HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_SCT_Wetland_250114
Formerly DCG/Watershed
SEATTLE | KIRKLAND | MOUNT VERNON | WHIDBEY ISLAND | FEDERAL WAY | SPOKANE
facetnw.com
March 6, 2025
Don Helling
Huitt-Zollars
1700 7th Avenue, Suite 2075
Seattle, WA 98101
Soos Creek Trail Phase 5a Extension
Wetland and Stream Delineation Report
City of Renton
Facet Number: 2204.0231.00
Dear Don:
We are pleased to present the findings of a wetland and stream delineation study on the multiple King
County Parks properties located along the proposed King County Parks Soos Creek Trail Phase 5a
Extension (parcels #332305-9057, -9073, -9010, -9098, 0305500310, & 13327730840) in the City of
Renton. The study was completed based upon the Scope of Work approved on November 25, 2024.
The enclosed report describes our study methods, findings and regulatory implications. Site photos, a
delineation sketch, wetland delineation data forms, and wetland rating forms and figures are also
included.
Please reach out if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Sage Yuasa
Ecologist / ISA Certified Arborist®
Enclosures
Soos Creek Trail Phase 5a Extension
Wetland and Stream Delineation Report
Soos Creek Trail Phase 5a Extension
Wetland and Stream Delineation Report
Don Helling; Huitt-Zollars
Facet Number: 2204.0231.00
March
On January 2nd, 3rd, and 10th, 2025, Ecologists Sage Yuasa and Anna Murphy visited the proposed Soos
Creek Trail extension study area in the City of Renton (parcels #332305-9057, -9073, -9010, -9098,
0305500310, & 13327730840) to screen for, delineate, and flag the boundaries of on-site jurisdictional
wetlands and streams. This report outlines the methods, findings, and regulatory implications of the
delineation study completed within the study area. City of Renton wetland and stream regulations are
refenced in Renton Municipal Code Title IV, Chapter 3.050.
The following documents are enclosed:
Wetland and Stream Delineation Sketch
Wetland Determination Data Forms
Wetland Rating Forms and Figures
STUDY AREA
The study area is defined as multiple King County Parks properties located along the proposed Soos
Creek Trail extension in the City of Renton (parcels #332305-9057, -9073, -9010, -9098, 0305500310, &
13327730840). Adjacent public or private property within 300 feet was screened from the edge of
parcel or nearest publicly accessible area; no private property was accessed without permission.
DELINEATION REPORT
MARCH 2025
FACET NUMBER: 2204.0231.00
DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 2
Figure 1. Study area within the City of Renton jurisdiction. Study area outlined in yellow; jurisdictional
boundaries outlined in white (King County iMap, 2023). Outline approximated from provided Soos
Creek Trail Phase 5 & 6 Project Limits Plan Exhibit (Huitt Zollars, December 2024).
SE 192nd Street
City of Renton
King County
City of Kent
DELINEATION REPORT
MARCH 2025
FACET NUMBER: 2204.0231.00
DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 3
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The study area is in the Big Soos Creek subwatershed (HUC 171100130302) of the Duwamish-Green
River Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA 9). The study area is approximately 24 acres in size and is
primarily undeveloped and used by Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) as a transmission line
corridor (Photo 1). The study area also includes a portion of Boulevard Lane Park (Photo 2). An existing
trail corridor extends south of the study area along Soos Creek and associated wetlands (Photo 3). The
study area is located within a broad ravine associated with Big Soos Creek and gently slopes to the
south toward SE 192nd Street. It is situated within Section 33 of Township 23 North, Range 05 East.
Methods
Wetland A was delineated and flagged within the Soos Creek Park and Trail King County properties and
Boulevard Lane Park. The study area was screened to determine the OHWM and bankfull width of Big
Soos Creek. However, characteristics of OHWM and bankfull width were not observable, given the
increased inundation during the winter season, beaver activity within Boulevard Lane Park, and the
absence of a well-defined channel in the low-gradient, broad floodplain landscape. To depict Soos
Creek as accurately as possible on project plan sheets, topographic contours surveyed during project
development will be used to extrapolate the approximate location of the OWHM. A surveyed cross-
section approximately 15 feet north of the 192nd Street SE culvert illustrates enough of a topographic
change to identify the channel. Attempts to obtain additional topographic survey information were not
feasible, due to more than four feet of inundation in February 2025. The boundary of Wetland A and
the protective critical area buffer of Wetland A exceeds the prescribed buffer for the non-delineated
Big Soos Creek.
Wetlands are defined as areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. The study area was
evaluated for wetlands using methodology from the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual
(Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Version 2.0 (U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers 2010). Qualified wetland biologists walked the study area to assess wetland conditions. The
presence or absence of wetlands was determined based on an examination of vegetation, soils, and
hydrology. The Corps Manual defines hydrophytic vegetation as the assemblage of macrophytes that
occurs in areas where inundation or soil saturation is either permanent or of sufficient frequency and
duration to influence plant occurrence. A hydric soil is defined as a soil that formed under conditions of
saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic
conditions in the upper part. Positive wetland hydrology is defined as 14 or more consecutive days of
flooding or ponding, or a water table 12 in. (30 cm) or less below the soil surface, during the growing
season at a minimum frequency of 5 years in 10 (50 percent or higher probability). These parameters
were sampled at several locations along the wetland boundary to determine the approximate wetland
edge. Areas that were determined to be wetland were flagged in the field using pink- and black-striped
flags for survey. Wetlands were classified using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for
DELINEATION REPORT
MARCH 2025
FACET NUMBER: 2204.0231.00
DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 4
Western Washington: 2014 Update (Version 2.0) (Hruby & Yahnke 2023; hereafter the “2014 Rating
System”).
Characterization of weather conditions for precipitation in the Wetland Determination Data Forms
were determined using the WETS table methodology (USDA, NRCS 2015). The “Seattle Tacoma Intl AP”
station from 1991‐2020 was used as a source for precipitation data (http://agacis.rcc‐acis.org/). The
WETS table methodology uses climate data from the three months prior to the site visit month to
determine if normal conditions are present in the study area region.
The study area was evaluated for streams based on the presence or absence of an ordinary high water
mark (OHWM) as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Washington Administrative Code
(WAC) 220‐660‐030, and the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 90.58.030 and guidance documents
including Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for Shoreline Management Act Compliance in
Washington State (Anderson 2016) and A Guide to Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) Delineation for
Non-Perennial Streams in the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region of the United States
(Mersel and Lichvar 2014).
