Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEx. 31 Binder 1-Supplemental Applicant ExhibitsQUENDALL TERMINALS ENTITLEMENTS HEARING MASTER PLAN REVIEW BINDING SITE PLAN SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CITY OF RENTON APRIL 18, 2017 EXHIBIT BINDER #1: SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICANT EXHIBITS QUENDALL TERMINALS ENTITLEMENTS HEARING MASTER PLAN REVIEW BINDING SITE PLAN SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CITY OF RENTON APRIL 18, 2017 EXHIBIT BINDER #1: SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICANT EXHIBITS TABLE OF CONTENTS Quendall Terminals Land Use, Shoreline and Master Plan Permit Application Update, December 2015 Quendall Terminals Drainage Report, November 2009 Quendall Terminals Report, November 2009 Title Report Quendall Terminals Preliminary Geotechnical Study, November 2009 Quendall Wetlands Assessment, November 2009. Larson Anthropological Archaeological Services, 1997 Notice of Complete Application from City of Renton, 2/5/10 Off Hold Notice from City of Renton, 2/3/16 Letter from HCMP to Renton HE Requesting Continuation of Public Hearing Date, 5/20/16 Letter from City of Renton to Quendall Granting Continuation of Public Hearing Date, 5/23/16 Letter from City of Renton to Quendall re Project Remaining "On Hold" Until Further Notice. Letter from City of Renton to Quendall re "Off Hold" Notice, 3/16/17 0 Quendall Hearing Exhibit Binder No. I page I NI): 19958.002 4840-3211-1430v1 S 0 LAND USE, SHORELINE & MASTER PLAN PERMIT APPLICATION UPDATE Quendall Terminals Century Pacific, L.P. December 2015 iq *,e t' r . Cw'sollino S LwQfie$ 'U Clark Martin& Peterscn PS. January 13, 2016 Ms. Vanessa Dolbee City of Renton Community and Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: Quendall Te,ininais, Plan Set Updates LUA09-151, BCF, SA-M, SM, DSP Dear Vanessa: We represent CenturyPacific LLLP, applicant on behalf of the owners of the Quendall . Terminals site for the above referenced Master Site Plan Approval, Binding Site Plan, and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Following the City's completion of the project SEPA review and issuance of the Mitigation Document, the City requested updated drawings to show project plans conforming to the Mitigation Document published for the preferred alternative of the RIS Addendum (October 2012) and Final EIS (August 2015). In response to the City, the applicant submits the enclosed December 2015 plan revisions, updated to reflect applicable mitigation conditions. Also at the City's request, in addition to the revised materials, this submittal package includes for your convenience the full set of existing application materials and supporting reports, as identthed on the enclosed table of contents. With the published SEPA documents, the project Mitigation Document, and the requested supplemental submittal, the City should have everything required to proceed with the staff report and hearing examiner proceedings on the Quendall Terminals applications referenced above. We note that in addition to conditions reflected in this submittal, we anticipate that the Master Site Plan approval will incorporate all Mitigation Document conditions, including those for off-site improvements, construction mitigation, and any details not relevant here but applicable to future site plan and building permit applications. Enclosed are 5 sets and one digital copy of the updated project plans and previous materials in support of the upcoming permit proceedings for the referenced applications. We ask that the City contact us at your earliest convenience if you have any questions. The 1221 Second Avenue, Suite 500 1 Seattle, WA 98101 I 206.623.1745 1 f: 206.623.7789 I ITI IVE E I TA Ms. Vanessa Dolbee January 13, 2016 Page 2 of 2 applicant team looks forward to completing this comprehensive permit review process. Ve truly yours, W14j'~ AnnM. Gygi AMG:kah E-Mail: ann.gygi(hcmp.com Direct Dial: (206) 470-7638 Fax (206) 623-7789 Enclosures cc: Campbell Mathewson, w/out end. Larry Warren, w/out end. ND: 19958.002 4833-7547-6780v1 S Hulls Clark Martin & Peterson P.S. Quendall Terminals Master Site Plan Update December 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Five copies of each Item below and an electronic copy of each UPDATED DOCUMENTS Project Narrative Density Worksheet Tree Retention Worksheet UPDATED PLANS Site Plan Parking Level Plans Typical Architectural Elevations Conceptual Landscape Plan Tree Inventory Plan Topographic Survey (from 2009) Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plans Conceptual Utility Plans PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED REPORTS FOR REFERENCE Original Environmental Checklist (SEPA) Urban Center Overlay District C Statement Neighborhood Detail Map Flood Hazard Map Preliminary Geotechnical Study Storm Drainage Report (TIR) Sewer Report Title Report Historical and Cultural Report (Larson, March 1997) Wetland Assessment, Lake Study, Habitat Data, and Conceptual Restoration Report Table of Contents December 2015 - .. .-.. Project Narrative, Revised Project Overview The QuericlailTerminals project is being updated following the completion of the Final EIS and mitigation document dated August 2015. The attached supplemental materials have been revised to conform to the mitigation document. This updated entitlement submittal has been prepared for property owners Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Co. The project developer and applicant is: Century Pacific, LLLP, Contact: Campbell Mathewson The following consultants contributed to preparation of the plans and documents: I KPFF Consulting Engineers - Entitlement Lead, Civil Site Development Contact: Tom Jones I Lance Mueller & Associates —Architecture and Landscaping Contact: Lance Mueller I Transpo Group—Transportation and Traffic Contact: Larry Toedtli (retired) Anchor QEA - Environmental Contact: Peter Hummel U Aspect Consulting - Geotechnical PROJECT SIZE AND LOCATION The Quendall Terminals project is located at 4350 Lake Washington Boulevard in the northern portion of Renton, Washington. The project site is bordered by Lake Washington to the west, the Seahawks Training Facility to the north, Ripley Lane North to the east, and the Barbee Mill site to the south. The site area is approximately 21.46 acres (20.3 acre main parcel and an isolated 2.iS acre parcel east of Ripley Lane). The site includes approximately 1,583 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. Century Pacific, LP Quendall Terminals Project Narrative - December 205 I t1'A t(ULI Environmental remediation and mitigation of the property will be conducted prior to development. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the lead agency for all site remediation, and mitigation actions, which are to be performed at the Quendall Terminals site under Superfund. The actions selected by EPA must comply with substantive elements of SEPA and other applicable, relevant, and appropriate environmental reviews and permitting requirements, though the remediation and mitigation actions are exempt from procedural requirements of SEPA. The Quendall Terminals Final EIS (August 2015) addresses the current status of the EPA proceedings. PERMITS AND ZONING As identified in the Final EIS for the Quendall Terminals project, issued August 2015, the following permits and approvals are required to complete redevelopment of the site. The permits shown in italics are those anticipated to complete the City of Renton Land Use Shoreline and Master Site plan entitlement for the Quendall Terminals project: City of Renton Permits Master Site Plan Approval Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Binding Site Plan Site Plan Review Construction Permits Building Permits Utility Approvals Property Permits & Licenses The FEIS also identifies the following state and federal permits and approvals required to complete redevelopment of the site: Federal I CERCLA Remediation (for site cleanup/remediation prior to redevelopment) State of Washington Dept. of Ecology, Construction Stormwater General Permit Dept. of Ecology, NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Hydraulic ProjectApproval Century Pacific, LP Quendall Terminals Project Narrative - December 205 2 Zoning The applicable zoning classification and comprehensive plan designation for the site is (COR) Commercial/Office/Residential. The applicable shoreline master program designation forthe site is "urban." The Seahawks Training Facility to the north and the Barbee Mill site to the south have the same COR zoning classification and designation per the City of Renton comprehensive plan. ACCESS Interstate 405 provides regional access to the project site via the Lake Washington Boulevard/44th Street interchange. Lake Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane (aka Seahawks Way) front the eastern boundary of the site. Two entrances to the project are proposed from these public rights of way. To the south an existing entrance to the Barbee Mill site will be used as a primary site access. A second site access will be provided at the northeast end of the site by connection to Ripley Lane. Both site access points cross a now abandoned Burlington Northern Santa Fe at-grade railroad line. New on-site public streets and private access tracts will be constructed to provide site access to the buildings. CURRENT USE The site is currently vacant with the exception of a small shed used during past logging operations. The site has been used for various industrial purposes in the past, most recently as a log sorting and storage yard. Historical industrial uses have included a refinery, and have resulted in hazardous substances and soil contamination. Various small docks, structures, and pilings are located at the west edge of the project site along Lake Washington. Adjacent Uses Seahawkslraining Facility, a football training facility, to the north. Barbee Mill, a residential development, to the south. Pan Abode, an existing cedar home manufacturing facility, to the southeast (as of December 2015, no longer on site). Future planning includes a hotel (Hawks Landing). Lake Washington Boulevard, Ripley Lane, and Interstate 405 are to the east. Lake Washington is located to the west. PROPOSED USES The proposed development includes construction of four mixed-use buildings with structured and surface parking for 1,366 vehicles. The development will include 692 residential units, office space, 20,025 square feet of retail, and 9,000 square feet of restaurant, and public trails/paths. . Density The gross site area totals 883,350 SF (20.28 Ac) Century Pacific, LP Quendall Terminals Project Narrative - December 2015 3 Deductions for Public Streets total 95,600 SF (2.26 Ac) Deductions for Private Access total 13,800 SF (0.32 Ac) This results in a Net Site Area of 770,95o SF (17.70 Ac) Based on a proposed density of 692 dwelling units provides a net density of 39.1 units/Ac SPECIAL SITE FEATURES The site contains approximately o.81 acres (35,181 square feet) of wetlands and has approximately 1,583 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. Site slopes are generally o to S percent with localized slopes up to 2H:1V at debris piles and up to 2H:1V at the bank of the lake. PROPOSED OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS WSDOT has identified future improvements to the 1-405/Northeast 44th Street interchange as part of the WSDOT 1-405 Renton to Bellevue improvement project. Project contributions with and without the 1-405 improvements are set forth in the EIS. Several additional improvements are proposed or identified by the project to mitigate project generated impacts. These include: A southbound left-turn lane, a dedicated westbound right-turn lane, and an eastbound left-turn lane at the Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection. A northbound left-turn lane at the Main Project Access/Barbee Mill/Conner Homes Access intersection with Lake Washington Boulevard. Installation of a new traffic signal at the Main Project Access/Barbee Mill/Conner Homes Access intersection with Lake Washington Boulevard, or at the intersection of Ripley Lane with Lake Washington Boulevard, as determined by the City. A westbound left-turn lane at the Hawks Landing Access/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection. Traffic calming on Lake Washington Boulevard south of N. 41st Street to encourage primary trips to use 1-405 corridor. Implementation of programs that reduce auto travel to/from the site, including access to future transit on 1-405 or Lake Washington Boulevard. Construct pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the site. Note: Improvements listed are based on full build-out, initial phased development will not require all improvements. SOILS AND DRAINAGE CONDITIONS Soils Site soils consist of highly heterogeneous shallow alluvial and lacustrine silts, sands and peat underlain by a coarser sand-gravel alluvium. The shallow alluvial deposits are overlain by years of fill deposits. 0 Century Pacific, LP Quendall Terminals Project Narrative - December 2015 4 Drainage Conditions Stormwater runoff from the existing site either infiltrates or flows overland to Lake Washington with no known flooding problems. Stormwater runoff from the proposed development will be collected and conveyed via a piped stormwater system to new outfalls at Lake Washington. Runoff from pollution- generating surfaces will be treated prior to discharge to the lake. SHORELINE The project site includes approximately 1,583 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. The existing shoreline varies from gently sloping wetlands to steep (iH:iV) banks. Various docks and structures are located along the bank and in the water along the shore. The shoreline includes a ioo-foot average width riparian buffer upland from the ordinary high water mark. A shoreline restoration plan is being designed and approved under EPA direction. The following work is anticipated within 200 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline: Activities related to shoreline restoration, contaminant remediation and mitigation, including capping of the site, and construction of mixed-use buildings, roads, utilities, retaining walls, hardscape/landscape areas. VIEW CORRIDORS The site is currently vacant, so construction of the proposed development will create potential partial obstructions from certain vantage points around the site. The design of the project will maintain view corridors between the proposed buildings. TREE RETENTION The Quendall Terminals site will undergo environmental remediation and mitigation for on-site contaminated soils after Master Site Plan submittal and prior to final design and construction of the development included in this proposal. The site remediation is under the direction of the EPA and will include significant removal of on-site trees and placement of fill. The assumed existing conditions for Master Site Plan design are the post remediation and mitigation conditions. CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION DESCRIPTION Construction is anticipated to commence following EPA approval of a site cleanup action plan. Full project buildout is expected two years following the commencement of site remediation and mitigation construction. The following construction mitigation measures are anticipated: No special hours of construction activity are anticipated outside what is allowed under the current City of Renton Municipal Code. Century Pacific, LP Quendall Terminals Project Narrative - December 2015 5 A proposed haul route plan will be developed prior to construction. ATemporary Erosion Sedimentation Control Plan will be developed prior to construction to minimize erosion. A traffic control plan will be developed prior to construction to address traffic and transportation impacts. CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE Estimated Fill: A fill cap is anticipated to be placed over the site as part of EPA site remediation and mitigation. The combined volume of the fill cap and additional fill required to achieve building grades is estimated to be approximately So,000 to ioo,000 cubic yards. Actual volumes will be determined by the final EPA site remediation plan and final site design. Estimated Costs: Total estimated construction cost and estimated fair market value: Construction is estimated to total $390 million Project Fair Market Value is $390 million 0 S Century Pacific, LP Quendall Terminals Project Narrative - December 2015 6 DENSITY WORKSHEET City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 Gross area of property: 1. 