from the NRCS Web Soil Survey (WSS) program, (http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov). According to WSS there are two soil types on the subject property (Figure 5): • InC - Indianola loamy sand, 5 to 15 percent slopes; and • Sm—Shalcar muck. The following presents a summary of each soil found on the site, based on the description in Appendix B. InC - Indianola loamy sand, 5 to 15 percent slopes Indianola loamy sand is found on terraces, eskers and kames and is derived from sandy glacial outwash. This soil is found between 0 and 980 feet in elevation. This soil is somewhat excessively Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 5 well drained and exhibits a depth to water table of over 80 inches. Indianola is known to contain inclusions of the hydric Norma series along drainageways. Sm—Shalcar muck Shalcar muck is found on floodplains and is derived from herbaceous organic material and/or alluvium. This soil is typically located in areas with a slope of 0% to 1%. The soil is very poorly drained and exhibits a water table at the soil surface. Shalcar muck is a hydric soil. 3.1.6 Previous Studies Masterbuilder Construction, the previous landowner, provided a series of wetland and stream evaluations of the site from the mid-2000s. A summary of these studies is provided below. 2005 – The Watershed Company- Blueberry Meadows – Environmental Review (TWC, 2005) On July 18, 2005, The Watershed Company (TWC) conducted a site visit on the subject property to evaluate the site conditions, check the accuracy of a wetland delineation by Ellisport Engineering, and to verify the classification of a stream located to the west of the subject property (TWC, 2005). In this report, TWC challenges the applicant’s contention that the stream was a Type 5 stream as opposed to a Type 4 Stream. TWC also challenges the applicant’s assertion that the wetland hydrology parameter is not met in a wetland area on the site based on a delineation that had been performed in the late summer of 2004. This report suggested a re-delineation of the wetlands, considering the ephemeral nature of wetland hydrology on the project site. 2006 – Del Moral Associates Wetland and Stream Evaluation (Del Moral Associates, 2006) In September 2006, Del Moral Associates visited the subject property to determine the potential impact of a mapped stream and wetlands on the development potential of the site. Citing a previous 2004 evaluation of the property to the west of the subject property, Del Moral describes that “despite hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soil (as indicated by a Munsell color determination), the vegetation along the western edge of the Core property (i.e., the subject property) was not wetlands because the soil was not saturated…My examination of this boundary agrees with that determination.” This report goes on to say “The Core property contains no wetland. The nearest wetlands are over 40 ft. to the south and no closer than 39 ft. to the west” (citing a 25 foot buffer on a Category 3 wetland). “The stream, about 130 ft. to the west is unlikely to be affected by development of this project.” 2007 – TWC Wetland Delineation (TWC, 2007) In February 2007, TWC, which had reviewed the site in 2005 to assess the Ellisport delineation, visited the site to delineate and flag the wetlands on the subject property. Figure 6 presents the field map associated with this delineation. The datasheets from 2007 describe the wetlands as dominated by herbaceous vegetation. The wetland map appears to show a house and garage adjacent to the wetland, and possibly several junked cars on the northern end of the site. This appears to be inconsistent with the current aerial photography, which show the site as heavily vegetated with trees and shrubs. Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 6 2018 – Re-Align Environmental Critical Areas Report (Re-Align Environmental, 2018) During 2016 to 2018, Re-Align Environmental provided environmental consulting services to Masterbuilder Corporation, the previous owner of the subject property. This work was performed largely to assist with the owner’s desire to maintain the driveway into the property, which had become overgrown with Himalayan blackberry. Secondarily, the work was performed to document the wetland boundary and buffer on the site, in anticipation of the sale of the property. Based on this work, a Critical Areas Report was completed in 2018. As of this 2018 assessment, the onsite wetland corresponded with the TWC mapping (see Figure 7). The wetland was rated as a Category IV wetland with a total score of 14 (habitat score of 3) and a prescribed buffer of 50 feet. The 2018 report was never submitted to the City of Renton for verification. 3.2 Onsite Field Review Using the offsite review as a basis for evaluating the project area, Re-Align Environmental conducted fieldwork for this wetland evaluation and stream mapping on September 8, 2016 for a preliminary site reconnaissance, on June 29, 2023 for a formal wetland evaluation and data collection. 