Delineated wetland boundary points are marked with pink- and black-striped flagging. Wetland
determination data points are marked with yellow- and black-striped flagging.
Public‐domain information on the subject properties was reviewed for this delineation study. Resources
and review findings are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Summary of online mapping and inventory resources.
Resource Summary
USDA NRCS: Web Soil Survey
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes mapped in
the western portion of the study area. Norma sandy loam mapped
in the eastern portion of the study area.
USFWS: NWI Wetland Mapper
Freshwater emergent wetlands (PEM1B and SS1B) are mapped
within study area. Freshwater forested/shrub wetlands (PSS1B and
PSS1E) mapped within study area.
WDFW: PHS on the Web Soos Creek wetlands are mapped within study area.
WDFW & NWIFC: Statewide
Washington Integrated Fish
Distribution
Big Soos Creek (Type F) is mapped within the study area. Coho,
winter steelhead, and fall Chinook presence indicated. Gradient
accessible distribution type described.
WA-DNR: Forest Practices
Application Mapping Tool Big Soos Creek (Type F) is mapped within the study area.
King County iMap
Big Soos Creek (Type F) is mapped within the study area. King
County inventories wetland mapped within the study area. Seismic
hazard mapped throughout the study area. FEMA 100-year
floodplain mapped in study area.
DELINEATION REPORT
MARCH 2025
FACET NUMBER: 2204.0231.00
DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 5
Findings
BIG SOOS CREEK
At the time of the site visit, there were no identifiable bed and bank characteristics, scour, sorted
sediments, drainage patterns or other OHWM indicators observed for Big Soos Creek. Similarly, LIDAR
imagery and LIDAR-based topographic contours do not depict a defined channel in the study area. The
stream is mapped within the boundary of Wetland A, a large depressional wetland, densely vegetated
and inundated at the time of the site visit. No flow was observed at the culvert along SE 192nd Street, as
Soos Creek was stagnant with the surface vegetated with duckweed (Lemnoideae sp.) and reed
canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) (Photo 4). North of 192nd Street SE, within Boulevard Lane Park,
beaver activity was identified with several dams along the previous walking path and bridge, west of
the play structures (Photos 5 through 7). Hydrology from Soos Creek now consists of sheet flow
extending over the 200-foot segment of the walking path with no identifiable channel (Photo 8). Due
to current conditions and a lack of OHWM indicators, the OHWM and bankfull width of Big Soos Creek
could not be delineated during this study. Big Soos Creek is a documented fish-bearing stream.
WETLAND A
Wetland A is a large depressional wetland associated with Soos Creek that extends north toward SE
Petrovitsky Road and south toward SE Lake Youngs Way. The wetland extends across the jurisdictions
of both the City of Renton and King County. Areas depicted in Figure 1 are within the jurisdiction of the
City of Renton (Figure 2). Areas within the SE 192nd Street ROW are included within the jurisdiction of
King County and are addressed in a separate report. Two upland hummocks located in the western
portion of the study area were delineated as well (see Delineation Sketch) (Photo 9). Wetland A is
summarized in Table 2 below.
Resource Summary
City of Renton COR Maps Wetland mapped within study area. Big Soos Creek (Type F) is
mapped within study area.
WETS Climatic Condition Normal.
DELINEATION REPORT
MARCH 2025
FACET NUMBER: 2204.0231.00
DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 6
Table 2. Wetland A assessment summary.
WETLAND A
Location: Along Soos Creek within King County Parks properties and Boulevard Lane Park
WRIA / Sub-basin: Duwamish-Green River Watershed (WRIA 9); Soos Creek sub-basin
2014 Western WA
Ecology Rating:
Category I
City of Renton Buffer
Width and Buffer Setback:
150-foot standard buffer
and 15-foot setback
Wetland Size: Approx. 134 acres
Cowardin Classification(s): Palustrine Forested,
Palustrine Scrub-Shrub,
Palustrine Emergent
HGM Classification(s): Depressional and
Riverine
Wetland Data Sheet(s): DPs-1, -4, -5, -6, and -8
Non-wetland Data
Sheet(s):
DPs-2, -3, and -7
Flag Color: Pink- and black-stripped
Flag Numbers: A-1 to A-92 (west);
A-93 to A-109 (east)
Vegetation Tree stratum: Thuja plicata, Alnus rubra, Salix lucida, Populus balsamifera
Shrub stratum: Rubus spectabilis, Cornus sericea, Salix sitchensis, Spiraea douglasii
Herb stratum: Phalaris arundinacea, Juncus effusus, Typha latifolia, Equisetum telmateia
Soils Soil survey: Seattle muck, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes,
and Norma sandy loam
Field data: Depleted Matrix (F3), Hydrogen Sulfide (A4), Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Hydrology Source: Big Soos Creek and high water table
Field data: Surface Water (A1), High Water Table (A2), Saturation (A3), Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (A3), Geomorphic Position (D2), FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Wetland Functions
Improving
Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat
Site Potential H M L H M L H M L
Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L
Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL
Score Based on Ratings 9 8 7 24
DELINEATION REPORT
MARCH 2025
FACET NUMBER: 2204.0231.00
DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 7
Local Regulations
WETLANDS
The City of Renton regulates wetlands according to the Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-3-050 Critical
Areas Regulations. Wetlands in Renton are classified using the 2014 Update to the Western Washington
Rating System (Publication #23-06-009) (Rating System). According to the RMC, wetlands are classified
as one of four categories based on the Rating System. Wetland buffers in Renton are established based
on a combination of wetland category, the habitat score, and the intensity of the adjacent land use.
The City of Renton differentiates buffers between low impact land uses and all other uses. Low impact
land uses include but are not limited to unpaved trails, low intensity open space (hiking, bird-watching,
preservation of natural resources, etc.) and utility corridors without a maintenance road and little or no
vegetation management per RMC 4-3-050G.2.7. The proposed land use is a paved trail, a continuation
of the existing Soos Creek Trail to SE 186th Street. The proposed land use would qualify as “all other land
uses” per RMC.
Wetland A, a Category I wetland with a habitat score of seven points with no apparent low impact land
use, is prescribed a standard buffer of 150-feet in accordance with RMC 4-3-050G.2. The wetland and
the associated buffer appear to encumber the entire study area, except for the northwest corner of
parcel #3323059073. Table 3 provides a wetland buffer summary.
STREAMS
The City of Renton regulates streams according to the RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas Regulations. Streams
are categorized as “water types” (Type S, F, N, and O) per RMC 4-3-0450G.7. Stream buffers in the City
of Renton are established based on a combination of the water type. Big Soos Creek is a documented
Type F stream, requiring a standard buffer of 115 feet per RMC 4-3-050G.2. Table 3 provides a stream
buffer summary.