925,376 square feet (21 .24Ac) Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. These include: Public streets** (Streets A,B & C) 161,243 square feet (3.7OAc) Private access easements** (D,& E) 28,165 square feet (0.65Ac) Critical Areas* square feet Total excluded area: 2. 189,408 square feet (4.35Ac) S 3. Subtract line 2 from line I for net area: 3. 735,968 square feet Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage 4. 16.90 acres Number of dwelling units or lots planned: 5. 692 units/lots Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density: 6. 40.9 = dwelling units/acre *Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be not suitable for development and which are subject to the City's Critical Areas Regulations including very high landslide areas, protected slopes, wetlands or floodways." Critical areas buffers are not deducted/excluded. S ** Alleys (public or private) do not have to be excluded. I 2/2015 E City of Renton TREE RETENTION WO KSHEET Total number of trees over 6" in diameter1 on project site: 1. 463* trees Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dead, diseased or dangerous2 trees Trees in proposed public streets trees Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts trees Trees in critical areas3 and buffers trees Total number of excluded trees: 2. trees Subtract line 2 from line 1: 3. trees Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained4, multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones RC, R-1, R-4, or R-8 0.1 in all other residential zones 0.05 in all commercial and industrial zones 4. trees List the number of 6" or larger trees that you are proposing5 to retain4 : 5. trees Subtract line 5 from line 4 for trees to be replaced: 6. trees (If line 6 is less than zero, stop here. No replacement trees are required). Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 7. inches Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: (Minimum 2" caliper trees required) 8. inches per tree Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees6: (if remainder is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) 9. trees Measured at chest height. "Note: The Quendall Terminals site will undergo environmental remediation and mitigation after Master Site Plan submittal and prior to final design and construction. The remediation/mitigation work is under the direction of EPA and will include significant removal of on-site trees and placement of fill. The assumed existing conditions for Master Site Plan design are the post remediation/ mitigation conditions. Therefore this tree retention worksheet is not applicable to the project. X:\1 09000-1 09250\l 09118 (Quendall Terminals)\PROJECT DOCUMENTS\Cily of Renton\Submittal Documents\TrceRetcntion\Vorksheet.doc 12108 Quendall Terminals PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST City of Renton Planning DMsion 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 A. BACKGROUND Name of proposed project, if applicable: Quendall Terminals Name of applicant: Campbell Mathewson Executive Vice President Century Pacific, L.P. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Campbell Mathewson Executive Vice President . Century Pacific, L.P 1201 Third Ave, Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 757-8893 cmathewson@centurypacificip.com Date checklist prepared: November2009 Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton, Washington Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): SEPA I Master Plan Approval / Shorelines EPA Timeline - Feasibility Study Site Remediation and Cap Biiflding & Infrastructure Construction November 2009 - February 2010 Early 2011 2011 following EPA selected site remediation 2 years following site remediation Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No plans for future additions or expansion are anticipated with this proposal. Development activity is expected to include remediation/mitigation of site contaminants along with final design, permitting, and construction of the proposed Master Plan. C:\NrPortbRCREAXMATHS\6558-1.IDOC -1- 02/08 Quendall Terminals List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A Wetland Assessment, Standard Lake Study, Habitat Data Report, and Conceptual Restoration Plan have been prepared for the Quendall Terminals property. These have been prepared in accordance with City criteria (RMC Section 4-3-050) to support the development proposed and evaluated in this SEPA checklist. Prior to selection of a remediation remedy by EPA, the Quendall Terminals owners (Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Company) will submit a Remedial Investigation (RI) Report and a Feasibility Study (ES) Report to the EPA. The RI Report will summarize the results of environmental investigations on the property and is anticipated to be submitted to the EPA in summer 2010. The FS Report is anticipated to be submitted to EPA in early 2011, after which, EPA will select a preferred remedy. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the lead agency for all remediation, site remediation and mitigation actions which are to be performed at the Quendall Terminals site under Superfund. The remediation actions selected by EPA will comply with substantive elements of SEPA and other applicable, relevant and appropriate environmental reviews and permitting requirements, though the remediation actions are exempt from procedural requirements of SEPA. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City of Renton Land Use approvals and permits: Master Plan Approval Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Critical Areas Review Environmental Review (SEPA) Binding Site Plan Review Remaining site remediation and mitigation will be performed under Consent Decrees between EPA and the Quendall Terminals ownership as part of the initial work on the property. As a result, certain state and local permits are preempted although substantive requirements of those statutes and regulations will be satisfied by the remediation and mitigation approval. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. Proposed Uses A mixed use development with the following: 800 residential units 245,000 SF office 21,600 SF retail 9,000 SF restaurant Size of the Site C:\NrPortb!CREA\MATHS6558_1 .DOC -2 - 02/08 Quendall Terminals The project site is approximately 21.46 acres (934,874 square feet) in size. This includes the main parcel and an isolated parcel (50,052 Square feet) east of Ripley Lane that will be improved as a mitigation site. Parking 2,171 cars in structures and on grade 12. LocatIon of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address; if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, If reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Location The property is located at 4350 Lake Washington Boulevard in the northern portion of Renton, Washington. It is located within the Southwest 1/4 of Section 29, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, King County. The main site occupies approximately 20.3 acres adjacent to Lake Washington and has approximately 1,583 feet of shoreline. The site is located 3.5 miles south- southwest of the junction of Interstate Highways 405 and 90. The legal description is provided below. Site Plan, Vicinity Map, and Topographic Map 40 Please refer to the attached site plan, vicinity map, and topographic survey for additional detail. Access Interstate 405 provides regional vehicle access to the site via the 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard interchange. Direct site access is provided by Lake Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane, both located to the east of the site. Legal Description THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 5 IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., AND SHORELAND ADJOINING LYING WESTERLY OF THE NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SOUTHERLY OF A LINE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE QUARTER CORNER ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE NORTH 89058136" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5, 1,113.01 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY; THENCE NORTH 29°4454" EAST 849.62 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT A; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 29044'54" EAST 200.01 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE LINE HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE SOUTH 56028'50" WEST 222.32 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS NORTH 59024'56" WEST 100.01 FEET FROM SAID POINT A; THENCE NORTH 59024'56" WEST TO THE INNER HARBOR LINE AND THE END OF SAID LINE DESCRIPTION; . ALSO THAT PORTION OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 5 LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, WESTERLY OF SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 2A AND NORTHWESTERLY OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF PUBLIC STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER I C:\NrPortbRCREAXMATHS\6558—I.DOC -3- 02/08 Quendall Terminals AS ESTABLISHED BY DEED RECORDED JANUARY 15, 1964 UNDER RECORDING NO. 5687408; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO CITY OF RENTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 19, 2008 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20080619001179. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. The site is located on the shore of Lake Washington and is generally flat What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) Site slopes are generally 0-5% with localized slopes up to 2H:IV at debris piles and up to I H:IV at the bank of the lake. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Site soils consist of highly heterogeneous shallow alluvial and lacustrine silts, sands and peat underlain by a coarser sand-gravel alluvium. The shallow alluvial deposits are overlain by years of fill deposits. 0 Refer to the geotechnical study submitted with this Environmental Checklist for additional detail. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Surface and near surface conditions are especially variable across the site. Soils from the surface to a depth of 25 feet contain Fill and Shallow Alluvium soils which are relatively weak with variable compressibihty, permeability and contain a low bearing capacity. Refer to the geotechnical study submitted with this Environmental Checklist for additional detail. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Filling and grading will proceed pursuant to the Consent Decrees and Cleanup Action Plan as subject to review and approval by the EPA. Filling will also be required to achieve proposed site grades. It is assumed that fill will be imported. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. 0 C:\NrPortbl\CREA\MATHS\6558-l.DOC -4- 02/08 Quendall Terminals The relatively flat grade of the site will minimize the potential for erosion as a result of site construction. The near-surface soils are considered to have moderate to high moisture S sensitivity if disturbed by construction activity. Soils with high moisture sensitivity tend to degrade easily upon exposure to weather. While these soils have the potential for erosion during wet weather conditions, mftigation will be accomplished with the use of appropriate best management practices (BMPs). About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 75% of the site is considered impervious surface which includes buildings, roads and sidewalks. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Approved best management practices (BMPs) shall be specified and used during construction to minimize soil erosion and environmental impacts as a result of development activity. 2. AIR What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Construction activities may generate dust Construction equipment and hauling vehicles will create emissions from internal combustion engines. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are no known off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect this proposal. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Dust suppression techniques, including water sprinkling, will be used during construction as necessary. Stockpiles will be covered to the extent practicable to minimize construction-related dust. Emissions impacts during construction will be minimized through efficient use of equipment and minimizing equipment idling. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (Including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The project site includes approximately 1,583 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. Will the project require any work over, In, or adjacent to (wIthIn 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The following work is anticipated within 200 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline: C:\NrPo,-tbl\CREA\MAThS\6558_1 .DOC • 5- 02/08 Quendall Terminals ActMties related to shoreline restoration, contaminant rernediation and mitigation, including capping of the site. 0 Construction of mixed-use buildings, roads, retaining walls, hardscapellandscape areas. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be' placed In or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Earthwork impacts to surface waters and wetiands will be determined through the EPA directed site remediation effort that precedes development. No additional filling is proposed by the Master Plan. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The proposal will not require surface water withdrawals or diversions. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. The proposal does not lie within a 100-year flood plain. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. The proposal does not involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters. b. Ground Water: Will ground water be. withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The project does not propose groundwater withdrawal or discharge. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste materials as identified above are anticipated. C. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters, If so, describe. Stormwater runoff will be collected from impervious surfaces and will be conveyed to Lake Washington through a piped storm drainage system. Pollution-generating impervious surfaces will be treated prior to discharge to Lake Washington in accordance with City of Renton and Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDOE) storrnwater regulations. Best management practices will be used in accordance with WSDOE. 40 C:\NrPorthFCREAW1ATH8\6558_1 .Doc -6- 02108 Quendall Terminals 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? if so, generally describe. Waste material is not anticipated to enter ground or surface waters. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Runoff from pollution-generating impervious surfaces will be treated prior to discharge to Lake Washington. Best management practices will be used to prevent erosion and sedimentation during construction and at project completion. Stormwater conveyance and treatment systems will be designed in accordance with City of Renton and WSDQE requirements. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _x_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other - evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other x shrubs _x_ grass - pasture - crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other _x_ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation Please refer to the Wetland Assessment, Standard Lake Study, Habitat Data Report. 