Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_Wetland_Assessment_0109190_v1Wetland & Aquatic Sciences Wildlife Ecology Landscape Architecture 2111 N. Northgate Way, Ste 219 Seattle, WA 98103 206-525-8122 www.raedeke.com Associates, Inc. Raedeke TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM January 9, 2019 To: Mr. Mike Pruett, Segale Properties, Inc. Mr. Mark Segale, Segale Properties, Inc. From: Christopher Wright, BS, Raedeke Associates, Inc. Andrew Rossi, BS, Raedeke Associates, Inc. Annamaria Clark, BS, Raedeke Associates, Inc. RE: Upper Balch Pit – Critical Areas Update (R.A.I. No. 2000-011-003) At your request, Raedeke Associates, Inc. staff visited the Upper Balch Pit property in Renton, Washington on January 3, 2019. The purpose of our site investigation was to provide an update to our previous critical area assessment (Raedeke Associates, Inc. 2010). We investigated the site to identify any potential critical areas and gathered data in order to characterize current site conditions. SITE LOCATION The Upper Balch Pit is a 14-acre property located south of NE 4th Street, west of Monroe Avenue NE, east of Jefferson Ave NE, and north of NE 2nd street in Renton, Washington (Figure 1). This places the property within a portion of Section 16 Township 23 North Range 5 East, W.M. The property is identified as Tax Parcel No. 1623059059. Parcel maps retrieved on-line from King County (2019) depict the property boundaries. BACKGROUND REVIEW Prior to conducting our site visit, we reviewed existing background maps and information for the project site. We reviewed current and historical aerial photographs (Google Earth 2019) (Figure 2) to assist in the definition of existing plant communities, drainage patterns, and land use. We also reviewed an existing conditions graphic (Figure 3) provided by Segale Properties. In addition, we reviewed maps from the U.S.D.A. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS 2019) Web Soil Survey, King County iMap (2019) (Figure 4), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS 2019) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) (Figure 5), and in order to assist in our determination of whether wetlands or streams were present within or in vicinity of the project site. We also reviewed the Mr. Mike Pruett, Segale Properties, Inc. January 9, 2019 Page 2 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW 2019) Priority Habitats and Species map to identify documented presence of any endangered or threatened wildlife or their habitat in vicinity of the project site. The USDA NRCS (2019) Web Soil Survey identifies mined pits and Arents, Everett material within the project site. Soil series boundaries or mapping units are mapped from aerial photographs with limited field verification. Thus, the location and extent of boundaries between mapping units may not be accurate for a given parcel of land within the survey area. The USFWS (2019) National Wetland Inventory (Figure 5) map depicts a palustrine, freshwater pond (PABFh) on the north central location of the project site and an off-site palustrine, freshwater pond (PABF) approximately 1100 feet southwest. The WDFW (2019) PHS database map also shows a freshwater pond mapped on the project site, but no documented occurrence of species of concern, including endangered, threatened, or sensitive species or their habitat on or adjacent to the project site. In addition, the Water Quality Atlas map (WDOE 2019) depicts an off-site stream approximately 1500 feet south of the project site. Any buffers associated with the off-site features are too far away to impact the subject property. The maximum standard buffers for streams and wetlands are 115 feet and 225 feet, respectively, p er Renton Municipal Code (2018). EXISTING CONDITIONS & OBSERVATIONS We visited the site on January 3, 2019 to identify potential critical areas and collect information regarding the existing conditions of the site. The Upper Balch Pit is a reclaimed gravel mine. The majority of the site consists of gravelly, sandy fill sloping to various degrees. The entire site is fenced along the perimeter and can be accessed through a locked gate via Jefferson Avenue NE to the west. The interior sides of the fence are steeply sloped (50 – 70%) for ten to twenty horizontal feet throughout most of the property, except in the western portion of the site near the location of the entrance gate and a small pre-existing structure (approximately 150 square feet in size). The side slopes are vegetated with a mix of deciduous trees and shrubs common to the region. Central and southern portions of the Upper Balch Pit contain areas of unvegetated fill and areas vegetated by grasses, herbs, and shrubs common to the region. A paved road begins at the entrance gate and slopes south towards the southwest corner of the site, then turns directly east towards the southeast corner where