Soos Creek is mapped within the study area. However, the ordinary-high water mark and bankfull
width characteristics were not identified within the boundaries of Wetland A. Regardless, the extent of
Wetland A and its critical area buffer exceed the prescribed buffer of Soos Creek.
SETBACKS
The City of Renton requires a 15-foot building and structure from the edges of all critical area buffers
per RMC 4-3-050G.2.1. The following are allowed in the building setback area: landscaping, uncovered
decks, building overhangs, and impervious ground surfaces such as driveways and patios.
DELINEATION REPORT
MARCH 2025
FACET NUMBER: 2204.0231.00
DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 8
Table 3. Summary of wetlands, streams, and required buffer widths per RMC 4-03-050.G.2.
Feature Name Category/Type Habitat Score Buffer (ft) Building Setback (ft)
Wetland A Category I 7 150 feet 15 feet
Big Soos Creek Type F n/a 115 feet 15 feet
CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION
Under RMC 4-5-050.C.3, the construction of new trails is exempt from the City’s critical area
regulations, provided a letter of exemption has been issued. While the construction of new trails is
exempt, critical area and required buffer impacts shall be minimized, and disturbed areas shall be
restored during and immediately after the use of construction equipment. Under RMC 4-5-050.C.4,
trails and open spaces are exempt in wetland and stream buffers provided the following criteria are
satisfied:
a. The trail, walkway, and associated open space shall be consistent with the Parks, Recreation,
and Natural Areas Plan. The City may allow private trails as part of the approval of a site
plan, subdivision or other land use permit approvals.
b. Trails and walkways shall be located in the outer twenty five percent (25%) of the buffer, i.e.,
the portion of the buffer that is farther away from the critical area. Exceptions to this
requirement may be made for:
i. Trail segments connecting to existing trails where an alternate alignment is not
practical.
ii. Public access points to water bodies spaced periodically along the trail.
c. Enhancement of the buffer area is required where trails are located in the buffer. Where
enhancement of the buffer area abutting a trail is not feasible due to existing high quality
vegetation, additional buffer area or other mitigation may be required.
d. Trail widths shall be a maximum width of twelve feet (12'). Trails shall be constructed of
permeable materials which protect water quality, allow adequate surface water and ground
water movements, do not contribute to erosion, are located where they do not disturb
nesting, breeding, and rearing areas, and designed to avoid or reduce the removal of trees.
Impervious materials may be allowed if pavement is required for handicapped or emergency
access, or safety, or is a designated nonmotorized transportation route or makes a
connection to an already dedicated trail, or reduces potential for other environmental
impacts.
e. Any crossing over a stream or wetland shall be generally perpendicular to the critical area
and shall be accomplished by bridging or other technique designed to minimize critical area
DELINEATION REPORT
MARCH 2025
FACET NUMBER: 2204.0231.00
DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 9
disturbance. It shall also be the minimum width necessary to accommodate the intended
function or objective.
State and Federal Regulations
Federal Agencies
Many wetlands and streams are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act. Any proposed filling or other direct impacts to Waters of the U.S., including
wetlands (except isolated wetlands), would require preconstruction notification and permit
authorization from the Corps. Wetland A is not isolated. Unavoidable impacts (i.e., the placement of fill)
to jurisdictional wetlands are typically required to be compensated through implementation of an
approved mitigation plan. If activities requiring a Corps permit are proposed, a Joint Aquatic Resource
Permit Application (JARPA) could be submitted to obtain authorization.
Federally permitted actions that could affect endangered species may also require a biological
assessment study and consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine
Fisheries Service. Compliance with the Endangered Species Act must be demonstrated for activities
within jurisdictional streams, wetlands, and the 100‐year floodplain. Application for Corps permits may
also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality Certification and Coastal Zone Management
Consistency determination from Ecology and a cultural resource study in accordance with Section 106
of the National Historic Preservation Act.
Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology)
Like the Corps, Ecology is charged with reviewing, conditioning, and approving or denying certain
federally permitted actions that result in discharges to state waters under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act. However, Ecology review under the Clean Water Act would only become necessary if a
Section 404 permit from the Corps is required. Ecology approvals are typically either issued
concurrently with the Corps approval or within 90 days following the Corps approval.
Ecology also regulates non-federally regulated wetlands (i.e., isolated wetlands) under the Water
Pollution Control Act (RCW 90.48 and WAC 173-201A) through Administrative Orders, but only if direct
wetland impacts are proposed. Therefore, authorization from Ecology would not be needed if filling
activities are avoided.
A JARPA can also be submitted to Ecology to obtain an Administrative Order, Section 401 Water
Quality Certification, and/or Coastal Zone Management Consistency Determination if filling is
proposed.
In general, neither the Corps nor Ecology regulates wetland and stream buffers, unless direct impacts
are proposed. When direct impacts are proposed, buffers are applied based on Corps and Ecology joint
regulatory guidance.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Chapter 77.55 of the RCW (the Hydraulic Code) gives WDFW the authority to review, condition, and
approve or deny “any construction activity that will use, divert, obstruct, or change the bed or flow of
DELINEATION REPORT
MARCH 2025
FACET NUMBER: 2204.0231.00
DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 10
state waters.” This provision includes any in‐water work, the crossing or bridging of any state waters
and can sometimes include stormwater discharge to state waters or other adjacent activities that may
affect the bed, or banks, of state waters. WDFW will issue a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) if a project
meets regulatory requirements.
WDFW can also restrict activities to a particular timeframe through the conditions of approval on an
HPA. Work is typically restricted to late summer and early fall, however, WDFW generally allows for
overwater of adjacent activities that don’t involve in‐stream work to occur at any time during the year.
Disclaimer
The information contained in this report is based on the application of technical guidelines currently
accepted as the best available science and in conjunction with the referenced manuals and criteria. All
discussions, conclusions and recommendations reflect the best professional judgment of the author(s)
and are based upon information available at the time the study was conducted. All work was
completed within the constraints of budget, scope, and timing. The findings of this report are subject to
verification and agreement by the appropriate local, state, and federal regulatory authorities. No other
warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
DELINEATION REPORT
MARCH 2025
FACET NUMBER: 2204.0231.00
DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 11
References
Anderson, P.S. et al. 2016. Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for Shoreline Management Act
Compliance in Washington State. (Publication #16-06-029). Olympia, WA: Shorelands and
Environmental Assistance Program, Washington Department of Ecology.
Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2018. July 2018 Modifications for Habitat Score Ranges. Modified from
Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates, Western Washington Version. (Publication #16-06-001).
Accessed 8/16/18: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/parts/1606001part1.pdf.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. “Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,” Technical Report Y-87-
1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Hruby, T. & Yahnke, A. 2023. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014
Update (Version 2). Publication #23-06-009. Olympia, WA: Washington Department of Ecology.
Mersel, M.K. and Lichvar, R.W. 2014. A Guide to Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) Delineation for Non-
Perennial Streams in the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region of the United States.
ERDC/CRREL TR-14-13.
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. Wakely, R. W. Lichvar,
and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development
Center.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2023. Antecedent Precipitation Tool (APT) Version 2.0: Technical and User
Guide. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Vicksburg, MS.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2015. National
Engineering Handbook, Part 650 Engineering Field Handbook, Chapter 19 Hydrology Tools for
Wetland Identification and Analysis. ed. R. A. Weber. 210-VI-NEH, Amend. 75. Washington, DC.
DELINEATION REPORT / DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 2204.0231.00
Site Photos
Photo 1. North view of powerline corridor within Wetland A.
Photo 2. West view of Boulevard Lane Park and Wetland A.
DELINEATION REPORT / DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 2204.0231.00
Photo 3. North view of the existing Soos Creek Trail, south of the study area.
Photo 4. West view of Boulevard Lane Park and Wetland A.
DELINEATION REPORT / DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 2204.0231.00
Photo 5. Beaver activity within Boulevard Lane Park.
Photo 6. Beaver Dam along walking trail with sheet flow to the south.
DELINEATION REPORT / DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 2204.0231.00
Photo 7. Wetland inundated around the bridge connecting to Boulevard Land Park.
Photo 8. Wetland and Soos Creek inundated with sheet flow to the south.
DELINEATION REPORT / DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 2204.0231.00
Photo 9. Upland hummocks within Wetland A vegetated with salal, reed canary
grass, and hardhack.
DELINEATION REPORT / DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 2204.0231.00
Delineation Sketch
SEATTLE | KIRKLAND | MOUNT VERNON | WHIDBEY ISLAND | FEDERAL WAY | SPOKANE
facetnw.com
Note: Field sketch only. Features depicted are approximate and not to scale. Wetland boundaries are marked with pink- and black-striped flags. Data
points are marked with yellow- and black-striped flags. No defined stream channel identified within study area. All observations were made from
within the study area; adjoining private properties were not entered.
PAGE 1 OF 1
Wetland and Stream Delineation Sketch – Soos Creek Trails Phase 5a Extension
Site Address: 12500 SE 188th Place, Renton, WA 98058 Jurisdiction: King County; City of Renton, WA
Parcel Number: 042205-9161, -9024, -9162, -332305-9054, -9057, -
9073, -9010, -9098, 035500310 & 1332730840
Prepared for: Huitt Zollars
Site Visit Date: January 2nd, 3rd, and 10th 2025 Facet No.: 2204.0231
DP-2
DP-5
Wetland A
Flags A-93 to A-109
DP-8
DP-6
DP-7
DP-4 DP-3
DP-1 DP-2
Upland Hummocks
Flags AA-1 to AA-4; and Flags
AA-5 to AA-10
Do not connect AA-4 to AA-5
LEGEND
Wetland Area
Delineated Wetland Boundary
Non-Delineated Wetland Boundary
Delineated Upland Hummock
(non-wetland)
Study Area
Data Point (DP)
Direction of Flow
Culvert
Culvert; Unknown Connection
Approximate Soos Creek Location
Wetland A
Flags A-1 to A-92;
Do not connect to A-93
DELINEATION REPORT / DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 2204.0231.00
Wetland Determination Data Forms
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
DP - 1
Project/Site: Soos Creek Park and Trail Phases 5 & 6 City/County: City of Renton Sampling date: 01/02/2025
Applicant/Owner: Huitt Zollars State: WA Sampling Point: DP-1
Investigator(s): Sage Yuasa and Anna Murphy Section, Township, Range: S33, T23N, R05E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Depressional Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 2%
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: - Long: - Datum: -
Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None
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 on the site? ☒ 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 ☐ Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes ☒ No ☐ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Remarks: Wetland A in-pit.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30-ft radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) 1. Salix scouleriana 75 Y FAC
2. Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: 4 (B) 3.
4. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) 75 = Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius) Prevalence Index worksheet:
1. Rubus spectabilis 40 Y FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
2. Acer circinatum 10 N FAC OBL species x 1 =
3. Cornus sericea 20 Y FACW FACW species x 2 =
4. FAC species x 3 =
5. FACU species x 4 =
70 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3-ft radius) Column Totals: (A) (B)
1. Phalaris arundinacea 15 Y FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.
3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. ☐ 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. ☒ 2 – Dominance Test is > 50%
6. ☐ 3 – Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.01
7.
☐ 4 – Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. ☐ 5 – Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 15 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
1.
2.
0 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: 85
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: DP-1
HYDROLOGY
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
0-7 10YR 2/1 100 - - - - Silt loam High O.M. / Greasy
7-14 10YR 5/2 90 7.5YR 4/6 10 C M Sandy gravely loam -
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Loc: 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) ☐ 2cm 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) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
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 (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☒ High Water Table (A2)
☒ 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
☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Surface Water Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): -
Water Table Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): 2”
Saturation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): Surface
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
DP - 2
Project/Site: Soos Creek Park and Trail Phases 5 & 6 City/County: City of Renton Sampling date: 01/02/2025
Applicant/Owner: Huitt Zollars State: WA Sampling Point: DP-2
Investigator(s): Sage Yuasa and Anna Murphy Section, Township, Range: S33, T23N, R05E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 5%
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: - Long: - Datum: -
Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None
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 on the site? ☒ 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 ☒ Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes ☐ No ☒ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☐ No ☒
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Remarks: Wetland A out-pit.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30-ft radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 1. Acer macrophyllum 60 Y FACU
2. Salix scouleriana 25 Y FAC Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: 4 (B) 3.
4. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50% (A/B) 85 = Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius) Prevalence Index worksheet:
1. Rubus spectabilis 100 Y FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
2. Acer circinatum 15 N FAC OBL species x 1 =
3. FACW species x 2 =
4. FAC species x 3 =
5. FACU species x 4 =
115 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3-ft radius) Column Totals: (A) (B)
1. Hedera helix 15 Y FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.
3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. ☐ 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. ☐ 2 – Dominance Test is > 50%
6. ☐ 3 – Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.01
7.