3.2.1 Wetlands The subject property was walked from the highest elevation south and west to the lower elevations. Then, the perimeter of the site was walked to look for drainage patterns onto or off of the site. As shown in Figure 2, Wetland A was flagged with “wetland delineation” flagging along its northern and eastern edges (numbered sequentially A-1 through A-16). The flags were placed along the slope that defines the northern and eastern extents of the wetland on the site. For purposes of this analysis, the wetland is presumed to extend to the west and beyond the property line. No attempt was made to identify upland islands in the wetland area. Seven datapoints were recorded on the site to document the wetland determination and to assess the remainder of the property (Figure 2). The datasheets are included in Appendix A. Datapoints 1, 4, and 6 document the conditions inside the wetland boundary and the remaining four datapoints (2, 3 ,5 and 7) describe the uplands. As shown in these datapoints, the wetland is primarily forested with young red alder (Alnus rubra). Along the southern portion of the wetland boundary, the flagging is located in a blackberry and willow (Salix sitchensis) thicket, which was manually cleared with a machete to allow for the delineation and flagging. Soil samples in the wetland area are chroma 1 and 2 sandy loam with redox concentrations. It is anticipated that this hydric inclusion corresponds to the hydric Norma soil that is found along depressions and drainageways in the Indianola soil unit and not the mapped Shalcar muck, although the Shalcar mapping appears to align with the wetland boundary (see Figure 2). Hydrology indicators in the wetland include saturation, sparsely vegetated concave surface, dark leaf litter, and drainage patterns. The vegetation is hydrophytic in all seven datapoints. The wetland boundary was delineated based on changes in soil color and loss of redox features, changes in topography, and changes in hydrology indicators. Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 7 Based on a survey by Eastside Consultants, the acreage of wetland on the property covers 10,050 square feet (sf). The wetland extends to the south, off of the subject property, adding 9,100 sf of wetland area for a total of 19,150 sf for purposes of this CAR (see Figure 2). 3.2.2 Wetland Rating Appendix D contains the rating form for Wetland A. As indicated in page 3 of the rating form, the wetland was rated as a slope wetland because the wetland is on a gradual slope, water flows through the wetland in one direction, and the water leaving the wetland is not impounded. Although previous analyses of the wetland in the mid-2000s suggested that the wetland may be attached to a stream/ditch, no indication of riverine influence on this wetland was observed. The wetland scores 6 for water quality, 5 for hydrology, and 3 for habitat 1, for a total score of 14. A score of 14 indicates that the wetland is a Category IV wetland on the rating form. The City’s Critical Areas Regulations at 4-3-050G Development Standards prescribes a 50-foot buffer for this wetland. Figure 2 shows the prescribed buffer, covering a total area of 19,430 sf. The buffer includes 3,378 sf of offsite area that is comprised of single-family residential development, including rear lawn and Himalayan blackberry thickets. Onsite, the buffer includes the existing driveway into the former homesite covering 6,250 sf and a naturally vegetated area adjacent to the wetland covering 9,802 sf.2 3.2.3 Streams As described above, previous studies of the subject property have described the potential presence of a stream or ditch within the wetland unit, and distant from the subject property. No streams or indicators of a riverine system were found onsite or within the wetland unit as viewed from the subject property. 3.2.4 Summary Table 2 provides a summary of the wetland and buffer areas as described above. 1 Compared to the 2018 CAR, the habitat score has increased by 1. As of 2018, the interspersion of habitats (H1.4) was rated as “None” because the wetland was predominantly a young red alder stand. For this CAR, the interspersion was rated as “Low” recognizing the additional 6 years of maturation of the alders, and the development of minor shrub/herbaceous pocket s with differing composition along the wetland boundary. 2 The former owner of the property indicated that he “cleaned up” the property at the time the previous house was demolished. He suggested that this included mechanical clearing of vegetation in the area that is now defined by the vegetated wetland and buffer (Dutro, 2018). T he wetland and buffer onsi te are predominantly comprised of red alder saplings and small trees that are ass umed to have naturally established since 2018. Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 8 Table 2 – Critical Areas Summary Critical Area Area (sf) Area (ac) Wetland Onsite 10,050 0.23 Offsite 9,100 0.21 Total 19,150 0.44 Buffer Offsite 3,378 0.08 Onsite Vegetated 9,802 0.23 Onsite Driveway 6,250 0.14 Total 19,430 0.45 4.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND REGULATORY FINDINGS Figure 8 shows the currently proposed development plan for the parcel. The development would include a single-family, one-story main residence, one auxiliary dwelling unit, and a new driveway. The proposed development has been located on the northern portion of the site, such that the proposed driveway and buildings avoid the wetland buffer. The pipestem, which contains the existing, overgrown driveway, passes through the wetland buffer and within 2 – 20 feet of the existing wetland boundary. At 4-3-050I Alterations to Critical Areas Buffers, the City code provides criteria for buffer averaging. Sections 4-3- 050I(3)(a)(2) and 4-3-050I(3)(b)(4) specifically require that buffer reductions or averaging may not reduce the buffer to less than 75% of its standard width. In this case, with a 50-foot wetland buffer, the buffer could be reduced to a minimum of 37.5 feet. The existing driveway, and therefore the proposed driveway, would be well-within the reduced 37.5-foot buffer. As a result, the driveway represents an existing, non-conforming use and the development of the new driveway will require a Reasonable Use Variance for the development in the buffer. Staff comments on the preliminary submittal also noted this in their discussion of critical areas (City of Renton, 2021). Based on the site plan in Figure 8 and the areas described in Table 2, the onsite wetland and buffer areas are summarized in Table 3. Table 3 also outlines the proposed treatment of the wetland and buffer for the proposed development. Table 3 – Onsite Wetland and Buffer Areas Critical Area Area (sf) Area (ac) Proposal Wetland 10,050 0.23 Enhancement Buffer - Onsite Vegetated 9,802 0.23 Restoration Buffer - Onsite Driveway 6,250 0.14 Replace with new driveway Total 16,052 0.37 Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 9 The proposed development would not include any impact to the wetland area. Compared to the previous assessment by The Watershed Company (TWC, 2007), with buildings and maintained lawn in the wetland buffer, the current site plan would construct a driveway and buildings outside of the wetland buffer. However, due to the configuration of the lot, with a pipestem driveway, the proposed site plan would redevelop the existing driveway in the pipestem, resulting in 0.14 acre of impact to the buffer. As compensation for this unavoidable buffer impact, enhancement of the 0.23-acre wetland is proposed to increase plant diversity and to improve wildlife forage opportunities in the wetland. Restoration of the 0.23-acre, remaining buffer area outside of the driveway is also proposed. With 0.46 acre of restoration/ enhancement proposed, the ratio of buffer impact to mitigation would be 3.3:1. 4.1 Wetland and Buffer Condition, Restoration, and Enhancement On several occasions during 2017 and 2018, and then again during the summer of 2023, Re- Align Environmental visited the site to assess the wetland and buffer. As shown in Photo 8 (Appendix C), the southern portion of the buffer, along the driveway and in the pipestem, is currently dominated by a thicket of Himalayan blackberry and reed Canarygrass. Further north, the same species are present near the old homesite, but the density of the invasive vegetation is less (see Photo 3). 4.1.1 Buffer Restoration and Wetland Enhancement Plan In general, the goal of the buffer restoration will be to remove the invasive species, re-vegetate the remaining onsite buffer area with native, riparian species, and to increase the habitat complexity/forage species in the wetland. The following goals and objectives address these elements of the buffer restoration and wetland enhancement. Goal 1 – Improve buffer function and habitat complexity. Objective A: Remove invasive species from buffer. Performance Standard 1: Remove Himalayan blackberry and any other invasive species in the wetland and buffer through manual extraction, including roots. Evaluation Method: Photo-documentation before and after invasive removal, documentation in Year 0 Monitoring Plan. Objective B: Establish native riparian species in the restored buffer area and enhanced wetland area. Performance Standard: Plant vegetation according to Tables 4 and 5. Evaluation Method: 30-foot circular plot sampling (% cover), documentation in Year 1 - 5 Monitoring Reports. Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 10 Table 4 - Conceptual Wetland Enhancement Planting Plan Species Common Name Size Spacing Notes Thuja plicata Western Redcedar 1 gal. 20’ centers in wetland Rubus spectabilis Salmonberry 1 qt. Clusters of 3 on 15’ centers in wetland Alnus rubra (existing) Red alder N/A Cut existing trees under 3 – 4” caliper Trees to be identified by biologist prior to final planting plan. Table 5 - Conceptual Buffer Restoration Planting Plan Species Common Name Size/% Location in Buffer/Spacing Notes Trees and Shrubs: Thuja plicata Western Redcedar 1 gal. Inner 50%/ 15’centers Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas Fir 1 gal. Outer 50%/15’ centers Rubus spectabilis Salmonberry 1 qt. Clusters of 3 on 15’ centers in buffer Oemleria cerasiformis Indian plum 1 gal Inner 50%/15’ Centers in Group A Group A Sambucus racemosa Red elderberry 1 qt. Inner 50%/15’ Centers in Group A Group A Acer glabrum Douglas maple 1 qt. Outer 50%/20’ centers Mahonia nervosa Oregon grape 1 qt. Outer 50%/clusters of three, 15’centers in Group B Group B Gaultheria shallon Salal 1 qt. Outer 50%/clusters of three, 15’centers in Group B Group B Ribes sanguineum Red flowering currant 1 qt. Outer 50%/clusters of three, 15’centers in Group B Group B Objective C: Minimize Invasive species in wetland and buffer over 5-year monitoring period. Performance Standard: Invasive and non-native species will have 10% or less aerial coverage within the wetland and buffer enhancement areas. These plants include: • Himalayan blackberry • Reed Canarygrass • Butterfly bush Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 11 • Scotch broom • English Ivy • Japanese knotweed • Non-native thistles • Non-native/invasive species that could out-compete the plantings Evaluation Method: Visual observation and 30-foot circular plot sampling (% cover) sampling for five years, documentation in Year 1 - 5 Monitoring Reports. If the standard is exceeded, manual extraction will be preferable, but herbicide application may be considered, subject to riparian application guidelines, as approved by the City of Renton. Goal 2 – Monitor and maintain the restored buffer area. Objective A: Monitor vegetation and maintain plantings for a period of 5 years. Performance Standard: Survival of planted trees and shrubs will be a minimum of 100% after one year and 80% after three years. Evaluation Method: visual inspection of plantings, 30-foot circular plot sampling (% cover), photo-stations. Performance Standard: Planted tree and shrub canopy (not including Red Alder) cover percentages (including volunteers,) during the monitoring period will be: • 20% or greater at the end of Year 1 • 35% or greater at the end of Year 2 • 40% or greater at the end of Year 3 • 50% or greater at the end of Year 4 • 60% or greater at the end of Year 5 Evaluation Method: 30-foot circular plot sampling (% cover), photo-stations Objective B: Designate and sign the boundary the wetland buffer as a Wetland/Sensitive Area. Performance Standard: A 4-foot tall, wildlife passable fence (e.g., wood rail fence) is installed along the wetland buffer boundary and wetland/sensitive area signs are installed on the fence every 100 feet. Evaluation Method: Sign inspection by engineer following installation and/or by the project wetland ecologist during the monitoring period. Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 12 4.1.2 Monitoring Plan The buffer restoration area will be monitored for a period of five years. Monitoring will be conducted by a qualified wetland professional, including site inspections, reporting, and where possible, participation in site maintenance. Year 0 monitoring will include photo-documentation of the before and after site conditions. Permanent photo stations will be established in the field and these stations will be maintained throughout the 5-year monitoring period. Photos will be taken before removal of Himalayan blackberry, after removal of alder saplings, and again within 30 days of completion of the plantings. This third site visit will include evaluation of the plantings to ensure that the plantings have been installed according to the planting plan. Annual monitoring will be conducted beginning in Year 1 as follows: • Year 1: 1 visit early in the growing season to maintain the site/plantings 1 monitoring event near the end of the growing season • Year 2: 1 visit early in the growing season to maintain the site/plantings 1 monitoring event near the end of the growing season • Year 3: 1 visit early in the growing season to maintain the site/plantings 1 monitoring visit during the growing season • Year 4: 1 visit early in the growing season to maintain the site/plantings 1 monitoring visit during the growing season • Year 5: 1 visit early in the growing season to maintain the site/plantings 1 monitoring visit during the growing season (including final assessment) Monitoring will consist of percentage aerial cover measurements taken at permanent monitoring stations, which will be established during the initial Year 1 monitoring visit. While onsite, the assessment will include a general walkover of the site to assess invasive species, survivability of planted materials, wildlife observations, and needed maintenance (e.g., removal of invasives, trash and debris removal, irrigation). Finally, the monitoring will include photographs taken from