0 b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Site vegetation planting and removal will be determined per the future EPA approved site remediation, mitigation and shoreline restoration plan. C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. No threatened or endangered species were observed or are known to occur on or near the project site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: As part of the development project, native and regional climate zoned ornamental plants will be installed as landscaping throughout the development. The intent is to create a landscape that is functional, aesthetically pleasing, diverse, and water efficient. Plant material will be selected for hardiness, size, texture and color. The development will be adjacent to a riparian buffer along Lake Washington that averages 100-feet in width. The buffer will be enhanced with native vegetation as a result of remediation-related impacts to existing wetlands through the EPA. Revegetation will focus on species diversity, species density allowing for varied light penetration, and the creation of different successive stages along the lake. Willow and water-tolerant shrub vegetation along the shoreline and in existing and restored wetland habitat would provide shade for aquatic species. Deciduous-dominated forests would include open areas S .where sunlight can penetrate to the forest floor. Coniferous-dominated forests would provide important habitat for upland species. The proposed development will not impact C:\NrPortb1CRA\MATHS65581 .DOC -7- 02108 Quendall Terminals any of the areas of enhanced vegetation within the 100-foot average width riparian buffer along Lake Washington. Please refer to the Wetland Assessment, Standard Lake Study, Habitat Data Report and Conceptual Restoration Plan prepared by Anchor QEA. ANIMALS Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other____________________ Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other______________ Please refer to the Wetland Assessment, Standard Lake Study, Habitat Data Report and Conceptual Restoration Plan prepared by Anchor QEA. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), steelhead (0. mykiss), and bull trout (Sa!ve!inus conhluentus) use Lake Washington as part of their migration corridor. C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain Yes, it lies within the Pacific flyway. Also, anadromous salmonids, steelhead, and bull trout migrate through Lake Washington. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Measures to improve and restore wildlife habitat will be conducted as part of remediation activities prior to development of the property. The ripariari buffer and the creation/restoration of existing wetland habitat will provide detritus inputs, insect drop, and woody debris inputs for aquatic species to support prey resources and provide cover for juvenile salmon. In addition, woody debris and substrate enhancement of the shoreline would support these aquatic ecological functions in the short term. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity is anticipated to be used for heating, cooling, lighting, and other energy demands. Natural gas is anticipated to be used primarily for heating and cooking. Oil and woodstoves are not anticipated to be energy sources for the site. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. The project will not affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties. C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the' plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: C:\NrPortbl\CREA\MATHS\65581 .DOC -8 - 02/08 Quendall Terminals Specific conservation measures have not been identified at this time but are anticipated to be included on a limited basis as building programming is developed. 0 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. The site is contaminated with hazardous substances as a result of past industrial uses. As part of this development, a site remediation/mitigation plan will be executed to prevent the exposure and spread of hazardous substances to humans and the surrounding environment Proposed measures to prevent environmental health hazards include minimal disturbance to contaminated soils and capping of the site. Describe special emergency services that might be required. Emergency services will be provided by the City of Renton. No special emergency services are anticipated. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: As part of this development, a site remediation/mitigation plan will be executed to prevent the exposure and spread of hazardous substances to humans and the surrounding environment. Proposed measures to prevent environmental health hazards include minimal disturbance to contaminated soils and capping of the site. b. Noise What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? There are no known noises in the area that may affect the project. Traffic noise from Interstate 405, which is located approximately 500 feet east of the site's east boundary, is not expected to adversely affect the project. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short-Term Construction equipment and activity, will generate noise during daylight hours. During initial construction, noise will be generated outside. Once the buildings are enclosed, construction noise will be contained within the buildings. Normal construction noise is not anticipated to have a significant impact to adjacent uses. Impact-type noises and other high-noise activities will be limited and will occur during restricted hours to minimize impact to adjacent uses. Hours of construction operation are anticipated to be 7:00 AM- 5:00 PM, Monday-Friday. Adjoining property owners will be notified in advance of any weekend work that may take place. Long-Term . Low-speed vehicle traffic noise is anticipated in the long-term and is not anticipated to adversely impact adjacent uses. C:\NrPortblCREA\MATHS\65581Doc -9- 02108 Quendall Terminals 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any; Exterior construction hours are anticipated to be 7:00 AM-5:00 PM, Monday-Friday. Adjoining property owners will be notified in advance of any weekend work that may take place. Impact-type noises and other high-noise activities will be limited and will occur during restricted hours to minimize impact to adjacent uses. Contact with adjacent neighbors who may be adversely impacted will be made and information provided when loud noises, if any,. will occur. LAND AND SHORELINE USE What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently vacant. Adjacent uses: Seahawks Training Facility, a football training facility, to the north Barbee Mill, a residential development, 'to the south Pan Abode, an existing cedar home manufacturing facility, to the southeast. Future planning includes a hotel Lake Washington Blvd, Ripley Lane, and Interstate 405 are to the east Lake Washington is located to the west Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The site has not been used for agriculture. C. Describe any structures on the site. A wooden platform with metal stairs, a shack, a one-story brick building of approximately 835 square feet, and a sewer pump station are located at the east edge of the project site. Various small docks, structures, and pilings are lbcated at the west edge of the project site along Lake Washington. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No, site is vacant, with exception of the sewer pump station which is to remain. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site is zoned (COR) Commercial/Office/Residential per the City of Renton. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The site currently has the designation COR-Commercial-Office-Residential. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? The current shoreline master program designation of the site is "urban." Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? if so, specify. C:\NrPortbl\CREA\MATHS\6558_1 .DOC - 10- 02108 Quendall Terminals Areas on the site are currently identified as Critical Areas by the City of Renton, based on the proximity to Lake Washington and the presence of wetlands. However, existing S wetlands will be impacted as part of remediation activities that will be conducted as part of a separate project prior to development. The riparian buffer and wetlands along the Lake Washington shoreline will be enhanced and restored as part of remediation-related activities. Following remediation activities, no environmentally sensitive or Critical Areas will be present within the development area, but the riparian buffer along Lake Washington would qualify as an environmentally sensitive area that contains wetlands and shoreline buffers. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The office space will most likely accommodate up to about 1,000 workers. The retail and restaurants would have 40 to 50 employees, and the apartments are estimated to have 1,200 to 1,300 residents. This would be with 100% occupancy which is rarely achieved, so the totals may be up to 10% less than noted with normal vacancy rates. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The completed project will not displace people since the site is currently vacant K. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable—see response to line j, above. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any Landscape buffers and potential fencing will be used to provide a visual separation and buffer between the project and adjacent sites. 9. HOUSING Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Approximately 800 middle- to high-income units will be provided. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No units will be eliminated, as the site is currently vacant. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable—see response to line c, above. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what Is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. C:NrPortbICREA\MATh5\6558_1 .DOC -11 - 02/08 Quendall Terminals We expect the tallest building to be 5 stories over 2 floors of parking. Assuming there is some roof modulation, we would estimate the tallest building would be approximately 85 to 90 ft from grade to top of roof or parapet. The parking structures will be concrete with some structure exposed, some painted and with some walls or structure clad with brick or other masonry. The office building will be concrete and glass in the upper floors and concrete, brick or other masonry around the base and retail shops. The residential portions will have a combination of brick or other masonry, stucco, architectural factory finished metal panels with aluminum framed windows and metal railings at outdoor decks and balconies. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The site is currently vacant so construction of the proposed development will create potential partial obstructions from certain vantage points around the site such as surface streets and 1-405 to the east, adjacent residential development to the south and the Seahawks facility to the north. The design of the project will maintain view corridors between the proposed buildings. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The proposed buildings will not be taller than allowed per the zoning requirements; this will minimize potential for any view obstructions. The buildings will have a variety of materials and textures and modulation of wall surfaces or other grills, screens or trellises that will add visual interest. Roof lines will be varied for modulation and interest as well. Plaza or courtyard areas over the residential garages will feature landscape planters and payers for color, texture and pattern. There may be small water features incorporated in the final landscaped courtyard designs. The shoreline zone will be landscaped during the site remediation process. Other streetscape landscaping, sidewalks, perimeter landscaping and street trees will be designed to enhance the building designs, provide a pleasant sidewalk experience and buffer between the Quend2ll development and the adjacent properties. 11. LIGHTAND GLARE What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Sources of light and glare will include interior lights shining through windows, street lights along roads, outdoor pedestrian lights along sidewalks/hardscape areas, and lighted signage at retail/restaurant areas. Light and glare from these sources will occur from sundown until sunrise and are not expected to be significant Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light or glare from the completed project is not expected to be a safety hazard or interfere with views. c;\wrportbcREA\MAms\6558.j.Doc - 12 - 02108 Quendall Terminals C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? S There are no known existing off-site sources of light or glare that may affect the proposal. The Seahawks Training Facility located to the north of the project site does not have permanent field lighting. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. 12. RECREATION What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Lake Washington borders the west side of the project site and provides informal recreational opportunities such as boating, swimming, fishing, and other lake-related recreational activities. Other potential recreation opportunities have not been identified at this time and will be addressed with the future EPA site remediation I mitigation action plan. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The proposed project will not displace any existing recreational uses. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control Impacts on recreation, including S recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, If any: Not applicable—see response to line b, above. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. There are no known places or objects on or next to the site that are listed on or proposed for national, state, or local preservation registers. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. A Cultural Resource Assessment (Larson, 1997) was performed for the project site in 1997. This assessment did not identity any cultural resources eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The report concludes that the historic mouth of May Creek was likely located at the Port Quendall Log Yard and that a Duwamish site may have been located there. All portions of the Port Quendall Log Yard are identified as an area that may contain archeological deposits. Please refer to the Cultural Resource Assessment prepared by Larson Anthropological Archaeological Services (March, 1997). S c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Monitoring for archeological materials will be included iftwhere native site soils are disturbed. However, previous geotechnical explorations have indicated that the project C:\NrPortblkCREAkMATHS\6558—i.DOC -13- 02/08 Quendall Terminals site is overlain with fill, and the projecrs grading approach includes minimal disturbance to existing site soils due to the presence of hazardous substances. A fill cap will be added to the site as part of remediationlmitigation efforts, and buildings will use piling foundation systems. 14. TRANSPORTATION Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, If any. The site is principally served by the following three roads: Interstate 405 - Located approximately 500 feet east of the site. Lake Washington Blvd - Located at the southeast corner of the site. Ripley Lane - Located at the eastern edge of the site. Interstate 405 provides regional access to the project site via the Lake Washington Blvd I 40 Street interchange. Lake Washington Blvd provides access at the southeast corner of the site where it runs east to Interstate 405 or south to the City of Renton. At the southeast corner of the site, Ripley Lane runs north from Lake Washington Blvd and serves the east side of the site. Greater detail on all transportation and parking issues can be found in the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by The Transpb Group. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The site is not currently served by public transit. The nearest transit stop is located approximately 0.9 miles east-northeast at 116th Ave SE and SE 76th St (Metro Route 219). 40 C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The completed project would have parking for approximately 2,171 cars in structures and on grade. The project would not eliminate any parking. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? Yes. In addition to the improvements to the 1-405/NE 44th Street interchange identified as part of the planned WSDOT 1-405 Renton to Bellevue improvement project, several additional improvements are needed to mitigate project impacts. These include: A southbound left-turn lane, a dedicated westbound right-turn lane, and an eastbound left-turn lane would be needed at the Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Blvd intersection A northbound left-turn lane at the Main Project AccesslBarbee Mills/Conner Homes Access intersection with Lake Washington Blvd, and A westbound left-turn lane would be needed at the Hawks Landing Access/Lake Washington Blvd intersection. Note: Improvements listed are based on full build-out, initial phased development will not require all improvements. C:\NrPortbhCREA\MATHS\6568—l.DOC - 14- 02108 Quendati Term mats Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The project will not use water, rail, or air transportation. The project site is in the immediate vicinity of water transportation (Lake Washington borders the site to the west) and an existing BNSF railroad track which borders the site to the east and is no longer used for rail transport. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 8,570 net new off-site daily trips, with approximately 837 occurring during the AM peak hour (446 inbound trips and 391 outbound trips), and 905 occurring during the PM peak hour trips (410 inbound trips and 495 outbound trips). Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Consistent with the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by Transpo and attached to this submittal, traffic mitigation measures considered include additional turn lanes, channelization and traffic calming measures. In addition, a transportation management plan (TMP) for the site will be prepared. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. An increased need for public services is anticipated as a result of the project. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Coordination of the development plan and future phasing with public service personnel. Coordination and timing of future development will assist public services in determining when additional demand will be needed as result of development. 16. UTILITIES Circle or underline utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewor, septic system, other. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction actMties on the site or in the Immediate vicinity which might be needed. The following utilities are proposed for the project Water - City of Renton Sewer - City of Renton Electricity - Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas - Puget Sound Energy C:\NrPorthl\CREA\MAThS\65581.DOC - 15- S 02108 QuendaH Terminals Phone, DSL and Fiber-Optic Communications - Qwest SIGNATURE • I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Name Printed: Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific, L.P. Date: November 12, 2009 SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS Not Used S S C:\NrPortbRCREA\MATHS\6558—I.DOC - 16- 02108 Overlay Design District C Statement Compliance Statement The QuendailTerminals master site plan submittal and all supporting documents shall meet or exceed the minimum compliance requirements included in the Overlay Design District C. This includes the following: Site design and building location Building location, character, massing, rooflines and materials Transition to surrounding development Parking and vehicular access Location of surface and structured parking Pedestrian building entries Pedestrian circulation Landscaping Common space Signage Lighting As specific site development plans are prepared the applicant and design team will continue to coordinate the proposed design with the City of Renton to ensure compliance. Century Pacific, LP Quendall Terminals Project Narrative - December 2015 10 FA z -j >. LU -J 0. I 0 0 _i CO CO) (A EE 0 < w w w w Z5 (I) z I.-o0 LU ti O) - LC) QI -0 LU I EEEiZ 0<<a.22. - WWWW OjU. - :0 o o CL ° 8 Z , r EU Q_Q_ a. a. I-i-- I- I- 0 0 0 - 0 z z 2E 0 0 E LI.. 4 _J__J ___I J ww w w ______ °E A 0 E LL 4.4 00 / t i i' Jo Ii 7M 44-Io—IT Lu " co co rz C) (D -44 LI- C) - ' —c. in ___ ____ ___ _ __ _ JS Og) . V a OG)CDC O _ c 2 CizE U. 2 wI — 2 IC) - 0 - U) h-i--1 1_ X U) , --— z —I--- (/) > \U.z ci aa) U- '0 a a JIM a 0) 000 — __ LL_ 4 14 nLI cI_ 2 AINflO) 4VLIM IfI 0 - - .,-- - ) ' 1' %@i C : • • p Quendall Terminals Renton, Washington Drainage Report S November 2009 I Preliminary Report Consu/tnç £no,neeis Drainage Report November 2009 Prepared for: CenturyPacific, LP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101 Prepared by: Tom Jones Kris Koski, EIT KPFF Consulting Engineers 1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600 Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 622-5822 KPFF Job No. 109118.10 Property Owners: Altino Properties, Inc., and J.H. Baxter & Company V 40 24711 IST IONAL . I EXPIR2 9/14/10 ConturyPacific, LP Quendall Termin&s This page is intentionally left blank. fl CenturyPacific, LP Quendall Terminals Table of Contents Project Overview .1 ProjectLocation ..............................................................................................................................1 ProjectDescription .......................................................................................................................... 1 PredevelopedSite Conditions ........................................................................................................1 DevelopedSite Conditions .............................................................................................................2 Conditions and Requirements Summary......................................................................................3 Off-Site Analysis ............................................................................................................................4 UpstreamAnalysis...........................................................................................................................4 DownstreamAnalysis......................................................................................................................5 Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design.......................................................5 FlowControl.....................................................................................................................................5 WaterQuality...................................................................................................................................5 Conveyance System Analysis and Design ....................................................................................5 Special Reports and Studies.........................................................................................................6 . Other Permits................................................................................................................................6 ErosIon and Sedimentation Control (ESC) Analysis and Design ..................................................6 Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant...........................................7 Operations and Maintenance Manual..........................................................................................7 CenturyPacific, LP Quendall Terminals List of Tables 2-1 Conditions and Requirements Summary.......................................................................................3 Appendices Appendix A - Site and Project Information Figure 1A: Project Location Figure 2A: Existing Site Conditions Figure 3A: Proposed Site Conditions Figure 4A: NRCS Soils Map Figure 5A: FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Figure 6A: TIR Worksheet Appendix B - Calculations and Proposed Strom Drainage System Figure 113: Conceptual Storm Drainage Plan Figure 213: lsopluvial Maps (2-Year, 25-Year, 100-Year, and Annual Runoff) Figure 313: Conveyance Calculations Figure 413: Water Quality Calculations Figure 513: StormFilter Product Information S S CenturyPacific, LP iv Quendall Terminals 1. Project Overview This Technical Information Report (TIR) addresses the conceptual design of the storm drainage conveyance and water quality facilities for Quendall Terminals Master Site Plan entitlement. Site drainage will be conveyed to on-site water quality treatment facilities prior to discharge to Lake Washington. See Figure 6A (Appendix A) for the hR Worksheet. PROJECT LOCATION The Quendall Terminals project is located at 4350 Lake Washington Boulevard North within the City of Renton in King County, Washington. The project is located west of Ripley Lane North and northwest of the intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard North and Ripley Lane North. The project is located in a portion of Section 29, Township 24 N, Range 5 E, W.M. See Figure 1A in Appendix A for the project location. An additional parcel located east of the main project site across Ripley Lane North is included in project planning considerations but is not part of this drainage report. No improvements are planned for this additional parcel. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Quendall Terminals is a proposed mixed-use development including five stories of residential or office space above two levels of above-grade parking or retail and restaurant space. The development project anticipates entitlement of the following: Residential 800 Units Office 245,000 Square Feet Retail 21,600 Square Feet Restaurant 9,000 Square Feet Parking 2,215 Spaces PREDEVELOPED SITE CONDITIONS The existing site is vacant and is under the direction of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The site is partially vegetated with areas of grass, shrubs, brush, and trees where the site has been undisturbed for an extended amount of time. Other areas used more recently contain bare soil and debris from log yard operations. Debris piles from log yard operations are located on the site. The site is contaminated with hazardous substances as a result of past industrial uses, including a creosote processing facility. CenturyPaclflc, LP Quendall Terminals I The main site is approximately 20.3 acres in size with approximately 1,583 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. Site slopes are generally 0 to 5 percent with localized slopes up to 2H:1V at debris piles and up to 1H:1V at the bank of the lake. The site slopes gradually from east to west. Wetlands are located along and near the lakeshore on the west side of the site. There are approximately 34,959 square feet of existing wetlands on the site. The parcel east of the main project site and Ripley Lane North is approximately 1.2 acres in size and is not part of this drainage report. No improvements are planned for the east parcel. Manmade stormwater conveyance, water quality, and detention facilities on the site consist of swales and berms constructed in accordance with the Quendall Terminals Interim Stormwater Management Plan (Aspect, October 2008) in conjunction with a previously existing small sediment pond (approximately 1,722 square feet including rock check dams). The purpose of the Interim Stormwater Management Plan is to control site runoff and erosion prior to future environmental mitigation. Surface runoff currently infiltrates or is conveyed to Lake Washington via surface flow or swales. There are no creeks or streams located on the site. See Figure 2A in Appendix A for existing conditions. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soils Map indicates that the site is underlain with S Norma sandy loam and Bellingharn silty loam. See Figure 4A in Appendix A. The site does not lie within a 100-year floodplain per Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) Flood insurance Rate Map. See Figure 5A in Appendix A. DEVELOPED SITE CONDITIONS The proposed site improvements include a mixed-use development consisting of residential, office, retail, restaurant, and parking spaces. Proposed site slopes are anticipated to be 3:1 (horizontal:vertical) or less. Piped storm drainage systems will collect and convey surface runoff from pollution-generating surfaces to water quality treatment facilities then to outfalls at Lake Washington. Treated stormwater will discharge to Lake Washington during normal flows. During high flows that exceed the capacity of the water quality treatment facilities, stormwater will bypass the water quality facilities, discharging directly to the lake. To the greatest extent possible, roof drainage will be conveyed directly to Lake Washington, bypassing water quality treatment facilities, via dedicated storm drainage systems for non-pollution-generating surfaces. Surface water collection, conveyance, and treatment will be maintained separately from any groundwater activity. Prior to this development, a site remediation/mitigation plan will be executed under the direction of the EPA to prevent the exposure and spread of hazardous substances to humans and the surrounding environment. Proposed measures to prevent environmental health hazards include minimal disturbance to contaminated soils and capping of the site. 10 CenturyPacific, LP 2 Quendall Terminals S S :.:: T. -•- I ( YX - ! 2. Conditions and Requirements Summary This report supports City of Renton entitlement processing for Master Site Plan Approval. This report is intended to be amended in conjunction with future construction documents. Future report amendments will be in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). The 2009 KCSWDM outlines eight core requirements and five special requirements that must be addressed. A summary of the requirements is shown in Table 2-1. The table shows which requirements are applicable to this project and where requirements are addressed within this report. Table 2-1: CondItions and Requirements Summary Core Requirement No. 1 Discharge at the Natural Location Required 2 Core Requirement No. 2 Off-Site Analysis Required 3 Core Requirement No. 3 Flow Control Exempt 4 Core Requirement No. 4 Conveyance System Required 5 Core Requirement No. 5 Erosion and Sediment Control Required 8 Core Requirement No. 6 Maintenance and Operations N/A 10 Core Requirement No. 7 Financial Guarantees and Liability N/A 9 Core Requirement No. 8 Water Quality Required 4 Special Requirement No. 1 Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements N/A 2 Special Requirement No. 2 Flood Hazard Area Delineation N/A 2 Special Requirement No. 3 Flood Protection Facilities N/A 2 Special Requirement No. 4 Source Control Required 2 Special Requirement No. 5 Oil Control N/A 2 CenturyPacific, LP Quendall Terminals 3 Core and Special Requirements not addressed below are discussed in other sections of this report. Table 2-1 provides a summary of the requirements and where they are addressed within this report. Core Requirement No. 1: DIscharge at the Natural Location Stormwater runoff from the existing site either infiltrates or is conveyed to Lake Washington via surface flow or swales. Stormwater runoff from the proposed improvements will be collected and conveyed by a piped stormwater system to new outfalls at Lake Washington. Runoff from the existing and proposed sites both discharge to Lake Washington. See the 'Existing Site Conditions" and "Proposed Site Conditions" exhibits in Figures 2A and 3A, Appendix A. Special Requirement No. 1: Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements Does not apply. The proposed project is not in a Critical Drainage Area or in an area included in an adopted master drainage plan, basin plan, salmon conservation plan, stormwater compliance plan, flood hazard reduction plan, lake management plan, or shared facility drainage plan. Special Requirement No. 2: Flood Hazard Area Delineation Does not apply. The proposed project does not contain and is not adjacent to a flood hazard area. Special Requirement No. 3: Flood Protection Facilities Does not apply. The proposed project does not rely on existing flood protection facilities or construct a new flood protection facility. Special Requirement No. 4: Source Control The proposed project will require a commercial building and commercial site development permit; therefore, water quality source controls will be implemented in accordance with the King County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Manual. Special Requirement No. 5: OIl Control Does not apply. None of the proposed land uses generate average daily traffic of 100 or more vehicles per 1,000 square feet of gross building area. 3. Off-Site Analysis A Level 1 qualitative off-site analysis is required per Core Requirement No. 2. The off-site analysis assesses potential off-site drainage and water quality impacts associated with development of the project site, and proposes appropriate mitigation of the impacts, if necessary. UPSTREAM ANALYSIS S There is no upstream tributary area contributing to site stormwater runoff. CenturyPacific, LP 4 Quendall Terminals cy . .. . ..' . ... 1' DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS Runoff from the proposed site will be collected and conveyed via a piped storm drainage system and discharge to Lake Washington. The water level in Lake Washington is maintained at the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks. Outfalls at the lake will require armoring to prevent erosion. 4. Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design FLOW CONTROL The project is exempt from flow control requirements by the "direct discharge exemption" as defined in Section 1.2.3.1 of the 2009 KCSWDM. The project will feature a piped conveyance system of adequate capacity that discharges directly to Lake Washington. WATER QUALITY Runoff from pollution-generating surfaces will be collected and conveyed to water quality treatment facilities for treatment prior to discharge to Lake Washington. A water quality design flow of 60 percent of the developed 2-year peak flow rate will be used in accordance with the 2009 KCSWDM. The water quality treatment facilities will discharge to Lake Washington. Flows greater than the water quality design flow rate will bypass the water quality facilities and discharge directly to Lake Washington. See Figure 4B for water quality calculations, Figure lB for the water quality facility layout, and Figure 5B for StormFilter product information, Appendix B. 5. Conveyance System Analysis and Design The proposed conveyance system will be designed to convey and contain (at minimum) the 25-year peak flow, assuming developed conditions for on-site tributary areas. Potential overflow from a 100- year runoff event is not anticipated to create or aggravate a severe flooding problem or severe erosion problem. There is no upstream tributary area draining to the site or the proposed storm drainage is system. Outfalls at the discharge points of the stormwater systems will be designed to prevent erosion. CenturyPacific, LP Quendall Terminals 5 The conveyance system design is based on the following assumptions: The peak flows used to design the conveyance system were calculated using the Rational Method. Runoff coefficients ('C" values) for the Rational Method are based on Table 3.2.1.A in the KCSWDM: C=0.90 for impervious surfaces, roofs, and paving. C=0.25 for pervious surfaces and lawns. The minimum time of concentration is assumed to be 6.3 minutes. U Drainage areas are based on the current site plan and grading plan. U Manning's roughness coefficients are based on Table 4.2.1.D in the KCSWDM for PVC pipe. A coefficient of 0.013 is used in the uniform flow analysis. A hydrologic analysis is performed for the 25-year storm event. A precipitation amount of 3.43 inches was used based on Figure 3.1.2.0 of the KCSWDM. Twenty-five-year uniform flow calculations were performed in order to calculate design flows and to choose preliminary pipe sizes. • The minimum full flow pipe velocity is 3 feet per second, per KCSWDM Figure 4.2.1.17. This report will be amended in conjunction with future construction documents to include backwater calculations for final storm drain design. 6. Special Reports and Studies The following reports have been prepared as part of the Quendall Terminal's Master Site Plan: U Geotechnical Study, Aspect Consulting, LLC Wetland Assessment, Standard Lake Study, Habitat Data Report, and Conceptual Restoration Plan, Anchor QEA, LLC (one document) 7. Other Permits This report supports City of Renton entitlement processing for Master Site Plan Approval, which includes the following permits: Master Site Plan U Land Use Shoreline Substantial Development CenturyPacific, LP 6 Quendall Terminals ' riL Ri ,. 1?'T Prior to this development, a site remediation/mitigation plan will be executed under the direction of the EPA. 8. Erosion and Sedimentation Control (ESC) Analysis and Design A temporary sediment and erosion control plan designed by a professional civil engineer will be included with the project's construction documents (to be produced in the future) conforming to the requirements of the 2009 KCSWDM. 9. Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant Bond quantities and facility summaries are not required for Master Site Plan Approval. These items will be provided with the project's future construction documents. 10. Operations and Maintenance Manual An operations and maintenance manual is not required for Master Site Plan Approval. This item will be provided with the final project design. S CenturyPacitic, LP Quendall Terminals 7 ¶ 1. This page is intentionally left blank. CenturyPacific, LP 8 Quendall Termina's S '• ____ :t;L -; Appendix A Site and Project Information Figure 1A: Project Location Figure 2A: Existing Site Conditions Figure 3A: Proposed Site Conditions S Figure 4A: NRCS Soils Map Figure 5A: FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Figure 6A: TIR Worksheet S CenturyPacific, LP Quendall Terminals Appendix A KPFF Consulting Engineers 11/2009 [] I TION VICINITY MAP NTS Quendall Terminals Storm Drainage Report Figure 1A: Project Location I VAVM - 9W 9W G 2. 0 = . . •.H . . 1 ,. . . , [ T f J QUAD - Q BYPAS NW QD - WQ BY ASS - I f L - - . -- SDjJI( I - PGIS SD LINE Ø - PGIS - , ,). - 1 S LINPO - .J.!lII1IIiIIIIIIiI(IIi \ SE QUAD WQBY E PjPGIS= ASSUMPTIONS STREETS: 90% IMPERVIOUS . . . .... . LAKE SHORE AREA .: DY IMPERVIOUS \\ ( k / - ,-.. •, I 9]-- - I-U-I4-SSSS :-1100 LAND USE, SHORELINE & MASTER PLAN PERMIT APPLICAI1ON FIG 3. _________________________________ () (p4) DRAINAGE REPORT - PROPOSED CONDFTIONS E Tn WTI d/ , ,1 / / SJTE 1/ / •1/1' LOP 8 / / A Figure 4A: NRCS Soils Map fl 0 00 200 2)0 'JO COnO)00020000r000 N2)Ofl2)CO'JpOr20S2)Sr02y 90 E .02 0. 0 a) 0 CO 0 U) >_ 2 I ca - D (0(0 > 0 CD U) 0 0 20 0) 5 —J •- (11 0 J 75 a. 0 0. 0. a) U) -c U) a) W (a ( a) 0 2 a) 2 a) C. C (a - a) U) 0 > 0 ) 2 OW 0. 0. -= a 75 o 0 <0 co o () 2 > > - U.c CO 0 a) = Cc> >' 2 Cc) 0 0 < 2 - o2 > o2.2 22 a)..02 0.) . c2 rL o 2< U) -m m 0000 ..j 4 0. 0. U) (0(1)0) U) U) U) U) 2 0. > ©<©® > -::IIIo mc 21 - U) Cl) 0 Cl) Ui 0 Ui —j 0 S z 0 I- 0 U- z 0. d o 16 0) 0) C o E a) a) (a z 33.U) . . _(a 0 0) - (.) Q)V 0 Q. C . 0) o3 F— E x - (00 - a) 0 E O- --°j• ca a) <. ) C>' o 0 a) 0.N Ec CU) 0 -. E>a a) a)E - V a)Ca) '-.0 ,27 —(a (a co (0 N- .0 Zr- a) ) 0 >2 ca .E C0D 0 0) a) C >' >>S '-0 a; . - E 2 OC V 0 (0 I! a) 0.(0 U) (OW . . CO - coca a)a) 0 oo ( E° - — - I— E (1)0) 0 0 Soil Map—King County Area, Washington Quendall Terminals S Map Unit Legend King County Area, Washington (WA633) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOl Percent of AOl Bh Bellingham silt loam 5.3 22.7% No Norma sandy loam 18.2 77.3% Totals for Area of Interest 23.6 100.0% S Figure 4A: NRCS Soils Mai USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/1/2009 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 I I I N V 0 co Jo .oø. Co N < N zo z L() w >< urn ui LU o<<- I I I C C S 0 Z I - WLLJWW — — DON E ç rc. W -I-I- 0000 z — 99 - . iii d EJU J1 gzf LL U)U) (I) U) a i 1 R - o Op -4. ? 0 - <u_ .— uj — c_ p CY 0 00 ,02 m I il () 40 co I / 0 ' 01 g U- a - .- — 0 — — !--° iIJ1II7TT I 0 W U. U- KPFF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL 11/2009 TECHN!CAL JNFORMATON REPORT (TI R) VVORKSHEET S Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Project Owner Century Pacific, L.P. Phone (206) 757-8899 Address 1201 Third Ave, Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101 Project Engineer Tom Jones Company KPFF Consulting Engineers Phone (206) 622-5822 Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION U Landuse Services Subdivisori / Short Subd. I UPD U Building Services M/F / Commerical / SFR U Clearing and Grading U Right-of-Way Use Other Master Site Plan Entitlement Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Name Quendall Terminals DDES Permit # N/A Location Township T29N Range R5E Section SW29 Site Address 4350 Lake Washington Blvd Renton, WA 98056 Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS U DFW HPA 0 Shoreline U COE 404 Management U DOE Dam Safety U Structural U RockeryNaultl FEMA Floodplain U ESA Section 7 U COE Wetlands Other EPA Superfund Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION Technical Information Report Site Improvement Plan (Engr. Plans) Type of Drainage ReviewFull / Targeted / Type (circle one): Full / Modified / (circle): rge Site mall Site Date (include revision November, 2009 Date (include revision November, 2009 dates): dates): Date of Final: - Date of Final: Part 6 ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS Type (circle one): E~i~ Complex / Preapplication I Experimental I Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) Date of Approval: S Quendall Terminals Storm Drainage Report Figure 6A: TIR Worksheet KPFF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL 11/2009 TECH NCAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monitoring Required: No Start Date: N/A for Master Site Plan Completion Date: N/A Describe: N/A Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Plan Special District Overlays: Overlay Design District C Drainage Basin: Lake Washington Stormwater Requirements: 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual Part 9 ONS lIE AND ADJACENT SENSITIVE AREAS Ll River/Stream Lake Lake Washington Wetlands Ll Closed Depression D Floodplain U Other Part 10 SOILS Soil Type Bellingham Silt Loam Norma Sandy Loam High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet) U Other U Additional Sheets Attached Slopes 0-5% typical 0-5% tyicaI Quendall Terminals Storm Drainage Report Figure 6A: TIR Worksheet KPFF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL 11/2009 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS REFERENCE U Core 2 - Offsfte Analysis U Sensitive/Critical Areas U SEPA U Other U U Additional Sheets Attached LIMITATION I SITE CONSTRAINT Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET (provide one TIR Summary Sheet per Threshold Discharge Area) Threshold Discharge Area: Entire site discharges to Lake Washington. (name or description) Core Requirements (all S apply) Discharge at Natural Location Number of Natural Discharge Locations: 1 Offsite Analysis Level: () 2 / 3 dated:___________________ Flow Control Level: 1 / 2 I 3 or Exemption Number Direct L)iscllarqe (mci. facility summary sheet) Small Site BMPs N/A Conveyance System Spill containment located at: N/A for Master Site Plan Erosion and Sediment Control ESC Site Supervisor: N/A Contact Phone: N/A Not applicable for Master After Hours Phone: N/A Site Plan Entitlement. Maintenance and Operation Responsibility: Private I Public If Private, Maintenance Log Required: Yes / No Financial Guarantees and Provided: Yes / Liability Water Quality Type: Basic / Sens. Lake / Enhanced Basicm I Bog (include facility summary sheet) or Exemption No. Landscape Management Plan: Yes / No Special Requirements (as applicable) Area Specific Drainage Type: CDA / SDO / MDP / BP I LMP / Shared Fac. Requirements Name: Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type: Major / Minor I Exemption / None 100-year Base Flood Elevation (or range): Datum: Flood Protection Facilities Describe: N/A I Source Control Describe landuse: Mixed-Use Residential/Office/Commercial (comm./industrial landuse) Describe any structural controls: N/A for Master Site Plan S Quendall Terminals Storm Drainage Report Figure 6A: TIR Worksheet KPFF KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON. SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL 11/2009 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET S Oil Control High-use Site: Yes iii -- Treatment BMP: Maintenance Agreement: Yes I with whom? Other Drainage Structures Describe: Part 13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION Clearing Limits El Stabilize Exposed Surfaces Cover Measures Remove and Restoie Temporary ESC Facilities Perimeter Protection Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris, Ensure Traffic Area Stabilization Operation of Permanent Facilities U Flag Limits of SAO and open space Sediment Retention preservation areas Surface Water Collection Other Dewatering Control Dust Control U Flow Control Part 14 STORMWATER FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS (Note: Include Facility Summary and Sketch) Flow Control Type/Description - Water Quality Type/Description U Detention U Infiltration U Regional Facility U Shared Facility U Flow Control BMPs U Other U Biofiltration wetpooi Media Filtration U Oil Control U Spill Control U Flow Control BMPs U Other Presettling Vault StormFitters fl Quendall Terminals Storm Drainage Report Figure 6A: TIR Worksheet KPFF KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL 11/2009 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TR) WORKSHEET Part 15 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS ZI Drainage Easement J Cast in Place Vault Covenant LJ Retaining Wall Native Growth Protection Covenant LJ Rockery > 4' High Tract 0 Structural on Steep Slope Other U Other Part 17 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attached Technical Information Report. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. Quendall Terminals Storm Drainage Report Figure 6A- - TIR Worksheet ' - - TWN;010- 11 - - Appendix B Calculations and Proposed Strom Drainage System Figure 113: Conceptual Storm Drainage Plan Figure 213: Isopluvial Maps (2-Year, 25-Year, 100-Year, and Annual Runoff) Figure 313: Conveyance Calculations Figure 413: Water Quality Calculations Figure 58: StormFi!ter Product Information CenturyPacific, LP Quendall Terminals Appendix B 77 LE 12 -1141. 30. 36 Ao:;— - RU-LOlL I •--..8C50$1 V.2O00 •;o&lL j;r - -- -- -__- - ---- .- NOTE -- :.'-T-. :-- -- - - 000000010011 07 EC0V21( 100100101 0LE7L)60ECOLCCOCLI(0LIL - lit W0DC00' 00001)0411000000001(0 0000(7010 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIO ri liL k_ 5fJIQI RT QUENDALL TERMIHAUS SKET I° _ _ j lL00 1)4 4 43501431043500104000011050. 0000004.0001)40100 I - - I ,lOotoo DAM 200o s. -o LAND USE, SHOREliNE & MASTER PLAI PERMIT APPLICATIONFIG 1 IV 007)0 M. I 0000 H j 0 904010 (000)010-0002 (7.2220) 022-loX CONCEPTUAL STORM DRAINAGE AND GRADING <-:-:- ...•.L_• - - 0 00. .• -OGTOR 000 :.--.. -...- -. 1*9300*0 09000*91 3030 91 omm - -.. . . .:T-'-- 0:•0 ••' P1si\ 3- i.-rW91(T20C,301030.. - . -. .:--- - _;\ •0 - - .. - . 0.rkiT- .