☐ 4 – Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. ☐ 5 – Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 15 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☐ No ☒
1.
2.
0 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: 85
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: DP-2
HYDROLOGY
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
0-10 7.5YR 2.5/1 100 - - - - Sandy loam -
10-16 7.5YR 3/3 95 5YR 4/6 5 C M Sandy loam -
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Loc: 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) ☐ 2cm 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) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
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 (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☐ High Water Table (A2)
☒ 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
☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Surface Water Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): -
Water Table Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): 14”
Saturation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): 12”
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
DP - 3
Project/Site: Soos Creek Park and Trail Phases 5 & 6 City/County: City of Renton Sampling date: 01/02/2025
Applicant/Owner: Huitt Zollars State: WA Sampling Point: DP-3
Investigator(s): Sage Yuasa and Anna Murphy Section, Township, Range: S33, T23N, R05E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 5%
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: - Long: - Datum: -
Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None
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 on the site? ☒ 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 ☐ Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes ☐ No ☒ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☐ No ☒
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Remarks: Wetland A out-pit.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30-ft radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) 1. Populus balsamifera 60 Y FAC
2. Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: 4 (B) 3.
4. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) 60 = Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius) Prevalence Index worksheet:
1. Rubus spectabilis 50 Y FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
2. Rubus armeniacus 50 Y FAC OBL species x 1 =
3. FACW species x 2 =
4. FAC species x 3 =
5. FACU species x 4 =
100 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3-ft radius) Column Totals: (A) (B)
1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 Y FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.
3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. ☐ 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. ☒ 2 – Dominance Test is > 50%
6. ☐ 3 – Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.01
7.
☐ 4 – Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. ☐ 5 – Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 100 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
1.
2.
0 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: 0
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: DP-3
HYDROLOGY
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
0-14 10YR 2/1 100 - - - - Sandy clay loam -
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Loc: 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) ☐ 2cm 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) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
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 (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☒ High Water Table (A2)
☒ 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
☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Surface Water Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): -
Water Table Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): 9”
Saturation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): 9”
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
DP - 4
Project/Site: Soos Creek Park and Trail Phases 5 & 6 City/County: City of Renton Sampling date: 01/02/2025
Applicant/Owner: Huitt Zollars State: WA Sampling Point: DP-4
Investigator(s): Sage Yuasa and Anna Murphy Section, Township, Range: S33, T23N, R05E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Depressional Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 2%
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: - Long: - Datum: -
Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None
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 on the site? ☒ 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 ☐ Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes ☒ No ☐ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Remarks: Wetland A in-pit.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30-ft radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) 1.
2. Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: 4 (B) 3.
4. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) 0 = Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius) Prevalence Index worksheet:
1. Spiraea douglasii 10 Y FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
2. Rubus spectabilis 15 Y FAC OBL species x 1 =
3. Rubus armeniacus 15 Y FAC FACW species x 2 =
4. FAC species x 3 =
5. FACU species x 4 =
35 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3-ft radius) Column Totals: (A) (B)
1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 Y FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.
3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. ☐ 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. ☒ 2 – Dominance Test is > 50%
6. ☐ 3 – Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.01
7.
☐ 4 – Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. ☐ 5 – Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 100 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
1.
2.
0 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: 0
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: DP-4
HYDROLOGY
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
0-4 10YR 2/2 100 - - - - Silt loam -
4-16 10YR 4/3 80 7.5YR 4/6 20 C M Sandy gravelly loam -
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Loc: 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) ☐ 2cm 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) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
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 (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☒ High Water Table (A2)
☒ 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
☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Surface Water Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): Surface
Water Table Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): Surface
Saturation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): Surface
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
DP - 5
Project/Site: Soos Creek Park and Trail Phases 5 & 6 City/County: City of Renton Sampling date: 01/02/2025
Applicant/Owner: Huitt Zollars State: WA Sampling Point: DP-5
Investigator(s): Sage Yuasa and Anna Murphy Section, Township, Range: S33, T23N, R05E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Depressional Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 2%
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: - Long: - Datum: -
Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None
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 on the site? ☒ 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 ☐ Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes ☒ No ☐ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Remarks: Area previously mapped as non-wetland between bridge and existing powerline tower. Wetland A in-pit.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30-ft radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A) 1. Alnus rubra 20 Y FAC
2. Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: 5 (B) 3.
4. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) 20 = Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius) Prevalence Index worksheet:
1. Spiraea douglasii 20 Y FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
2. OBL species x 1 =
3. FACW species x 2 =
4. FAC species x 3 =
5. FACU species x 4 =
20 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3-ft radius) Column Totals: (A) (B)
1. Juncus effusus 15 Y FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 2. Phalaris arundinacea 25 Y FACW
3. Ranunculus repens 25 Y FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. ☐ 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. ☒ 2 – Dominance Test is > 50%
6. ☐ 3 – Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.01
7.
☐ 4 – Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. ☐ 5 – Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 65 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
1.
2.
0 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: 35
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: DP-5
HYDROLOGY
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
0-7 10YR 3/2 100 - - - - Clay loam
7-16 5PB 5/1 70 7.5YR 4/6 30 C M Clay loam Gleyed matrix
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Loc: 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) ☐ 2cm 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) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
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 (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☒ High Water Table (A2)
☒ 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
☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Surface Water Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): Surface
Water Table Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): Surface
Saturation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): Surface
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
DP - 6
Project/Site: Soos Creek Park and Trail Phases 5 & 6 City/County: City of Renton Sampling date: 01/02/2025
Applicant/Owner: Huitt Zollars State: WA Sampling Point: DP-6
Investigator(s): Sage Yuasa and Anna Murphy Section, Township, Range: S33, T23N, R05E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Depressional Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 2%
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: - Long: - Datum: -
Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: PEM1/SS1B
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 on the site? ☒ 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 ☐ Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes ☒ No ☐ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Remarks: Wetland A in-pit. Near King County Parks facility.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30-ft radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 1.
2. Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: 3 (B) 3.
4. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) 0 = Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius) Prevalence Index worksheet:
1. Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
2. OBL species x 1 =
3. FACW species x 2 =
4. FAC species x 3 =
5. FACU species x 4 =
0 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3-ft radius) Column Totals: (A) (B)
1. Juncus effusus 40 Y FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 2. Ranunculus repens 40 Y FAC
3. Poa sp. 20 Y FAC* Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. ☐ 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. ☒ 2 – Dominance Test is > 50%
6. ☐ 3 – Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.01
7.
☐ 4 – Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. ☐ 5 – Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 100 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
1.
2.