the permanent photo points. Woody vegetation will be evaluated for percentage cover by establishing 30-foot, circular plots, which will be established during the initial Year 1 monitoring visit. Trees and shrubs within these plots will be recorded by species and percentage aerial cover within the plot. In these plots, herbaceous species will also be measured by species and percentage aerial cover within the plot. Within 30 days after the completion of each monitoring site visit, a summary letter report will be provided to the city documenting the maintenance that was performed early in the growing Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 13 season, monitoring results, comparison to the goals and objectives, and any further recommended maintenance actions. 4.1.3 Maintenance Plan The plant species selected for planting in the buffer are typically well-adapted to environmental and climactic conditions at the project site. However, should drier than normal conditions persist through the summer and fall seasons, it may be necessary to provide temporary irrigation or periodic watering of the plants in the buffer. The primary objective of the buffer restoration plan is to replace the monotypic thicket of Himalayan blackberry with a riparian forest. Initially, blackberry removal may require excavation of root structures. Over time, as new blackberry shoots emerge, it may be necessary to excavate root structures by hand to reduce the possibility of recurrence. With invasive species prevalent on all of the adjoining properties, it is expected that routine maintenance of the restored buffer will be required. The primary objective of the wetland enhancement is to improve species diversity, with a secondary goal of improving forage. As with the buffer, the wetland area on adjoining properties contains invasive species that will require maintenance. As described above, the first seasonal monitoring visit will include removal of invasives to the extent practicable. If additional maintenance is required, then the monitoring staff will coordinate with the landowner to ensure that maintenance is performed. 4.1.3 Contingency Plan If it is determined through monitoring that one or more of the performance standards are not being met, contingency adaptive management actions may be needed to bring the restoration/enhancement site into compliance. Any adaptive management actions will be recommended in monitoring reports. Upon review of the needed actions by the homeowner and the biologist, remedial actions will be implemented within 60 days. Example contingencies may include: • In Years 1-3, if a planted tree or shrub is found to have died, the plant will be replaced before the next growing season. • If it appears through monitoring or routine observation that the plantings are not sufficiently watered, a temporary watering or irrigation system will be designed and installed. • Recurring invasive plant shoots (e.g., Himalayan blackberry) may be spot treated. Manual extraction of shoots and roots is preferred over chemical treatment. • Trash or other accumulated debris in the site will be collected and removed from the restoration site at least once per growing season during the 5-year monitoring period. • If red alder continues to be a dominant volunteer, cutting individual stems may be warranted to ensure sufficient light penetration. Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 14 5.0 QUALIFICATIONS OF THE AUTHOR Bill Granger is a Wetland Biologist with extensive training and experience in wetland and stream science, aquatic and shoreline habitat restoration, wetland mitigation project design, wetland and stream assessments and delineation, aquatic ecology, and development planning and permitting. Bill earned a Bachelor’s Degree in Biology from Alfred University (NY) in 1987. Bill earned his Master’s Degree in Aquatic and Wetlands Ecology from the Duke University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies (NC) in 1988. Bill was issued Professional Wetland Scientist (PWS) certification #366 by the Society of Wetland Scientists. Bill is also a Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) in the state of Washington and is recognized as a CESCL by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Bill is a Corps-certified wetland delineator, and is also a King, Pierce, and Snohomish County Wetland Specialist. For a list of representative projects, please contact him at Re-Align Environmental (Bill@Re-alignenv.com). I certify that I prepared this report based upon my review of the subject property and the available information from Masterbuilder Construction regarding past analysis of the subject property. 11-20-2023 Bill Granger – Owner Date Critical Areas Report 1828 NE 20th St, Renton, Wa November 20, 2023 15 6.0 REFERENCES City of Renton, 2021. Preapplication Meeting for Blueberry Meadows, 1828 NE 20th Street, PRE21- 000363. City of Renton, Department of Community & Economic Development, Planning Division, October 28, 2021. Del Moral Associates, 2006. Evaluation of Property North of 1828 NE 20th St., Renton, WA 98056. September 22, 2006. Dutro, 2018. Personal Communication to Bill Granger, March 23, 2018. Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Technical Report Y-87-1 – Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. United States Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS. Environmental Laboratory, 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region. May 2010. Guard, J. 1995. Wetland Plants of Oregon and Washington. Lone Pine Publishing Company. Vancouver, BC. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html - accessed on 9-28-2023. https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/ - accessed on 9-28-2023. https://gismaps.kingcounty.gov/iMap/ - accessed on 9-28-2023. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx - accessed on 9-28-2023. 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. GretagMacbeth. New Widsor, NY. Pojar, J and A. MacKinnon, 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Lone Pine Publishing Company. Vancouver, BC. Re-Align Environmental, 2018. Critical Areas Report, Masterbuilder Construction Property. July 16, 2018. (unpublished, never submitted). TWC, 2005. The Watershed Company. Blueberry Meadows project – Environmental Review. July 19, 2005. TWC, 2007. The Watershed Company. Wetland Delineation Sketch, Parcel number 334903201 in the City of Renton. February 23, 2007. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. (http://plants.usda.gov/java/nameSearch) USDA- NRCS, 2017. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2017. Field Indictors of Hydric Soils in the United States, (Version 8.1) (USDA and NRCS, 2017). Figures Figure 1 Location Map 1828 NE 20th St Re-Align Environmental Not to scale NE 20th StNE 20th St Kennewick Pl NE Kennewick P l N E NE 20th St 264 262 260 25 8 258 258 256 256256 Figure 2 - Existing Conditions Maxar, Microsoft, Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Renton, King County, WA State Parks GIS, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA 1828 Parcel Boundary 1828 Contour 1828 Wetland 1828 Wetland Buffer 50 ft 11/20/2023 0 0.01 0.010 mi 0 0.01 0.020.01 km 1:999 Bill Granger Re-Align Environmental A-1 A-16 A-13 A-13 Wetland Flag 12 3 4 5 67 1 Wetland Datapoint )LJXUH1:,0DSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team,wetlands_team@fws.govWetlandsEstuarine and Marine DeepwaterEstuarine and Marine WetlandFreshwater Emergent WetlandFreshwater Forested/Shrub WetlandFreshwater PondLakeOtherRiverineSeptember 28, 202300.10.20.05mi00.150.30.075km1:6,019This page was produced by the NWI mapperNational Wetlands Inventory (NWI)This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site.6LWHǦ DISCLAIMER. This report includes information that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) maintains in a central computer database. It is not an attempt to provide you with an official agency response as to the impacts of your project on fish and wildlife. This information only documents the location of fish and wildlife resources to the best of our knowledge. It is not a complete inventory and it is important to note that fish and wildlife resources may occur in areas not currently known to WDFW biologists, or in areas for which comprehensive surveys have not been conducted. Site specific surveys are frequently necesssary to rule out the presence of priority resources. Locations of fish and wildlife resources are subject to variation caused by disturbance, changes in season and weather, and other factors. WDFW does not recommend using reports more than six months old. Figure 4 - PHS Report Date: 09/28/2023, Parcel ID: 3343903201 The Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) datasets do not contain information for your project area. This does not mean that species and habitats do not occur in your project area. PHS data, points, lines and polygons are mapped only when occurrences of these species or habitats have been observed in the field. Unfortunately, we have not been able to comprehensively survey all sections in the state and therefore, it is important to note that priority species and habitats may occur in areas not currently known to the Department. Re-Align Environmental 652621205262140526216052621805262200526222052622405262260526228052623005262320 52621205262140526216052621805262200526222052622405262260526228052623005262320560580 560600 560620 560640 560660 560680 560700 560720 560580 560600 560620 560640 560660 560680 560700 560720 47° 30' 41'' N 47° 30' 41'' N 47° 30' 34'' N 122° 11' 44'' W47° 30' 34'' N 122° 11' 36'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 45 90 180 270 Feet 0 15 30 60 90 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,020 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Figure 5 - Soils Map Re-Align Environmental Wetland Delineation Sketch Parcel number 3343903201 in the