- . - -- . lvammAR NOTES: IEEE(S): I. 03.3000(1*3030*90.3.3 fl300I 00 030*1030150(103 9033130*1*01130*3310(03.93130.3103003<3*00(090 . 3*503(301(1(0 *30301 (0 0) ISlE 10*3 MCCV (93 *11910*010)10 (*3 (St 1*1003) *313010*106*0*01*1103333030*10*113130.0.33(1 11321.3*13930030*1* <1311 *0.3013*310*3*13910/1011090 (010933) *3013 0490<0. * 0<IC0: 333 3013*010*15 eoor 3*3033303390 13300333311910*191*10)310300 3100; III 0051* A 50011€ *510*10*3*0)10 03*5 ((SOlO *16 (111330 33.312 133* 300113*. 3 113300*1 IEI'JJCS 000*3013<9310)0.3 C'1*TOI/%0S13l*l04 *0*3391093030*03*003W 1*1*30030301* (*0004*1. 0. 4M&033010*0039300.12133*33331391033339353.3*193 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIO 10*9 0< C1II1 J(3S 0 QUENDAIL TERMINALS 3(3*51 L un rL AND C6NCEPTUALSTORMDRAAGEANDGRADG 1 0 El SECTION 3.2 RUNOFF COMPUTATION AND ANALYSIS METHODS FIGURE 3.2.1.A 2-YEAR 24-HOUR ISOPLUVIALS 1i T7 7.1 -: ) 1W) )1)4, c—, \$ ,\ IQUENDALL TERMINALS SITE P = 2.0 INCHES .. t,( I \ \\ . . \ / Y. €1 CV -- I 0! \ _gIo KING COUNTY YERCE CoUlfly '7 CV WESTERN 1 KING COUNTY 3.5 r. 2-Year 24-Hour V / Preci'itation -. F.. /—_-,---.' J in Inches 024MIIes Figure 2B: Isopluvial Maps 1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 3-14 SECTION 3.2 RUNOFF COMPUTATION AND ANALYSIS METHODS L=: FIGtJ1E 3.2.1.0 25-YEAR 24-HOUR ISOPLUVIALS 11 -- ' I- . tNO 7C,UNT" L,\. - I L . QUEND / \ 4/ fALETEXLSSff I ) IP = 3.43 INCHES I-Ji Aw k\ / - - 0 J; - -.9ING COUNTY d j. 1 : / ? NERCE COUNTY . WESTERN KiNG COUNTY 4.5 N 25-Year 24-Hour ... ' • Precipitation Cb "—, in Inches 02 4MtIes r 0 ijjiuvpc*i iviat 1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 3-16 STORM DRA!N LINE El C, .yr.q Oh.a to, the Ct-yea, Cr,,, • iTJ LLI.I J rj __ CT! - a000 t-t OC Th or,. or eec rear,, err ETC. ,rr , - -- - _*3T!Y T'TFL S11ye CIa 43 00 CC? 0?) tEN COca O 34*4 0% IO. 000% 40)0. 1I MIA- 0 0 STORM DRAIN USE #2 Dnt,t C,IcW,t,.Conyuc. Check k( I%t 2It,t SLQ, EtI --..-------------.----- -- - -. - -- - - 14:ffi THEE Ii _ — 6wa C530 I MIS CeSS S)A !Ct.7 en eM €5 CM see 1W MR 05 -- o.• __________ MUD- - - --.T I - - - €III tI 055 50 055 eOn. 11i11SSI .S5W o.1e€w1€ 500 55.55 5501. R 00 Imm SM 505 CCI 5005. MOOS ----,---- _0-_t_ I- S 0 STORM DRAIN UNE 03 0312Mg, C0I,3M,.Cy.M.Ch3AI313M23y,,$,31(,31 w - TT u1p TTr - ____ - ----- - n on. a • OCS 331 370 372,57. *022,, 3332,. 11331233 010<0001__2,3,37 74372,1730, 1137. AI31 : .o'., ________ 331 •* 6!3330 —g * - — - 043 0 *3*., 03*04 370377 332, .373o7, '°''' 1*fl 33,J 1013336*0I_05*0.7240,42,32. 10 01 - — - 311*032 3*12, 027., 632. 331 3*1 33, 233,%7 3573 42333, j 3*34333 2315 *o,3*33.. 1124 _311, _331,*OO *43,g_001,p*0 ••.*3o331% ,00,_2,3,,,,_ 1*10 I so_so - 472 SSL 31303 012,4 331,0,3 "L 01037, *3273, _*0*3.7 __ - 3221 _2434*43. _5*3*340% _31*337 _3.1731743% *31312I 0 STORMFILTER CALCULATIONS S(ormFlInr demgn per Section 6.5.5 of 2009 KCSVr'DM. Treatment ftnw is 35% of the developed 2-year peak flow rate determined using KCRTS and IS-minute limes steps. Sea-Tac 1.0 scale factor used in KCRTS. Cartridge design flown per Table 6.5.5.A of 2009 KCSWDM. <PEP Consulting Engineers NOvember. 2009 BASIN AREAS Basin areas are for Storm Drain Lines #1, 42, and #3, which carry POtS from streets and open-air parking to water quality treatment facilities. STORM DRAIN LINE #1 TOT 57810(SF( = I.33)AC) IMP 90% 52029 (SF] 1.19 AC) PERV 10% 5781 ] = 0.13 (AC) ISTORM DRAIN LINE 02 hOT 124226 (SF) 4 - 2.95 (AC) IMP 90%111803(J_= 2.57 (AC] PERV 10% 12423 (SF) 0.29 (AC] STORM DRAIN LINE #3(INCLUDES NE QUADPARKING) TOT - - 114770 (SF)= IMP95.6%109687(SF] - 2.63(AC] 2.92 ]AC) PERV 4.4% 5083 (SF] = 0.12 (AC) PRESE17LING TANK VOLUMES Preoeffling prior to SIorrnFilter per Section 6.5.1 of 2009 KCSWDM. PRESETTLING VOLUME = 0.75V, (0.9A * 0.25A 5 0.10A + 0.01'AyR (Eq 6-13. 2009 KCSWDM) A, = IMP A,5 PERV A = 5 A. = 0 R 0.039 (Ff3 (Fig 6.4.1.A, 2609 KCSWDM) SDLINE El _SD LINE #2_SD LINE 63 V, )CF) 1583 4045 3900 5.75V_]CF) _1412 _3034 _2925 Quecdall Terminals Drainage Report Figure 4B: Waler Quality Calculations S 0 KPFF Consulting Engineers Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:sd line #1.tsf Project Location: Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates---- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (cFs) 0.572 6 8/27/01 18:00 0.399 8 9 /17/02 17:45 1.11 2 12/08/02 17:15 0.460 7 8/23/04 14:30 0.613 5 10/28/04 16:00 0.647 4 10/27/05 10:45 0.780 3 10/25/06 22:45 1.48 1 1/09/08 6:30 Computed Peaks 11/2009 SD Line #1.pks Flow Frequency Analysis------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 1.48 1 100.00 0.990 1.11 2 25.00 0.960 0.780 3 10.00 0.900 0.647 4 5.00 0.800 0.613 5 3.00 0.667 0.572 6 2.00 0.500 0.460 7 1.30 0.231 0.399 8 1.10 0.091 1.36 50.00 0.980 E C Page 1 Quendall Terminals Storm Drainage Report Figure 413: WQ Calcs ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (cFs) 1.23 6 0.854 8 2.38 2 0.986 7 1.31 5 1.39 4 1.67 3 3.18 1 computed Peaks 8/27/01 18:00 9/17/02 17:45 12/08/02 17:15 8/23/04 14:30 10/28/04 16:00 10/27/05 10:45 10/25/06 22:45 1/09/08 6:30 KPFF Consulting Engineers 11/2009 SD Line #2.pks Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:sd line #2.tsf Project Location: Sea-Tac Flow Frequency Analysis------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (cFs) period 3.18 1 100.00 0.990 2.38 2 25.00 0.960 1.67 3 10.00 0.900 1.39 4 5.00 0.800 1.31 5 3.00 0.667 1.23 6 200 0.500 0.986 7 1.30 0.231 0.854 8 1.10 0.091 2.91 50.00 0.980 fl Page 1 Quendall Terminals Storm Drainage Report Figure 413: WQ Calcs KPFF Consulting Engineers 11/2009 S Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:sd line #3.tsf Project Location: Sea-Tac SD Line #3.pks ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (cFs) 1.20 6 8/27/01 18:00 0.838 8 9/17/02 17:45 2.30 2 12/08/02 17:15 0.966 7 8/23/04 14:30 1.28 5 10/28/04 16:00 1.35 4 10/27/05 10:45 1.63 3 10/25/06 22:45 3.03 1 1/09/08 6:30 Computed Peaks Flow Frequency Analysis------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 3.03 1 100.00 0.990 2.30 2 25.00 0.960 1.63 3 10.00 0.900 1.35 4 5.00 0.800 1.28 5 3.00 0.667 1.20 6 2.00 0.500 0.966 7 1.30 0.231 0.838 8 1.10 0.091 2.79 50.00 0.980 S Page 1 Quendall Terminals Storm Drainage Report Figure 413: WQ Caics ALLA5T (SEE NOTE 3) INLET Fl (SEE NOTES 5 4 )UTLET ES 5 4 C) MANHOLE STORMFILTER -PLAN VIEW I I 030 IRAME AND COVER. (STD) CONCRETE (SEE NOTE 4) GRADE RiNG 5TEF (TYF) INLET FIFE (SEE NOTES 5 4 C) ull _ 1-m- on '9il 'Ifli UNDERDRAIN MANIFOLD MANHOLE STORMFILTER - — Solutions -. I-IDFE OUTLET RISER WITh , SCUM 8AFFLE 4-G"MIN (S5 NOTE 7) 7. SEE DETAIL 2/2 STORMfl LTER CARTRIDGE (Ii'?) (SEE NOTE 2) LION VIEW (:s\ THE 5TOWWATEP, MANAGEMENT Stormder® U.S. FAT5.9 No. 5,322.29. Ne. 5,707,527. No. G,027$35 No. 45,045, No. 5.G24.57G, AND OTHEP U.S. AND rOP1GN PATENTS PENDING AM STORMWAlE R SOLUTIONS contechetormwater.com PRECAST 96" MANHOLE STORMFILTER PLAN AND SECTION VIEWS I I STANDARD DETAIL 1/2 DATE.8/18/08SCALE: NONE MHSF14-9SPC-DTL DRAWN: JHR CHECKED: DK GNAL NOThS S I) STORMFILTER DY CONTECII STORMWATER SOLUTIONS; PORTLAND, OR (800) 546-4C67; SCARbOROUGh, ME (877) 907-ÔC7C; LINThICUM, MD (8CC) 740-3318. FiLTER CARTRIDGE(S) TO BE SIPhON-ACTUATED AND SELF-CLEANING. STANDARD DETAIL ShOWS MIMUM NUMDER. OF CARTRIDGES. ACTUAL NUMDR REQUIRED TO BE SPECIFIED ON SITE PLANS OR IN DATA TAbLE bELOW. PRECAST MANHOLE STRUCTURE TO SE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C478. DETAIL REFLECTS DESIGN INTENT ONLY. ACTUAL DIMENSIONS AND CONFIGURATION OF STRUCTURE WILL SE ShOWN ON PRODUCTION ShOP DRANG. STRUCTURE AND ACCESS COVERS TO MEET MSI-ITO 11-20 LOAD RATING. FOR LOW DROP CARTRIDGE, DROP REQUIRED IS I .6, FOR 18" CARTRIDGE, DROP REQUIRED IS 23, FOR 27' CARTRIDGE DROP REQUIRED IS 3.05'. MINIMUM ANGLE DETWEEN INLET AND OUTLET IS 45°. C) INLET PIPING TO SE SPECIFIED DY ENGINEER AND PROVIDED DY CONTRACTOR. PRECAST MANHOLE STORMFILTER EQUIPPED WITH A DUAL DIAMETER 11DPE OUTLET STUD AND SAND COLLAR. EIGhT INCh DIAMETER OUTLET SECTION MAY SE SEPARATED FROM OUTLET STUD AT MOLDED-IN CUT LINE TO ACCOMMODATE A 12 INCh OUTLET PIPE. CONNECTION TO DOWNSTREAM PIPING TO SE MADE USING A FLEXIbLE COUPLING OR ECCENTRIC REDUCER, AS REQUIRED. COUPLING DY FER.NCO OR EQUAL AND PROVIDED DY CONTRACTOR. 7) PROVIDE MINIMUM CLEARANCE FOR MAINTENANCE ACCESS. IF A ShALLOWER SYSTEM IS REQUIRED, CONTACT CONTECII STORMWATER SOLUTIONS FOR OTI-IER OPTIONS. B) ANTI-FLOTATION DALLAST TO SE SPECIFIED DY ENGINEER AND PROVIDED DY CONTRACTOR, IF REQUIRED. bALLAST TO SE SET AROUND THE PERiMETER OF THE STRUCTURE. 9) ALL STORMFILTERS REQUIRE REGULAR MAINTENANCE. REFER TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES FOR MORE INFORMATION. 030' FRAME ; •-... AND COVER(STD) MANHOLE STORMFILTER - TOP VIEW (i OUTLET SAND COLLAR 2" OUTLET STUD MOWED-IN CUT LINE ,- 08" OUTLET STUD FRCAST MANhOLE STOKMMLThK_DATA STRUCTURE ID XXX WATER QUAUTh' FLOW RATE (cfs) XXX PEAK FLOW RATE (<I .8 cf) X.XX RETURN PERIOD OF PEAK FLOW (yrs) XXX # OF CARTRIDGES REQUIRED XX CARTRIDGE FLOW RATE XX MEDIA TYF'E (CSF, PERLITE, ZPG) XXXXX RIM ELEVATION XXX.XX' PIPE DATA: I.E. ORIENTATION MATERIAL DIAMETER INLET PIPE #1 Ylv. X X XX° XXX XX' INLET PIPE #2 XXX.XX' XX° XXX XX° OUTLET STUD XXX.XX' 00 XXX B" Il 2' ECCENTRIC REDUCER (DY CONTRACTOR.) YES\NO SIZE XXX Xx" x XX" ANTI-FLOTATION bALLAST - WIDTh hEIGhT XX" XX" NOTES/SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: PIPE ORIENTATION KEY: 90° 1800 _$_00 270° THE STORM WATER. MANAGEMENT StormFilter U.S. PATENI No. 5,322,G25, No. 5,707,527. No. G,027,G39 No. C.G49.04S, No. 5$24,57, AND OThER U.S. AND PORFJGN PATENTS FENDING MANHOLE STORMFILTER - OUTLET DETAIL \, OUTLET PIPE (DY CONTRACTOR) COUPLING (DY CONTRACTOR) (SEE NOTE C) SALLAST \ GROUT (SEE NOTE 8) (DY CONTECh STORMWATER SOLUTIONS) Ct*N1'FH® PRECAST 96" MANHOLE STORMFILTER — TOP AND SECTION VIEWS, NOTES AND DATA 2 STORMWATER -1 IONS,. STANDARD DETAIL 2/2 contechstormwater.com DATE: 8/18108 SCALE: NONE I FILE NAME: MHSF14-952PC.Dft - - DRAWN: JHR I CHECKED:D}( ITECt I STORMFILTER DESIGN TABLE ICAET)SNS. StormFilter ThE 8' (6' STORMFILTER TREATMENT CAPACITY VARIES BY EIJMREROF FILTER CARTRIDGES INSTAJJ.ED AND BY REGION SPECIFIC INTERNAL FLOWCOIVTTTOLS. COWEYANCE CAPACITY IERATEOATLB CFS. TIlE STANDARD CONFIGURATION IS SHOWN. ACIUAL CONFIGURATION OF TIlE SPECIFIED STRUCTURE(S) PER CM., ENGINEER VIILLBE SHOWN ON SUBMITTAL DRAWWG(S(. ALL PARTS PROVIDED AND INTERNAL ASSEMBLY BYCONTECH STORMWATER SOLUTIONS UNlESS OTHERWISE NOTED. CARTRIDGE HE1DIIT lIT (IT (YSTEIl HYDIEAIIJC DROP(H -P50W. MIS.) 3.55 2.3 1ff IREAThEENT BY MEDIA SURFACE AREA 1 2987111' I I qp~ I 2 RB'RE EE'8' I 20pnSR' I I CARTRIDGE FLOWRATE(BRFI( 22.5 1 11.25 1 15 I 7.5 1 15 5 INSPECTION HEED - - - A tFLOW INLET PIPE (SEE NOTE I) LJ71IN (ACCESS FRAME AND COVERS OMITTED FOR CLARITY) GENERAL NOTES 1. (NLETAND OUTLET PIPING SHALL ED SPECIFIED BY SITE CIVIL ENGINEER (SEE PLANS(NED PROVIDED BYCONTRACTOR. STOEIIIFILTER IS PROVIDED WITH OPEIANGS AT INLET AND OUTJ.ETLOCAT1ONS. S. IT THE PEAK FLOW RATE, AS DETERMINES BY TIlE SITE CIVIL ENGINEER. EXCEEDS THE PEAR BYDRALIUC CAPACITY OF THE PRODUCT, AN EPSTREAU BYPASS STELIC1URE IS REQUIRED. PLEASE CONTACT CONTECH ETORMWATER SOLIJTIONS FOR OPTIONS. THE FILTER CARTRIDGE(S) ARE SIPHON-ACTUATED AND SELF-CLE&'IITIG. THE STANDARD DETAIL DRAWUEG SHOWS THE MOJAMUM NUMBER OF CARTRIDGES. THE ACTUAL NIJMSER SHALL EU SPECIFIED BY THE STIR CIVIL ENGINEER ON SITE PLANS OR IN DATA TABLE BELOW. PRECAST STRUCTURE TORE CQNSTRECTES IA ACCORDANCE IMTH AETM CAST AND C858. SEE STORMF(LTER DESIGN TABLE FOR REQUIRES HYDRAULIC DROP. FOR SHALLOW. LOW DROP OR SPECIAL DESIGN CONSTRAINTS, CONTACT CONTSCN STORMWATER SOLUTIONS FOR DESIGN OPTIONS. N. ALL WATER QUALITY PRODUCTS REQUIRE PERIODIC MAINTEI'LOYICE AS OUTI.INEG IN THE OEM GUIDELINES. PRO - MINIMUM ClEARANCE FOR (I(AIIETENAE10E ACCESS. B. STRUC TU RE AND ACCESS CORERS TO MEET AASAITO (1.23 LOAN RATiNG. 7. THE STRUCTURE TH1CIINSUSES SHOWN ARE FOR REPRESENTAT1ONAL FLIRPOSED AND VERY REGIONALLY. S. ASS BACOWLL DEPTH, DUB-EASE, AND OR ANT1.FLOTATION PROVISIONS ARE SITE-SFECPTC DESIGN CONS SHALL BE SPECIFIED BY SITE CIVIL ENGINEER. A. STANDARD CARTRIDGE HEIGHT (DDE' (SHOWN). CARTRIDGE I-SIGHT AND ASSOCIATED DESIGN PARHJiIETERS PER STOR.MFILTER DESIGN TABLE. IS ETDRI,IFILTEB BY CONTECH STORI.IWATER SOLUTIONS: (SW) 925-5240. I - PER SITE CIVIL ENGINEER I ALTERNATE LOCAT1ON(TVP - (SEE NOTE I) A OUTLET PIPE (SEE NOTE 1) FR,OEIE AND COVEW NOTE 6) GRADER(NG iL(SEE II H OVERFLOW (SEE NOTE 5) H FRAME AND V2R _ STORMFILTER RFCUNDSRDRAUN OUTLET r*itcr THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STORMFILTER 6 8 x 16 STORMFILTER STORMWATER_.—... —OWTIONS. SECTION A - A STANDARD DETAIL 11g. 8 lWa,AAIIAU11IAIA6 58611 noIbee,odledlMIlOgl the .po,0.-&OICOlnEEHStvS,6sEOl 061,807. IllS 609.910617659i0106654 0707007010 I O°' I0&II0 t19 Aot0nIV 5420.R76 0.024,67W 6.70142710.000.1671 0.727.030.6.849.545: _SlId 10,01910075116. O,Ofl*,jb_00HAI 0 S 3 S S Quendall Terminals Renton, Washington Sewer Report TIE— :. . . November 2009 J Preliminary Report S Jonsu/1!nQ Engnies 0 Sewer Report November 2009 Prepared for: CenturyPacific, LP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101 Prepared by: Tom Jones Kris Koski, EIT KPFF Consulting Engineers 1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600 Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 622-5822 KPFF Job No. 109118.10 Property Owners: Altino Properties, Inc., and J.H. Baxter & Company NA I EXPIR 9/14/10 I . CentwyPaclfic, LP Quendall Terminals A 'J A Table of Contents 1. Introduction .1 2 0 Predeveloped Site Codtions .1 Developed Site Conditions................................................................................2 Basis of Design .................................................................................................2 Design Criteria...................................................................................................3 Points of Connection...........................................................................................3 Existing Baxter Lift Station..................................................................................4 List of Tables Table 1-1: Proposed Development ..................................................................................1 Table5-1: Design Criteria.................................................................................................3 Table 5-2: Building Area Summary and Sanitary Sewer Flows ......................................3 Table 5-3: Lift Station Design Assumptions for Quendall Terminals .............................4 Appendix Figure 1: Project Location Figure 2: Existing Site Conditions Figure 3: Site Plan Figure 4: Proposed Sewer Plan Figure 5: Calculations Figure 5: Baxter Lift Station Sewer Report CenturyPacific, LP Quendall Termina's Introduction Quendall Terminals is a proposed mixed-use development in Renton, Washington. The development includes five stories of residential or office space above two levels of above-grade parking or retail and restaurant space. The development project anticipates entitlement of the following: Table 1-1: Proposed Development Residential 800 Units Office 245,000 Square Feet Retail 21,600 Square Feet Restaurant 9,000 Square Feet Parking 2,215 Spaces Note: All areas shown are gross building areas (GBA). The project site is located west of Interstate 405 near the northern city limits of Renton. The site is bounded by the Seahawks Training Facility to the north, BNSF railroad tracks to the east, and the Barbee Mill residential community to the south. Ripley Lane is located east of the BNSF railroad tracks and Lake Washington Boulevard is located southeast of the project site. See Figure 1 in the Appendix for the site location This report is intended to support City of Renton entitlement processing for Master Site Plan Approval. The scope of this report is to address the sanitary sewer system for the proposed development. Design criteria will be outlined and a sewerage approach will be evaluated. Predeveloped Site Conditions The existing site is vacant and is the former location of a log sorting and storage yard. The main site is approximately 20.30 acres in size, and the parcel east of the main project site across Ripley Lane North is approximately 1.15 acres in size. An existing 12-inch sanitary sewer main runs from south to north along the east side of the site within a 60-foot roadway and utility easement. The invert elevation of the existing sewer pipe is generally 10 to 13 feet below the existing ground surface. The existing Baxter Lift Station serves Quendall Terminals as well as the Seahawks Training Facility to the north and Barbee Mill to the South. There are no other sewers located on the project site. An 84-inch Metro sewer main is located approximately 100 feet east of the site's east property line. See Figure 2 in the Appendix for existing site conditions. S Centurypacific, LP Quendall Terminals I . .. ...