0 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: 0
Remarks: *Presumed FAC.
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: DP-6
HYDROLOGY
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
0-8 10YR 3/2 100 - - - - Silt loam -
8-16 10YR 5/1 95 7.5YR 4/6 5 C M Sandy loam -
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Loc: 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) ☐ 2cm 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) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
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 (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☒ High Water Table (A2)
☒ 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
☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Surface Water Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): -
Water Table Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): 9”
Saturation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): 2”
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
DP - 7
Project/Site: Soos Creek Park and Trail Phases 5 & 6 City/County: City of Renton Sampling date: 01/02/2025
Applicant/Owner: Huitt Zollars State: WA Sampling Point: DP-7
Investigator(s): Sage Yuasa and Anna Murphy Section, Township, Range: S33, T23N, R05E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 5%
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: - Long: - Datum: -
Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None
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 on the site? ☒ 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 ☒ Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes ☐ No ☒ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☐ No ☒
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☐ No ☒
Remarks: Wetland A out-pit/
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30-ft radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 1.
2. Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: 2 (B) 3.
4. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50% (A/B) 0 = Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius) Prevalence Index worksheet:
1. Cytisus scoparius 20 Y NL Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
2. OBL species x 1 =
3. FACW species x 2 =
4. FAC species x 3 =
5. FACU species x 4 =
20 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3-ft radius) Column Totals: (A) (B)
1. Pteridium aquifolium 5 N FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 2. Poa sp. 90 Y FAC*
3. Ranunculus repens 5 N FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. ☐ 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. ☐ 2 – Dominance Test is > 50%
6. ☐ 3 – Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.01
7.
☐ 4 – Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. ☐ 5 – Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 100 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☐ No ☐
1.
2.
0 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: 0
Remarks: *Presumed FAC.
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: DP-7
HYDROLOGY
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
0-12 10YR 2/2 100 - - - - Sandy loam -
12-16 10YR 3/3 98 7.5YR 4/4 2 C M Sandy loam -
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Loc: 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) ☐ 2cm 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) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
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 (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☐ High Water Table (A2)
☐ 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
☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☐ No ☒
Surface Water Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): -
Water Table Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): -
Saturation Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): -
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
DP - 8
Project/Site: Soos Creek Park and Trail Phases 5 & 6 City/County: City of Renton Sampling date: 01/02/2025
Applicant/Owner: Huitt Zollars State: WA Sampling Point: DP-8
Investigator(s): Sage Yuasa and Anna Murphy Section, Township, Range: S33, T23N, R05E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Depressional Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5%
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: - Long: - Datum: -
Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None
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 on the site? ☒ 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 ☐ Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes ☐ No ☐ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Remarks: Wetland A in-pit; within Boulevard Lane Park.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30-ft radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 1.
2. Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: 2 (B) 3.
4. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) 0 = Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius) Prevalence Index worksheet:
1. Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
2. OBL species x 1 =
3. FACW species x 2 =
4. FAC species x 3 =
5. FACU species x 4 =
0 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3-ft radius) Column Totals: (A) (B)
1. Ranunculus repens 60 Y FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 2. Poa sp. 40 Y FAC*
3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. ☐ 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. ☒ 2 – Dominance Test is > 50%
6. ☐ 3 – Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.01
7.
☐ 4 – Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. ☐ 5 – Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 100 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10-ft radius)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
1.
2.
0 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: 0
Remarks: *Presumed FAC.
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: DP-8
HYDROLOGY
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
0-8 10YR 2/2 90 7.5YR 4/6 10 C M Sandy gravelly loam -
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Loc: 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) ☐ 2cm 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) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Type: Compacted gravel
Depth (inches): 8”
Remarks:
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 (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☒ High Water Table (A2)
☒ 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
☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐
Surface Water Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): Surface
Water Table Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): Surface
Saturation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): Surface
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
DELINEATION REPORT / DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 2204.0231.00
Wetland Rating Forms and Figures
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 1
Wetland name or number: Wetland A
RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington
Name of wetland (or ID #): Wetland A Date of site visit: January 02, 2025
Rated by: Sage Yuasa and Anna Murphy Trained by Ecology? ☒Y ☐N Date of training: March 2021
HGM Class used for rating: Depressional Wetland has multiple HGM classes? ☒Y ☐N
NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined).
Source of base aerial photo/map: DOE Water Quality Atlas, DOE WATOR Tool, USDA Stream Stats
OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY I (based on functions ☒ or special characteristics ☐)
1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS
☒ Category I – Total score = 23 - 27
☐ Category II – Total score = 20 - 22
☐ Category III – Total score = 16 - 19
☐ Category IV – Total score = 9 - 15
FUNCTION Improving
Water Quality
Hydrologic Habitat
Circle the appropriate ratings
Site Potential H M L H M L H M L
Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L
Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL
Score Based
on Ratings 9 8 7 24
2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland
CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY
Estuarine I II
Wetland of High Conservation Value I
Bog I
Mature Forest I
Old Growth Forest I
Coastal Lagoon I II
Interdunal I II III IV
None of the above ☒
Score for each function based on three ratings (order of ratings is not important)
9 = H,H,H
8 = H,H,M
7 = H,H,L
7 = H,M,M
6 = H,M,L
6 = M,M,M
5 = H,L,L
5 = M,M,L
4 = M,L,L
3 = L,L,L
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 2
Wetland name or number: Wetland A
Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for
Western Washington
Depressional Wetlands
Map of: To answer questions: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4 1
Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 2 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1 2
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 3
Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 4 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 5
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 6
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 7
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 3
Wetland name or number: Wetland A
HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington
1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods?
☒NO – go to 2 ☐YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe – go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit.
☒NO – go to 3 ☐YES – The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
☐The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size;
☐At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m).
☒NO – go to 4 ☐YES – The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
☐The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual),
☐The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks,
☐The water leaves the wetland without being impounded.
☒NO – go to 5 ☐YES – The wetland class is Slope
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
☐The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river,
☐The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years.
For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8.
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 4
Wetland name or number: Wetland A
☒NO – go to 6 ☒YES – The wetland class is Riverine
NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior
of the wetland.
☐NO – go to 7 ☒YES – The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet.
☐NO – go to 8 ☐YES – The wetland class is Depressional
8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored.
NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area.
HGM classes within the wetland unit
being rated
HGM class to
use in rating
Slope + Riverine Riverine
Slope + Depressional Depressional
Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe
Depressional + Riverine along stream
within boundary of depression
Depressional
Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional
Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other
class of freshwater wetland
Treat as
ESTUARINE
If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have
more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Depressional, Riverine
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 5
Wetland name or number: Wetland A
DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS
Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality
D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality?