City of Renton Prepared for Terry Dutro on February 23, 2007 Site visits on February 22 and 23, 2007 First Flag Wetland A A-1 DPA-1 N Note: Field Sketch only. Features depicted are approximate and not to scale. DPA-2 Wetland A LEGEND: Approximate Data Point location Approximate delineated wetland edge Property boundary Approximate wetland area Last Flag Wetland A A-11 Figure 6 - TWC Delineation Re-Align Environmental 1234567WetlandFigure 7 - 2018 Site Survey with WetlandsRe-Align Environmental 3WETLAND DATAPOINTMASTERBUILDER CONSTRUCTION NE 20th StNE 20th St Kennewick Pl NE Kennewick P l N E NE 20th St 264 262 260 25 8 258 258 256 256256 Figure 8 - Site Plan Maxar, Microsoft, Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Renton, King County, WA State Parks GIS, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA 1828 Parcel Boundary 1828 Contour 1828 Wetland 1828 Wetland Buffer 50 ft 1828 Building 1828 Driveway 1828 Buffer Impact 1828 Buffer Restoration 11/20/2023 0 0.01 0.010 mi 0 0.01 0.020.01 km 1:999 Bill Granger Re-Align Environmental Appendix A – Wetland Datasheets Appendix B – NRCS Soil Report United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for King County Area, Washington 1828 NE 20th Street, Renton, WA Natural Resources Conservation Service September 28, 2023 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 Soil Map..................................................................................................................5 Soil Map................................................................................................................6 Legend..................................................................................................................7 Map Unit Legend..................................................................................................8 Map Unit Descriptions..........................................................................................8 King County Area, Washington.......................................................................10 InC—Indianola loamy sand, 5 to 15 percent slopes....................................10 Sm—Shalcar muck......................................................................................11 4 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 5 6 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 5262120526214052621605262180526220052622205262240526226052622805262300526232052621205262140526216052621805262200526222052622405262260526228052623005262320560580 560600 560620 560640 560660 560680 560700 560720 560580 560600 560620 560640 560660 560680 560700 560720 47° 30' 41'' N 122° 11' 44'' W47° 30' 41'' N122° 11' 36'' W47° 30' 34'' N 122° 11' 44'' W47° 30' 34'' N 122° 11' 36'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 45 90 180 270 Feet 0 15 30 60 90 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,020 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: King County Area, Washington Survey Area Data: Version 18, Sep 8, 2022 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 31, 2022—Aug 8, 2022 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI InC Indianola loamy sand, 5 to 15 percent slopes 1.3 66.5% Sm Shalcar muck 0.6 33.5% Totals for Area of Interest 1.9 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, Custom Soil Resource Report 8 onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Custom Soil Resource Report 9 King County Area, Washington InC—Indianola loamy sand, 5 to 15 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2t635 Elevation: 0 to 980 feet Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 81 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 170 to 210 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Indianola and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Indianola Setting Landform:Eskers, kames, terraces Landform position (three-dimensional):Riser Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Sandy glacial outwash Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 6 inches: loamy sand Bw1 - 6 to 17 inches: loamy sand Bw2 - 17 to 27 inches: sand BC - 27 to 37 inches: sand C - 37 to 60 inches: sand Properties and qualities Slope:5 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):High to very high (5.95 to 99.90 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest Forage suitability group: Droughty Soils (G002XN402WA), Droughty Soils (G002XS401WA) Other vegetative classification: Droughty Soils (G002XN402WA), Droughty Soils (G002XS401WA) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 10 Minor Components Alderwood Percent of map unit:8 percent Landform:Ridges, hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional):Nose slope, talf Down-slope shape:Linear, convex Across-slope shape:Convex Hydric soil rating: No Everett Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Kames, eskers, moraines Landform position (two-dimensional):Shoulder, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope, crest