•. •.• •., • .•'. .•. 1 . Tt K Developed Site Conditions The proposed site improvements include a mixed-use development consisting of residential, office, retail, and restaurant uses, as well as new public and private streets and parking. Sewer mains will be constructed within the proposed public streets. Sewage from the buildings will discharge to the new sewer mains via side sewers. The new sewer mains will discharge to the existing 12-inch sewer main at the east side of the project site at a new manhole constructed over the existing main. No improvements are planned for the 1.15-acre parcel east of Ripley Lane. See Figures 3 and 4 in the Appendix for proposed site plan and proposed sewer plan, respectively. Basis of Design An on-site sanitary sewer system will collect and convey flows from Quendall Terminals. Adjacent sites are already developed and served by separate sanitary sewer systems. This report has utilized programmed project areas and Department of Ecology (DOE) criteria to establish projected sewer flows without provisions for future growth or connections. See Figures 3 and 4 in the Appendix for proposed site plan and proposed sewer plan, respectively. Gross building areas have been used for this report. An allowance of 1,100 gallons/acre/day (gpad) has been made for infiltration and inflow since the proposed sanitary sewer system is expected to be below seasonal high groundwater elevations. The 1.15-acre parcel east of Ripley Lane has not been included in the infiltration calculation. A peaking factor of 4.0 was included in the design flows. This factor should account for the daily and seasonal fluctuations in waste generation. This factor should also mitigate the impact of the varying flow generations for the different uses proposed with this project. The sanitary sewer system was designed to convey the estimated peak flows by gravity to the project discharge location at a new manhole installed on an existing City of Renton sanitary sewer pipe. The sewer capacities were established using Manning's Equation, with an "n' factor of 0.013. Sewer lines have been designed using the minimum slope requirements of the Washington State DOE. The pipe slopes used in the final design and future construction documents may be greater than the minimum slope to accommodate potential settlement, depending on the recommendation of the geotechnical engineer. CenturyPacfIc, LP Quendall Terminals 2 -41 5. Design Criteria Table 5-1: DesIgn Criteria Residential Per Unit 175 4 Office Per Square Foot 0.2 4 Retail Per Square Foot 0.3 4 Restaurant Per Seat 50 4 I/I Per Acre 1,100 1 Table 5-2: ulldIng Area Summary and Sanitary Sewer Flows l ntial Unit 800 389 ce Square Feet 245,000 136 Retail Square Feet 21,600 18 Restaurant Seat 396 55 I/I Acre 20.3 16 Total 614 'Assumes 1 Seat per 22.7 square feet See Figure 5 in the Appendix for calculations. POINTS OF CONNECTION Points of connection are available along an existing City of Renton 12-inch concrete sanitary sewer line that flows south to north within a 60-foot roadway and utility easement along the east side of the project site to the existing Baxter Lift Station. The point of connection for the proposed development will be a new manhole constructed over the existing sanitary sewer pipe. CenturyPaciuic, LP Quendall Termnas 3 E S EXISTING BAXTER LIFT STATION The Baxter Lift Station is an existing sewer lift station located at the northeast corner of the project site within a sanitary sewer easement. The lift station was designed in 2006 and was constructed in 2009. The lift station was designed for an overall peak flow of 594 gpm for the Seahawks Training Facility, Barbee Mill community, and the Quendall Terminals site. The lift station was designed and constructed with the following assumptions for future development of the Quendall Terminals site: Table 5-3: Lift Station Design Assumptions for Quendall Terminals (per Figure 6) Developable Acres 5 Tributary Area 5.0 Acres Flow Rate 2,800 gpad Number of units 75 Tributary Area 3.0 Acres Persons/unit 2.4 Flow Rate 100 gpad Average Sewerage Flow 22.2 gpm Design f/I Rate 1,500 gpad Peaking Factor 4 Design Sewage Flow 88.9 gpm Design I/I Flow 8.3 gpm Total Design Flow 97.2 gpm Total Design Flow Q peak hourly The sewer lift station was designed for a flow of 97.2 gpm from the Quendall project site. The anticipated flow from the Quendall project site is 614 gpm. The sewer lift station capacity will need to be increased by approximately 517 gpm to 1,111 gpm to accommodate development of the Quendall Terminals site. Per discussion with the City of Renton Public Works, the existing lift station has the ability to be modified to increase capacity by changing pump impellers and increasing the wet well capacity. See Figure 6 in the Appendix for Baxter Lift Station design details and Figure 7 for a record of discussion with the City. Centurypacific, LP Quendall Terminals 4 Appendix Figures Figure 1: Project Location Figure 2: Existing Site Conditions Figure 3: Site Plan Figure 4: Proposed Sewer Plan Figure 5: Calculations Figure 6: Baxter Lift Station Sewer Report Figure 7: Telephone Record (Lift Station Flows) S S Centurypacific, LP Quendall TermnaIs Appendix KPFF Consulting Engineers November, 2009 NE 48Th AU N S NE RD a RCJECT S O( ATION VICINITY MAP NTS S Quendall Terminals Sewer Report Figure 1: Project Location - 1 - / ' I g. -•- CX 12 SS_\ -- / X BAXTER SXER Un STATiON --.--- \;_ - - V L--1 BJ1 QUENDALL TERMINAlS ER iTT 4850 t4 20 WAS608TCO 803550502. 60000.5*30010504 I ,~ff —_j I-MB-Ill-ER LJI!MM01(0$o 0000 FIG 00000135200$ EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS U no. I 0018 06 010. 0668. 0C1155C8 208 4 :108118 (20$) 62275522 10, (2(6) 622-5130 0 WE wsciou — — LAKE WASHINGTOA — _—. LL Y I - JS\v EIrAAREA2 HEA. _ SE TRIBf AREA NEUTIE QUENOALL TERIUNALS wc I IA( WASG104 I1O. I I PROPOSED SEWEP PLAN U 6. DAit I si Icc. JOB h:10116 (flOO224Z2 (1:O)JfltJ3 0 (I) 0 (N ('4 CD 0 2,'t at at 00 co 0, at at ' '>' CD o sa 0)0 at CO (N C') at ,C'C C,) 'C C) C,C 0) CC) a> 0)10) co a> a> 0 01: a C) a> at a> I a> 0- co2 CL C: 0' C a> C,) o 0)1 a> a> 0 )(N U)0 0 - ó C 0) - a>a> 0);o of 0 U) (N a>- 20 a> a> a> CC) a> a> a> 0 00 0 0 0 U) 0 at 0) at 0 0) '00. oC')COU) 0 C) Cl) at CD CD fio (N U) 0 0 CC 0(Q) cl) °N-° CO (N Ca> Q a> 2a>a> CC) CC) a> a> CO a> .cL C I— CD CD ZZ Ci) 5 co CD a) < C)jO 0 0) we" Cl) Cl) a> CI) 0 0 0 0) = 0 000 Cl) (I) CD 0) 0 0 0 0 LL 0 U) U) at Cli) U) N' N' clj — (I) U) 0 U) <I) Z &t CO- 0 U) 0 CC) 'C C) 0 C) a> CO CC) a> a> at at a> 0) a> a) a> (N U) a>- LL U- a- ff a- OCD 0 U' C) ; a>, : ('4 I a>. 0 at '21 € 2 c' I- . I- 0 0 (1) Z .5 CI (0 0 <1 ('1 ' LU -: N : 0, CC) Ca, 0 c : 0) 0) to U) : a>. ,CO CD, C') (N CD C)) - 0, 0 U) iN' at U) atco .at Cl) at U) Z5' 00 1 N' N' N' r CD Co 0O .0 0 C U) U) 0 U) 0 0 00 0 0 II) cli : 0 0 0 0 0, U' cli 0 00 0 0 -h Qj C). 0 0 o 00 0 0 LU at N' CD: U) CD U) CD U) co • U) co OR N' CC .(N 0 at C , 0) 0 0 0 a " C-1 (N ('4 a> 0_ 0CD CD ci) C C (C) CD Ci) 0 a> -' Cl) ('4 ('4 I (N (N • at at at I I I I C (j) (/) () Cl) C') (1) Ci) 0 a') I CIJ co Cl> I II I CL H o (N U) at '5 a> o < 0 0 0 a> at CD at U) cC W at CD at U- KPFF Consulting Engineers 11/2009 S .-. .-,-- P ,&. p 4SiS n. - Augu.st 30, 2006 P1-42 GIPIN. Ir-1 http:IIVNAY.rti2.com mailboxWth2.com 1.800.720.8052 Mr. Gordon Wagster Omega Contractors P.O. Box 430 Duvali, WA 98019-0430 WESTERN WAS HING1'ON 12100 NE 1951h St.. Suite 100 BotIrell, WA 98011 (tel) 425.951.5400 (1ax) 425.398.2774 454 West Horton Road 8ellingham, WA 98226 (tel) 360.576.0836 ((ax) 360.675.0837 One Pxci9c Building 621 Paciflc Avonue, Suite 504 Tacoma, WA 98402 (tnt) 253.272.3059 EAStERN WASI-IING'TON 300 Simon Street SF., Suite 5 East Wenatcttee, WA 98802 (tCl) 509.886.2900 (tan) 909.886.2313 KITSAP PENINSULA 600 tcilsap Street, Suite 101 Port Orchard, WA 98366 (tel) 060.876.7560 (fax) 360.876.7988 Sc,it Via: E-Mail and US Mail Sub jcct: Baxter Lift Station Replacement Project Sewage Flows for Proposed Lift Station Dear Got-dy: We have completed our flow calculations for the proposed lift station that would replacc the Ci'-owned Baxter Lift Station, and senre the proposed Connor Homes Development, the future Seaha\vk Facility and the 8 acres of mixed density property that fits between the two facilities. RH2 hngincerit.lg has followed the rccommendcd Renton design standards and the Department of P.cology guideirt.es for lift station sizing to calculate the expected peak hour flow at the station when all ptopertics are completely built out. The t:esults of the calculations are as follows. When the Seaha\vk football team is not using their proposed facility the peak hour flow will. be 307 gpm. When the Seahawk football team is using their proposed practice facility the peak hour flow will be 594 gpm. With such a high variability is expected peak hour flow to the lift station we are recommending that you consider using a triplex pumping system that could match the projected 594 gpm flowrate with two pumps operating at the same time. A single pump in operation would be expected to pump the projected 307 gpm. A copy of the calculations has been attached for your review. Quendall Terminals Sewer Report Figure 6: Baxter Lift 19/711-1167/7') '5-1 J:\dt,IOCtI206.001\O92506.lT'CWStatiOfl Sewer Report KPFF Consulting Engineers 11/2009 S Mc. Gordon Wagster August 30, 2006 Page 2 22780 /- /. EXPIRES •3/I9/0S If you hwe any questions or we can be of further assistance please do not hesitate to contact. us. We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with this project and we look forward to working with you on the design and construction of the facility. Sincerely, RH2 ENGINEERING, INC. '-_ ,\ 36613 / SiGNED: le MM/sp/cc q' 5 Enclosure: Flow Calculations UPIRIES 7/15/07 cc: Mr. Dave Christensen, City of Renron Quendall Terminals Sewer Report Figure 6: Baxter Lift O8!$0/O( 3:4.1 PM Sewer Report KPFF Consulting Engineers 11/2009 E RH2 ENGINEERING, INC. BAXTER LIFT STATION - FLOW CALCULATIONS Project: Baxter Lift Station rr: Version; Final JDESIGN FLOW CALCULATIONS rDevelopment Calculations - Barboe Mill (Connor Homes) Number of Units 140 Tributary Area; 19.3 Acres Persons/Unit 2.7 per Renton guidelines Flow Rate 100 (gal/person/day) Average Sewage 26.3 gpm Design lit Rate; 1500 gal/acre/day Flow: Peaking Factor: 4 (based on basin size) Design Sewage Flow: 105.0 gpm Design I/I Flow; 20.1 gpm Total Design Flow:j 125.1 Igpm Total Design Flow: 0 peak hourly (max. rate of wastewater flow) Notes: 1 21 of the 161 dwellings in the development will flow to Lake We. No. 2. 2 fiihawk FacIlIty I Number of Employees 75 Tributary Area; 3.0 Acres Flow Rate 15 (gal/person/day) Average Sewage Flow; 2.3 gpm Peaking Factor; 4.0 Design Sewage Flow w/oTearn present: 12.5 Design Sewage Flow; 300.0 gpm Total Design Flow:I 303.1 gpm Design I/I Rate: 1500 gal/acre/day 0 Design Ill Flow: 3.1 gpm Total Design Flow; 0 peak hourly (max. rate of wastewater flow) Notes: 1 Design sewage flow was given by Mechanical Engineer with Flak and Kurlz 2 Average Sewage Flow is calculated based on an 8 hr per day flow duratIon [Development Calculations - Mixed DensIty between Barbee Mill Site and Seahawk Facility Developable Acres 5 Tributary Area: 5.0 Acres Flow Rate 2800 (gals/acre/day (gpad)) Number of Units 75 Persons/Unit 2.4 per Renton guidelines Flow Rate 100 (gal/person/day) Average Sewage 22.2 gpm Flow: Peaking Factor; 4 (based on basin size) Design Sewage Flow: 88.9 gpm Total Design Flow:( 97.2 Igpm Tributary Area: 3.0 Acres Design I/I Rate: 1500 gal/acre/day Design Ill Flow: 8.3 gpm Total Design Flow: 0 peak hourly (max. rate of wastewater flow) Notes: 1 8 acres between Barbee Mill and Seahawk Facility is expected to be mixed use density 2 [Contribution Flow from Misty Cove Lift Station I Average Sewage Flow: 18.0 gpm From telemetry data averages from 2003- Present Peaking Factor; 4 (based on basin size) 8/30/200611:36 AM 1 of 2 Quendall Terminals Sewer Report Figure 6: Baxter Lift Station Sewer Report C KPFF Consulting Engineers 11/2009 RH2 ENGINEERiNG, INC. BAXTER LIFT STATION - FLOW CALCULATIONS Design Sewage Flow: 72.0 gpm Total Design Flow: gpm Total Design Flow: 0 peak hourly (max. rate of wastewater flow) Notes: I Existing lifi station pump capacity is 200 gpm. 2 ContributIon Flow from Existing Baxter Lift Station Average Sewage Flow: 0.0 gpm Currently no services exist on the Baxter LS with the exception of Peaking Factor: 4 (based on basin size) Misty Cove. Design Sewage Flow: 0.0 gpm S Total Design Flow: I 0.0 gpm I Currently no services exist on the Baxter LS. 2 The Misty Cove LS pumps to Baxter at approximately 200 gpm Total Design Flow: Q peak hourly (max. rate of wastewater flow) Notes: E verage z>ewage now: 68.8 gpm Barbee + Misty Cove + Mixed Density + Seahawk offseason Total Ill Flow: 31.6 gpm Barbee + $eahawk + Mixed Density Peaking Factor: 4 (based on population) Design Sewage Flow: 275 gpm Seahawk Peak Flow: 300.0 gpm Total Design Flow: I 307 lExpected design flow with Seahawks in the offseason. Total Design FlowT —1 wlSeahawk: 594 f Expected design flow with Seahawks practice at the facility. 