D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland:
☐ Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet).
points = 3
☐ Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet.
points = 2
☒ Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing. points = 1
☐ Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1
1
D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions).☒Yes = 4 ☐No = 0 4
D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub-shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes):
☒ Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5
☐ Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 1/2 of area points = 3
☐ Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/10 of area points = 1
☐ Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants < 1/10 of area points = 0
5
D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation:
This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual.
☒ Area seasonally ponded is > ½ total area of wetland points = 4
☐ Area seasonally ponded is > ¼ total area of wetland points = 2
☐ Area seasonally ponded is < ¼ total area of wetland points = 0
4
Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above 14
Rating of Site Potential If score is: ☒12-16 = H ☐6-11 = M ☐0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site?
D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? ☒Yes = 1 ☐No = 0 1
D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? ☒Yes = 1 ☐No = 0 1
D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? ☒Yes = 1 ☐No = 0 1
D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in
questions D 2.1-D 2.3? Source: Click here to enter text. ☐Yes = 1 ☒No = 0 0
Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above 3
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: ☒3 or 4 = H ☐1 or 2 = M ☐0 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society?
D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine
water that is on the 303(d) list? ☒Yes = 1 ☐No = 0 1
D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? ☒Yes = 1 ☐No = 0 1
D 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)? ☒Yes = 2 ☐No = 0 2
Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 4
Rating of Value If score is: ☒2-4 = 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 6
Wetland name or number: Wetland A
DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS
Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation
D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion?
D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland:
☐ Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). points = 4
☐ Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently
flowing outlet. points = 2
☐ Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1
☒ Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing. points = 0
0
D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands
with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part.
☒ Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet. points = 7
☐ Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet. points = 5
☐ Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet. points = 3
☐ The wetland is a “headwater” wetland. points = 3
☐ Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water. points = 1
☐ Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in). points = 0
7
D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin
contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself.
☐ The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit. points = 5
☒ The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit. points = 3
☐ The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit. points = 0
☐ Entire wetland is in the Flats class. points = 5
3
Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above 10
Rating of Site Potential If score is: ☐12-16 = H ☒6-11 = M ☐0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site?
D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? ☒Yes = 1 ☐No = 0 1
D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? ☒Yes = 1 ☐No = 0 1
D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at
>1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? ☒Yes = 1 ☐No = 0 1
Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above 3
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: ☒3 = H ☐1 or 2 = M ☐0 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society?
D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around
the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest score if more than one condition is met.
The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down-gradient into areas where flooding has
damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds):
• ☒ Flooding occurs in a sub-basin that is immediately down-gradient of unit. points = 2
• ☐ Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient. points = 1
☐ Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub-basin. points = 1
☐ The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that
the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood.
Explain why: points = 0
☐There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points = 0
2
D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan?
☐Yes = 2 ☒No = 0 0
Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above 2
Rating of Value If score is: ☒2-4 = H ☐1 = M ☐0 = L Record the rating on the first page
Wetland name or number: Wetland A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 7
These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes.
HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat
H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat?
H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the
Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold
of ¼ ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked.
☐ Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4
☒ Emergent 3 structures: points = 2
☒ Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1
☒ Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0
If the unit has a Forested class, check if:
☒ The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover)
that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon
4
H 1.2. Hydroperiods
Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover
more than 10% of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods).
☒ Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3
☒ Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2
☒ Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1
☒ Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0
☒ Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland
☐ Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland
☐ Lake Fringe wetland 2 points
☐ Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points
3
H 1.3. Richness of plant species
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
If you counted: ☒ > 19 species points = 2
☐ 5 - 19 species points = 1
☐ < 5 species points = 0
2
H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats
Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or
the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you
have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high.
☐ None = 0 points ☐ Low = 1 point ☐ Moderate = 2 points
All three diagrams in
this row are
☒ HIGH = 3points
3
Wetland name or number: Wetland A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 8
H 1.5. Special habitat features:
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points.
☒ Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long).
☒ Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland.
☒ Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) AND/OR overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m)
over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m).
☒ Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree
slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered
where wood is exposed).
☒ At least ¼ ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are
permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians).
☐ Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of
strata).
5
Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above 17
Rating of Site Potential If score is: ☒15-18 = H ☐7-14 = M ☐0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page
H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site?
H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit).
Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(%moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = x% + [x%/2) = x%
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
1
H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland.
Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(%moderate and low intensity land uses)/2 = xx% + (xx%/2) = xx%
☐ 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
1
H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If
☒ > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2)
☐ ≤ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0
-2
Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above 0
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: ☐4-6 = H ☐1-3 = M ☒< 1 = L Record the rating on the first page
H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society?
H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score
that applies to the wetland being rated.
Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2
☒ It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)
☐ It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists)
☐ It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species
☐ It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources
☐ It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan,
in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan
☐ Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1
☐ Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0
2
Rating of Value If score is: ☒2 = H ☐ 1 = M ☐0 = L Record the rating on the first page
Wetland name or number: Wetland A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 9
WDFW Priority Habitats Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. or access the list from here: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat.
☐ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha).
☐ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report).
☐ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
☐ Old-growth/Mature forests: Old-growth west of Cascade crest – Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi- layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests – Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest.
☐ Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 – see web link above).
☒ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.
☐ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 – see web link above).
☒ Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.
☐ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report – see web link on previous page).
☐ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.
☐ Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation.
☐ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.
☒ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere.
Wetland name or number: Wetland A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 10
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Wetland Type
Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met.
Category
SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands
Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?
☐ The dominant water regime is tidal,
☐ Vegetated, and
☐ With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt ☐Yes –Go to SC 1.1 ☒No= Not an estuarine wetland
SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area
Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151?
☐Yes = Category I ☒No - Go to SC 1.2
Cat. I
SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions?
☐ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has
less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25)
☐ At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or
un- mowed grassland.
☐ The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water,
or contiguous freshwater wetlands. ☐Yes = Category I ☒No= Category II
Cat. I
Cat. II
SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV)
SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High
Conservation Value? ☒Yes – Go to SC 2.2 ☐No – Go to SC 2.3
SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value?
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/NHPwetlandviewer ☐Yes = Category I ☒No = Not a WHCV
SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland?
http://file.dnr.wa.gov/publications/amp_nh_wetlands_trs.pdf
☐Yes – Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 ☒No = Not a WHCV
SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on
their website? ☐Yes = Category I ☒No = Not a WHCV
Cat. I
SC 3.0. Bogs
Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key
below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.
SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or
more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? ☐Yes – Go to SC 3.3 ☒No – Go to SC 3.2
SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep
over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or
pond? ☐Yes – Go to SC 3.3 ☒No = Is not a bog
SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30%
cover of plant species listed in Table 4? ☐Yes = Is a Category I bog ☒No – Go to SC 3.4
NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory, you may substitute that criterion by
measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the
plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog.
SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar,
western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the
species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy?
☐Yes = Is a Category I bog ☒No = Is not a
Cat. I
Wetland name or number: Wetland A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 11
SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands
Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA
Department of Fish and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate
the wetland based on its functions.
☐ Old-growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi-layered
canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of
age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more.
☐ Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR
the species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm).
☐Yes = Category I ☒No = Not a forested wetland for this section
Cat. I
SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
☐ The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated
from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks
☐ The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5
ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the
bottom)
☐Yes – Go to SC 5.1 ☒No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon
SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?
☐ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has
less than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100).
☐ At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or
un- mowed grassland. ☐ The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2) ☐Yes = Category I ☐No = Category II
Cat. I
Cat. II
SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands
Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If
you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions.
In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:
☐ Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103
☐ Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105
☐ Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109
☐Yes – Go to SC 6.1 ☒No = not an interdunal wetland for rating
SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M
for the three aspects of function)? ☐Yes = Category I ☐No – Go to SC 6.2
SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger?
☐Yes = Category II ☐No – Go to SC 6.3
SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac?
☐Yes = Category III ☐No = Category IV
Cat I
Cat. II
Cat. III
Cat. IV
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
If you answered No for all types, enter “Not Applicable” on Summary Form NA
Wetland Rating Figures
Soos Creek Trail Phase 5a Extension
Wetland A (Depressional) .................................................................................................................................. 1
Figure 1. Cowardin plant classes (D1.3, H1.1, H1.4) .................................................................................................. 1
Figure 2. Hydroperiods and location of outlet(s) (D1.1, D1.4, H1.2, D5.2) ...................................................... 2
Figure 3. Boundary of area within 150 feet of the wetland (D2.2, D5.2) ....................................................... 3
Figure 4. Map of the contributing basin (D4.3, D5.3) .......................................................................................... 4
Figure 5. Undisturbed habitat and moderate-low intensity land uses within 1 km from wetland
edge including polygon for accessible habitat (H2.1, H2.2, H2.3) ................................................ 5
Figure 6. Screen-capture of 303(d) listed waters in basin (D3.1, D3.2) .......................................................... 6
Figure 7. Screen-capture of TMDL map for sub-basin in which unit is found (D3.3) ............................... 7
The features depicted in these rating form figures are approximate and not to scale. Sketches are based
on available data and best professional judgment.
WETLAND FIGURES - 1
WETLAND A (DEPRESSIONAL)
Figure 1. Cowardin plant classes (D1.3, H1.1, H1.4)
The features depicted in these rating form figures are approximate and not to scale. Sketches are based
on available data and best professional judgment.
WETLAND FIGURES - 2
Figure 2. Hydroperiods and location of outlet(s) (D1.1, D1.4, H1.2, D5.2)
Outlet
The features depicted in these rating form figures are approximate and not to scale. Sketches are based
on available data and best professional judgment.
WETLAND FIGURES - 3
Figure 3. Boundary of area within 150 feet of the wetland (D2.2, D5.2)
The features depicted in these rating form figures are approximate and not to scale. Sketches are based
on available data and best professional judgment.
WETLAND FIGURES - 4
Figure 4. Map of the contributing basin (D4.3, D5.3)
Contributing Basin
Approx. 2,200 acres.
Approx 16 times wetland size
Wetland A
Approx. 140 acres.
The features depicted in these rating form figures are approximate and not to scale. Sketches are based
on available data and best professional judgment.
WETLAND FIGURES - 5
Figure 5. Undisturbed habitat and moderate-low intensity land uses within 1 km from wetland edge
including polygon for accessible habitat (H2.1, H2.2, H2.3)
The features depicted in these rating form figures are approximate and not to scale. Sketches are based
on available data and best professional judgment.
WETLAND FIGURES - 6
Figure 6. Screen-capture of 303(d) listed waters in basin (D3.1, D3.2)
Wetland A
Black dashed outline
The features depicted in these rating form figures are approximate and not to scale. Sketches are based
on available data and best professional judgment.
WETLAND FIGURES - 7
Figure 7. Screen-capture of TMDL map for sub-basin in which unit is found (D3.3)
Wetland A
Located in the Big Soos Creek
Basin (HUC 171100130302)
DELINEATION REPORT / DON HELLING; HUITT-ZOLLARS / 2204.0231.00
Public Inventories
NRCS Soil Data
Soos Creek Trail Extension 5a
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team,wetlands_team@fws.gov
Wetlands
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Other
Riverine
March 5, 2025
0 0.2 0.40.1 mi
0 0.3 0.60.15 km
1:12,073
This page was produced by the NWI mapper
National 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.
WDFW Priority Habitat And Species Data
Statewide Integrated Fish Distribution Map
Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO), Department of Natural
Resources (DNR), Forest Practices Division, Department of Natural Resources
(DNR), Engineering Division
Extreme care was used during the compilation of this map to ensure
its accuracy. However, due to changes in data and the need to
rely on outside information, the Department of Natural Resources
cannot accept responsibility for errors or omissions, and therefore, there are no warranties that accompany this material.
0 1,000 2,000500
Feet
Date: 3/5/2025 Time: 11:01 AM
Map Symbols Additional Information Legal Description
Forest Practices Activity Map - Application #______________
¯
#*Waste Area
~~~Harvest Boundary
Stream
Ç Rock Pit
U Landing
Y Clumped
WRTS/GRTS
× Existing Structure
Road Construction
RMZ / WMZ Buffers
Approximate Scale :1:12,000
Forest Practices Application Mapping Tool S05 T22.0N R05.0E, S34 T23.0N
R05.0E, S32 T23.0N R05.0E, S03 T22.0N
R05.0E, S33 T23.0N R05.0E, S04 T22.0N
R05.0E
King County
King County iMap
Date: 3/5/2025 Notes:
The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to changewithout 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 liablefor any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profitsresulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map isprohibited except by written permission of King County.
Legend
Stream type
S - Shoreline ofthe state
F - Fishhabitat,Biologi...
F - Fishhabitat,Physical
F - Fish
habitat,Presu...
N - Non-fishbearing
Unclassified
Seismic hazard(1990 SAO)
FEMA floodway
FEMA 100 yearfloodplain
FEMA 500 year
floodplain
FEMA area withreduced risk dueto levee
±