it ends near an old wheel wash station. The lowest portions of the site are located at the bottom of the eastern slope. This low area was ponded with stormwater at the time of our site visit. The area is unvegetated and a disposal location for fill material from other sites. Along the east slope of the site, two storm drainage pipes convey water from Monroe Avenue NE. The largest of the two is a black PVC pipe that is 2-feet in diameter. It Mr. Mike Pruett, Segale Properties, Inc. January 9, 2019 Page 3 extends from the top of the slope, at the east edge of the site, and drains downslope to the west. The pipe runs all the way downhill to the lowest portion of the site where water is ponded. The end of this pipe was inundated by water at the time of our site visit and not visible. The second pipe is located approximately 15 feet south of the first. It is black corrugated plastic, 1.5-feet in diameter. It also appears to begin at the top of the slope; however, this pipe ends less than half way down the slope. We did not observe any water draining from this pipe at the time of our visit. We collected data at several sample plots at the project site (Appendix A). Soils on the site generally consist of up to 5 inches of brown (2.5Y 4/2 to 2.5Y 5/2) sandy soils with gravels and clays, over brown to olive brown (2.5Y 5/3 to 5Y 5/2) sandy soils to a depth of greater than 15 inches. In several sample plots, the upper few inches of soil were saturated due to rain but there was no saturation or water table beneath to a depth of up to 15 inches. The majority of the site did not have redoximorphic features in the soils nor wetland hydrology. A sample plot in the location of the NWI mapped wetland revealed no wetland indicators. This area is not a jurisdictional wetland. On a low area of land adjacent to the ponded area and at the toe of the eastern slope, we observed hydric soil, hydrology, and a mixed vegetation community that included hydrophytic plants. Sample plot 3 is located in this location. It is near the bottom of the slope from Monroe Avenue NE where it appears stormwater runoff drains down from the street. The pipes discussed earlier are located along this slope. Soils in this location consist of up to 5 inches of dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2) over olive gray (5Y 5/2) sandy soils with redoximorphic concentrations (10YR 3/6 to 10YR 4/4) throughout. The vegetation community is dominated by balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera, FAC), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus, FAC), Kentucky blue grass (Poa pratensis, FAC), and reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW). We observed saturated soils at a depth of 4 inches and a water table at a depth of 7 inches. However, hydrology appears to be the result of roadway runoff, diverted stormwater, and water ponding on- site due to compact fill rather than supported by a natural groundwater table. Therefore, although we observed hydric soil and hydrophytic vegetation in this area, hydrology does not meet criteria to be considered wetland. The surrounding area immediately adjacent to the subject property consists of developed parcels with businesses, cemeteries with mowed lawns, and paved parking lots and roads. We did not observe any evidence of critical areas on the adjacent lots or anywhere in the immediate vicinity. CONCLUSION Based on our January 3, 2019, investigation of the Upper Balch Pit project site, we did not identify any wetlands or streams within the property boundaries or in the immediate vicinity. The majority of the property consists of unvegetated fill and well-draining steep slopes vegetated by weedy herbaceous and shrub species. The area with hydric soil and Mr. Mike Pruett, Segale Properties, Inc. January 9, 2019 Page 4 hydrophytic vegetation is supported by diverted stormwater and water ponding upon compact fill, which does not meet criteria to be considered a wetland. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this letter for the exclusive use of Segale Properties, Inc. and their consultants. No other person or agency may rely upon the information, analysis, or conclusions contained herein without permission from Segale Properties, Inc. The determination of ecological system classifications, functions, values, and boundaries is an inexact science, and different individuals and agencies may reach different conclusions. With regard to wetlands, the final determination of their boundaries for regulatory purposes is the responsibility of the various agencies that regulate development activities in wetlands. We cannot guarantee the outcome of such determinations. Therefore, the conclusions of this report should be reviewed by the appropriate regulatory agencies. We warrant that the work performed conforms to standards generally accepted in our field and prepared substantially in accordance with then-current technical guidelines and criteria. The conclusions of this report represent the results of our analysis of the information provided by the project proponent and their consultants, together with information gathered in the course of the study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. Please let us know if you have any questions or need additional information. Respectfully submitted, RAEDEKE ASSOCIATES, INC. Christopher W. Wright Annamaria Clark Vice-President/Soil and Wetland Scientist Wetland Biologist Mr. Mike Pruett, Segale Properties, Inc. January 9, 2019 Page 5 LITERATURE CITED Google Earth. 