Down-slope shape:Convex Across-slope shape:Convex Hydric soil rating: No Norma Percent of map unit:2 percent Landform:Depressions, drainageways Landform position (three-dimensional):Dip Down-slope shape:Concave, linear Across-slope shape:Concave Hydric soil rating: Yes Sm—Shalcar muck Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 1hmv5 Elevation: 50 to 700 feet Mean annual precipitation: 35 to 55 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 150 to 190 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Shalcar and similar soils:75 percent Minor components:25 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Shalcar Setting Landform:Flood plains Parent material:Herbaceous organic material and/or alluvium Custom Soil Resource Report 11 Typical profile H1 - 0 to 14 inches: muck H2 - 14 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 28 to 60 inches: loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Very poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 0 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:Frequent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Ecological site: R002XA003WA - Puget Lowlands Bogs and Fens Forage suitability group: Wet Soils (G002XF103WA) Other vegetative classification: Wet Soils (G002XF103WA) Hydric soil rating: Yes Minor Components Puget Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Depressions Other vegetative classification:Wet Soils (G002XN102WA) Hydric soil rating: Yes Snohomish, undrained Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Depressions Other vegetative classification:Wet Soils (G002XN102WA) Hydric soil rating: Yes Tukwila Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Depressions Other vegetative classification:Wet Soils (G002XN102WA) Hydric soil rating: Yes Seattle Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Depressions Other vegetative classification:Wet Soils (G002XN102WA) Hydric soil rating: Yes Norma Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Depressions Other vegetative classification:Wet Soils (G002XN102WA) Hydric soil rating: Yes Custom Soil Resource Report 12 Appendix C– Site Photographs 1 Photo 1 – View looking southwest at datapoints #1 and #2. The wetland boundary is established at the soil corer. Note the dominance of red alder ranging from 3” to 7” dbh. Photo 2 – View looking southwest at datapoint #3, corresponding to the previous homesite in the wetland buffer. Note the alder-dominated wetland in the background and the dominance of reed canarygrass and blackberry in this disturbed area. 2 Photo 3 – View looking northeast into the previous home site, near datapoint #3, Note the dominance blackberry in this disturbed area. Photo 4 – View looking south at wildlife scratchings on a red alder tree in the alder stand. 3 Photo 5 – View looking west at datapoints #4 and #5 (ora nge flags). The wetland boundary is established at the pink flag on the alder. Again, note the dominance of red al der ranging from 3” to 7” dbh. Photo 6 – View looking east at datapoints #6 (closer orange flag and #7 (further orange flag). The wetland boundary is established at the pink flag visible between the two. This offsite area is a willow thicket along the pipestem and the property is several feet behind the upland datapoint. Access to this site required cu�ng into the willow thicket with a machete. 4 Photo 7 – View looking north along the eastern wetland boundary along the pipestem area. Photo 8 – View looking north along the driveway/pipestem area. Wetland flag A-16 is visible in the center-le�, in front of the wheel barrow. Note the blackberry and reed Canarygrass in the pipestem area. Appendix D– Wetland Rating King County King County iMap ±The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intended for use as a survey product. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County. H1.1, H1.4, S 1.3, S 4.1 - Immature forest (north) and mature shrub (south) serve as one habitat type with little interspersion. Dense woody plants >90% of area. H1.2 - Previous studies indicate the presence of a stream/ditch adjacent to the wetland unit. S2.1,S5.1- > 10% of adjacent area generates pollutants (runoff). > 25% of adjacent area generates runoff. Re-Align Environmental Rating Figure 1 King CountyKing County iMapDate: 7/31/2017Notes:±The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King Countymakes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document isnot intended for use as a survey product. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including,but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information onthis map is prohibited except by written permission of King County.H2.1-2.3100% disturbed habitat~5% accessible habitat> 50% high intensityland use Rating Figure 2Re-Align Environmental S.3.1, 3.2Site drains to MayCreek, which is 303(d)listed (see RatingFigure 4). Rating Figure 3Re-Align Environmental No TMDLs Listed Rating Figure 4Re-Align Environmental