2019. Image for 47.486538° N, 122.176401° W in King County, WA. © 2019 Google. Accessed January 2019. King County. 2019. iMAP GIS Interactive map center, King County, Washington. http://www.kingcounty.gov/operations/GIS/Maps/iMAP.aspx. Accessed January 2019. Raedeke Associates, Inc. 2010. Upper Balch Pit – Wetland Reconnaissance. Technical Memorandum to Mark Segale, Segale Properties, Inc. dated July 30, 2010. Renton, City of. 2018. Renton Municipal Code current through November 19, 2018. Accessed January 9, 2019. 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). Wakeley, J.S., R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble, eds. May 2010. U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2019. On-line Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov. Accessed January 2019. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2019. National Wetland Inventory, Wetlands Online Mapper. http://wetlandsfws.er.usgs.gov/wtlnds/launch.html. Accessed January 2019. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2019. PHS on the web. Available at: http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs. Accessed January 2019. UPPER BALCH PIT FIGURE 1 - VICINITY MAP RAI PROJECT #2000-011-003 PREPARED: 1/08/2019 BY: AIC Associates, Inc. Raedeke 2111 N. Northgate Way, Suite 219 Seattle, Washington 98133 SOURCE INFORMATION: Google Maps 2019 FIGURE DISCLAIMER STATEMENT: Displaying approximate location. PROJECT LOCATION UPPER BALCH PIT FIGURE 2 - AERIAL WITH SAMPLE PLOTS RAI PROJECT #2000-011-003 PREPARED: 1/08/2019 BY: AIC Associates, Inc. Raedeke 2111 N. Northgate Way, Suite 219 Seattle, Washington 98133 SOURCE INFORMATION: Google Earth 2019 FIGURE DISCLAIMER STATEMENT: Displaying approximate locations. TOPOGRAPHY MAPFIGURE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS UPPER BALCH PIT FIGURE 4 - KING COUNTY iMAP RAI PROJECT #2000-011-003 PREPARED: 1/08/2019 BY: AIC Associates, Inc. Raedeke 2111 N. Northgate Way, Suite 219 Seattle, Washington 98133 SOURCE INFORMATION: King County 2019 FIGURE DISCLAIMER STATEMENT: 301 Mo nroe Ave NE Date: 1 /2/2019 Notes: Th e informatio n include d on this map has been comp iled by Kin g Co unty sta ff f rom a varie ty of sources and is subject to chan gewithout notice. K ing Coun ty makes no representat ions or warra nt ie s, express or imp lied, as t o accuracy, co mpleteness, timeliness,or rights to the use o f such inf ormation. This document is not in tended for use as a survey p ro duct. K ing Coun ty sh all no t be liablefor a ny g eneral, sp ecial, indirect , incid ental, or conseq uential damages includin g, bu t n ot limited to, lost re venue s or lost pro fitsresulting from t he use or misuse of the info rmation con tain ed on th is map. Any sa le of th is map or inf orma tion on this map isprohibited except by writte n permissio n of Kin g County. UPPER BALCH PITFIGURE 5 - NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORYRAI PROJECT #2000-011-003PREPARED: 1/08/2019BY: AIC Associates, Inc. Raedeke 2111 N. Northgate Way, Suite 219Seattle, Washington 98133SOURCE INFORMATION: USFWS 2019U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team,wetlands_team@fws.govJanuary 4, 201900.10.20.05mi00.150.30.075km1:6,873This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife WetlandsEstuarine and Marine DeepwaterEstuarine and Marine WetlandFreshwater Emergent WetlandFreshwater Forested/Shrub WetlandFreshwater PondLakeOtherRiverineJanuary 4, 2019This 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. APPENDIX A Field Survey Data Sheets US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Upper Balch Pit City/County: Renton/King County Sampling Date:1/3/2019 Applicant/Owner: Segale Properties, Inc. State: WA Sampling Point: SP 1 Investigator(s): A. Clark & A. Rossi Section, Township, Range: S16, T23N, R5E, W.M. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): Northwest Forests & Coasts (LRR A) Lat: 47.487330 Long: -122.177011 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Arents, Everett material NWI classification: PABFh Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Yes, Soil Yes, or Hydrology Yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Sample Plot located in Northwest Corner, 25-30 feet below street level. Moderate rain earlier in the day with light rain during site visit. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 5 m) % Cover Species? Status 1. NONE 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. NONE 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 m) 1. Unknown Herb. 1 n n/a 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 1 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. None 0 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 99 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: SP 1 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 2.5Y 5/2 90 10YR 5/8 10 c m Gr S w/ Clay contains high portion of gravel/pebble 7-15 2.5Y 5/3 70 10YR 5/8 30 Gr S w/ Clay fire peds - no redox 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 2 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Saturation 0-2". Some moisture 2-15", but no naturation or water table US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Upper Balch Pit City/County: Renton/King County Sampling Date:1/3/2019 Applicant/Owner: Segale Properties, Inc. State: WA Sampling Point: SP 2 Investigator(s): A. Clark & A. Rossi Section, Township, Range: S16, T23N, R5E, W.M. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1-3% Subregion (LRR): Northwest Forests & Coasts (LRR A) Lat: 47.487220 Long: -122.175666 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: PITS NWI classification: PABFh Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation yes, Soil yes, or Hydrology yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Sample Plot located at northwest corner of large ponded area. Towards the northeast corner of project site. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 5 m) % Cover Species? Status 1. None 0 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. None 0 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 m) 1. None 0 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. None 0 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: No vegetation in sample plot US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: SP 2 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 0-2 2.5Y 4/3 100 S w/ cl Sand with clay 2-7 5G 5/1 100 Cl clay 7+ Refusal, very hard/dry clay. 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0-2" (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: no water below 2 inches US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Upper Balch Pit City/County: Renton/King County Sampling Date:1/3/2019 Applicant/Owner: Segale Properties, Inc. State: WA Sampling Point: SP 3 Investigator(s): A. Clark & A. Rossi Section, Township, Range: S16, T23N, R5E, W.M. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1-3 Subregion (LRR): Northwest Forests & Coasts (LRR A) Lat: 47.486614 Long: -122.175282 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Arents, Everett material NWI classification: PABFh Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation yes, Soil yes, or Hydrology yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 5 m) % Cover Species? Status 1. Populus balsamifera (Black Cottonwood) 60 y FAC 2. Alnus rubra (red alder) 5 n FAC 3. 4. 65 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. Rubus armeniacus (Himalayan blackberry) 20 y FAC 2. Rubus laciniatus (cutleaf blackberry) 5 n FACU 3. Rubus ursinus (california dewberry) 5 n FACU 4. Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut) 5 n FACU 5. 35 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 m) 1. Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass) 20 y FAC 2. Phalaris arundinacea (reed canarygrass) 15 y FACW 3. Juncus effusus (Lamp rush) 10 n FACW 4. Polystichum munitum (Sword fern) 10 n FACU 5. Glyceria elata (tall mannagrass) 1 n OBL 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 56 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. 0 0 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 44 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 1 x 1 = 1 FACW species 25 x 2 = 50 FAC species 105 x 3 = 315 FACU species 25 x 4 = 100 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 156 (A) 465 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.98 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: SP 3 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 0-5 2.5Y 4/2 90 10YR 4/4 10 c m SL 5-14 5Y 5/2 80 10YR 3/6 20 c m VFS Very Fine Sand 14+ Compact, refusal 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydr ic Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 7" Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 4" (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Water is surficial. Result of runoff from recent rain. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Upper Balch Pit City/County: Renton/King County Sampling Date:1/3/2019 Applicant/Owner: Segale Properties, Inc. State: WA Sampling Point: SP 4 Investigator(s): A. Clark & A. Rossi Section, Township, Range: S16, T23N, R5E, W.M. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%): 50 Subregion (LRR): Northwest Forests & Coasts (LRR A) Lat: 47.486178 Long: -122.175108 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: PITS 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 yes, Soil yes, or Hydrology yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 5 m) % Cover Species? Status 1. Populus balsamifera (Black Cottonwood) 60 y FAC 2. Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir) 5 n FACU 3. 4. 65 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. Rubus armeniacus (Himalayan blackberry) 40 y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 40 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 m) 1. Equisetum telmateia (giant horsetail) 30 y FACW 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 30 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. None 0 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 70 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 30 x 2 = 60 FAC species 100 x 3 = 300 FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 130 (A) 360 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.76 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: SP 4 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 2.5Y2.5/1 100 GrSL cobbles 2-5" in diameter 7-16+ 2.5Y 3/2 100 GrSL cobbles 2-5" in diameter 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: no signs of hydrology US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Upper Balch Pit City/County: Renton/King County Sampling Date:1/3/2019 Applicant/Owner: Segale Properties, Inc. State: WA Sampling Point: SP 5 Investigator(s): A. Clark & A. Rossi Section, Township, Range: S16, T23N, R5E, W.M. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 45 Subregion (LRR): Northwest Forests & Coasts (LRR A) Lat: 47.486387 Long: -122.175053 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: PITS 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 yes, Soil yes, or Hydrology yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Sample plot located on eastern edge of property at the top of the hill along the fence. Sample plot is ~15' west of fence (down slope) VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 5 m) % Cover Species? Status 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir) 10 y FACU 2. 3. 4. 10 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. Rubus armeniacus (Himalayan blackberry) 20 y FAC 2. Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut) 10 n FACU 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 m) 1. None 0 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. None 0 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50% (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 20 x 3 = 60 FACU species 10 x 4 = 40 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 30 (A) 100 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.00 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: SP 5 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 0-16+ 2.5Y3/2 100 GrSL very sandy. cobbles 2-5" in diameter 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: no redox/other indicators HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: no signs of hydrology US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Upper Balch Pit City/County: Renton/King County Sampling Date:1/3/2019 Applicant/Owner: Segale Properties, Inc. State: WA Sampling Point: SP 6 Investigator(s): A. Clark & A. Rossi Section, Township, Range: S16, T23N, R5E, W.M. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%): 2-5% Subregion (LRR): Northwest Forests & Coasts (LRR A) Lat: 47.485608 Long: -122.176838 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: PITS NWI classification: PABFh Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation yes, Soil yes, or Hydrology yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Sample plot located towarsd the southwest corner of the project site, on the south side of a large gravel pile VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 5 m) % Cover Species? Status 1. None 0 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. None 0 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 m) 1. Unknown herbs 50 y unk 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 50 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3 m) 1. 0 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 50 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: unknown herbs (not wetland) US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: SP 6 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 0-3 2.5y4/2 100 S no redox 3+ very hard. refusal. feels like cement 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: no indicators present HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: no signs of hydrology