8/30/2006.11:35 AM 2 of 2 Quendall Terminals Sewer Report Figure 6: Baxter Lift Station Sewer Report E Tom Telephone Record Notes S By: Tom Jones Date: 6/16/09 Time Begin: Time End: With: Dave Christensen Company: City of Renton Public Works Address: Phone: Fax: Regarding: Quendall Sewer Capacity, Anticipated Sewer Flows KPFF Project #: 109118 CC: Campbell Mathewson, Mark Veldee S Conversation: I called Dave to discuss the existing Baxter Sewer Pump Station capacity and its ability to handle the anticipated flows from the Quendall Terminals development currently being planned. Existing Baxter Pump Station: o The existing sewer pump station was designed to include conservative flows from the Quendall site (hotel & office only I O0gpm). The conservative approach was based on the information at the time related to traffic constraints that would limit development for the site. e The current location of the Baxter Pump Station is within the center of the access drive between the Seahawks and Quendall, which will require street access between the two sites to "meander" around the PS. Dave indicated when the PS was planned the access between these two sites did not exist. Proposed Quendall Flows: KPFF has run estimated peak flows based on the 5/7/09 and 6/16/09 Lance Mueller layouts in the range of 500gpm based on a peaking factor of 4.0. The City uses a peaking factor of 2.0 for individual site masterplans where specific site density is being planned and the change in peak flow (change is use/density) is not anticipated to be a major divergence in the future over the original masterplan. A 2.0 peaking factor would provide an estimated sewer demand of 250gpm less the lOOgpm available results in a 1 5Ogpm capacity deficit. Dave indicated the existing pump station has the ability to be modified to increase the existing pump station capacity by 300+-gpm. This would include changing pump impellers and adding additional wet well capacity, relatively minor modifications (less than $IOOk) that would be a Quendall developer cost. S 'O• S.Ve (2)6 322•3) Seattle Tacoma Portland Everett San Francisco Oakland Sacramento Los Angeles bvine San Diego Phoenix St. Louis Figure 7 S Other available options are installing larger pumps but Dave did not believe that would be necessary as the existing pumps were specifically chosen to allow impeller modifications as they anticipated the need for additional capacity in the future. Fees: Quendall has recently been assessed a capacity charge of $166k for their "fair share" of the Baxter Pump Station. This assessment was based on 11 lgpm of capacity. I asked Dave if future assessments would be required if the flows exceeded the 111 gpm. Dave indicated there would be NO additional capacity charge assessments for the Quendall site only mechanical pump station upgrades to increase the pump station capacity to meet our proposed site demand. KPFF Consulting Engineers Page 2 Telephone Record November 17, 2009 Figure 7 S 4 S C Form WA-5 (6/76) File No.: NCS-380710-WA1 Commitment Face Page S COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued by FIRSTAMERICAN TiTLE INSURANCE COMPANY First American Title Insurance Company, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagor of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of the Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment if preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six (6) months after the effective date is the or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this commitment to be signed and sealed, to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance with its By-Laws. This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date." FirstAmerican Tide Insurance Company By: President 1558 Attest: Secretary By:f,44"-- Countersigned S First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) File No.: NCS-380710-WA1 Commitment Page No. 1 S S I ( I Firct American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services 818 Stewart Street, Suite 800, Seattle, WA 98101 (206)728-0400 - (800)526-7544 FAX (206)448-6348 Donna F. Koerber Ce Nedra Van Why (206)615-3021 (206)615-3131 dkoerber@firstam.com cvanwhy@flrstam.com To: CenturyPacific LP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101-3029 Attn: Campbell Mathewson SECOND REPORT SCHEDULE A Commitment Date: May 28, 2009 at 7:30 A.M. Policy or Policies to be issued: AMOUNT File No.: NCS-380710-WA1 Your Ref No.: Quendall Terminals PREMIUM TAX Standard Owner's Coverage $ To Follow $ To Follow $ To Follow Proposed Insured: To Follow The estate or interest in the land described on Page 2 herein is Fee Simple, and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: Quendall Terminals, a Washington joint venture comprised of Puget Timber, Inc., a Washington corporation and Altino Properties, Inc., a Washington corporation The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: The land referred to in this report is described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. S FlitAmerican Title ZnsuMnce Company Form WA-S (6/76) File No.: NCS-380710-WA1 Commitment Page No. 2 E1 EXHIBIT 'A' LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 5 IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., AND SHORELAND ADJOINING LYING WESTERLY OF THE NORThERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY AND SOUThERLY OF A LINE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE QUARTER CORNER ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE NORTH 89058'36" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5, 1,113.01 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE NORTH 2904454" EAST 849.62 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT A; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 2904454" EAST 200.01 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE LINE HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE SOUTH 56028150H WEST 222.32 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS NORTH 59024t56U WEST 100.01 FEET FROM SAID POINT A; THENCE NORTH 5902415611 WEST TO THE INNER HARBOR LINE AND THE END OF SAID LINE DESCRIPTION; ALSO THAT PORTION OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 5 LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, WESTERLY OF SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 2A AND NORTHWESTERLY OF THE RIGHT OF WAY OF PUBLIC STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 1 AS ESTABLISHED BY DEED RECORDED JANUARY 15, 1964 - UNDER RECORDING NO. 5687408; 0 AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO CITY OF RENTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 19, 2008 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20080619001179. FiitArnerfcan Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) File No.: NCS-380710-WA1 Commitment Page No. 3 S SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the Requirements to be complied with: Item (A) Payment to or for the account of the Grantors or Mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (B) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record. Item (C) Pay us the premiums, fees and charges for the policy. Item (D) You must tell us in writing the name of anyone not referred to in this Commitment who will get an interest in the land or who will make a loan on the land. We may then make additional requirements or exceptions SCHEDULE B - SECTION 2 GENERAL EXCEPTIONS S The Policy or Policies to be issued will contain Exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. A. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. Any facts, rights, interest, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of person in possession thereof. Easements, claims of easement or encumbrances which are not shown by the public records. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by public records. (1) Unpatented mining claims; (2) reservations or exceptions in patents or in acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (3) Water rights, claims or title to water; whether or not the matters excepted under (1), (2) or (3) are shown by the public records; (4) Indian Tribal Codes or Regulations, Indian Treaty or Aboriginal Rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, materials or medical assistance theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance, construction, tap or reimbursement charges/costs for sewer, water, garbage or electricity. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgages thereon covered by this Commitment. first American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) File No.: NCS-380710-WA1 Commitment Page No. 4 SCHEDULE B - SECTION 2 S (continued) SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS Lien of the Real Estate Excise Sales Tax and Surcharge upon any sale of said premises, if unpaid. As of the date herein, the excise tax rate for unincorporated area of King County is at 1.78%. Levy/Area Code: 2151 For all transactions recorded on or after 3uly 1, 2005: A fee of $10.00 will be charged on all exempt transactions; A fee of $5.00 will be charged on all taxable transactions in addition to the excise tax due. Facility Charges, if any, including but not limited to hook-up, or connection charges and latecomer charges for water or sewer facilities of King County Water District No. 107 as disdosed by instrument recorded April 1, 1981 under Recording No. 8104010618. Relinquishment of all existing and future rights to light, view and air, together with the rights of access to and from the State Highway constructed on lands conveyed by document in favor of the State of Washington: Recorded: October 16, 1951 Recording No.: 4178247 Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: March 20, 1963 under Recording No. 5562896 In Favor of: Puget Sound Power and Light Company, a corporation, its successors and assigns For: Power line Affects: The Northwesterly portion of the property herein described Westerly of Railroad right of way Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: November 20, 1964 under Recording No. 5814320 In Favor of: Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, its successors and assigns For: Utility easement Affects: The Northeasterly portion of the property herein described Westerly of Railroad right of way A lease dated July 1, 1974, executed by Quendall Terminals, a Joint Venture of Puget Timber Company and Altino Properties, Inc., as lessor and Turbo Energy Leasing, Inc., a corporation as lessee, for a term of a month-to-month tenancy commencing with the date of this lease recorded November 8, 1974 as Recording No. 7411080549 of Official Records. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements: Recorded: July 16, 1975 Recording No.: 7507160536 • First American 77t/e Insuince Company Form WA-5 (6/76) File No.: NCS-380710-WA1 Commitment Page No. 5 41 8. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: July 7, 1980 under Recording No. 8007070459 In Favor of: City of Renton, a municipal corporation For: Public utilities (including water and sewer) Affects: Portion of the property herein described Westerly and adjacent to Railroad right of way Subject to the terms of the Joint Venture Agreement between Puget Timber Company and Altino Properties Inc., dated June 15, 1971, amendment thereto dated September 12, 1980, both appearing under Recording No. 8102190531, recorded February 19, 1981. According to rectical on easement under Recording No. 9602150689, recorded February 15, 1996; J.H. Baxter & Co., a California limited partnership appears to have succeeded Puget Timber Company, a joint venturer. All amendments to said Joint Venture Agreement must be submitted prior to closing to determine the current signatories. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: February 15, 1996 under Recording No. 9602150689 In Favor of: Barbee Mill Co., Inc., a Washington corporation, and J.H. Baxter & Co., a California limited partnership For: Roadway and utilities Affects: The East 60 feet adjacent to West margin of Railroad right of way S 11. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Land Corner Record" recorded May 29, 1997 as Recording No. 9705290636 of Official Records. Conditions, notes, easements, provisions contained and/or delineated on the face of the Survey recorded February 9, 2000 under Recording No. 20000209900005, recorded in Volume 135 of surveys, at Page(s) 176, in King County, Washington. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: September 2, 2008 under Recording No. 20080902001178 In Favor of: City of Renton, a municipal corporation, its successors and assigns For: Sanitary sewer utilities and utility pipelines Affects: as described therein Private access to said premises is across a railroad right of way. This company will require that the "Private Roadway and Crossing Agreement", and any assignments or modifications thereof which were issued by the Railroad Company, be submitted for examination. The coverage then afforded under any policy(ies) issued, relative to access to said premises, will be limited by the restrictions, conditions and provisions as contained therein. If no "agreement" exists, the forthcoming policy(ies) will contain the following exception: The lack of right of access to and from the land across a railroad right of way. Any question as to the true location of the lateral boundaries of the said 2nd Class Shorelands. S 16. Right of the State of Washington in and to that portion, if any, of the property herein described which lies below the line of ordinary high water of Lake Washington. firstAmerican Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) File No.: NcS-380710-WA1 Commitment Page No. 6 Rights of the general public to the unrestricted use of all the waters of a navigable body of water not only for the primary purpose of navigation, but also for corollary purposes; including (but not limited to) fishing, boating, bathing, swimming, water skiing and other related recreational purposes, as those waters may affect the tidelands, shorelands or adjoining uplands and whether the level of the water has been raised naturally or artificially to a maintained or fluctuating level, all as further defined by the decisional law of this state. (Affects all of the premises subject to such submergence) Terms, conditions, provisions and stipulations of the Joint Venture Agreement of Quendall Terminals, a Washington joint venture. A copy of the current agreement and any amendments must be submitted prior to closing. Any conveyance or encumbrance of the Joint Venture property must be executed by all of the Joint Venturer. Title to vest in an incoming owner whose name is not disclosed. Such name must be furnished to us so that a name search may be made. Unrecorded leaseholds, if any, rights of vendors and security agreement on personal property and rights of tenants, and secured parties to remove trade fixtures at the expiration of the term, S First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) File No.: NCS-380710-WA1 commitment Page No. 7 S INFORMATIONAL NOTES General taxes for the year 2009 which have been paid. Tax Account No. 292405-9002-03 Amount: $25.20 Assessed Land Value: $1,000.00 Assessed Improvement Value: $0.00 Effective January 1, 1997, and pursuant to amendment of Washington State Statutes relating to standardization of recorded documents, the following format and content requirements must be met. Failure to comply may result in rejection of the document by the recorder. Any sketch attached hereto is done so as a courtesy only and is not part of any title commitment or policy. It is furnished solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises and First American expressly disclaims any liability which may result from reliance made upon it, If this preliminary report/commitment was prepared based upon an application for a policy of title insurance that identified land by street address or assessor's parcel number only, it is the responsibility of the applicant to determine whether the land referred to herein is in fact the land that is to be described in the policy or policies to be issued. The description can be abbreviated as suggested below if necessary to meet standardization requirements. The full text of the description must appear in the document(s) to be insured. Ptn Govt. Lot 5, Sec 29 Twp 24N Rge 5E APN: 292405-9002-03 A fee will be charged upon the cancellation of this Commitment pursuant to the Washington State Insurance Code and the filed Rate Schedule of the Company. END OF SCHEDULE B S First Amer/can Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) File No.: NcS-380710-WA1 Commitment Page No. 8 First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services COMMITMENT Conditions and Stipulations The term "mortgage" when used herein shall indude deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment, other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act or reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclosure such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option, may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of Policy or Policies committed for, and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the Policy or Policies committed for and such liability is subject to the Insuring provisions, exclusion from coverage, and the Conditions and Stipulations of the form of Policy or Policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by references, and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, and which arises out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the lien of the Insured mortgage covered hereby or any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to the provisions and Conditions and Stipulations of this Commitment. firstAmerican Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6176) File No.: NCS-380710-WA1 Commitment Page No. 9 The First American Corporation First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services PRIVACY POLICY We Are Committed to Safeguarding Customer Information in order to better serve your needs now and in the future, we may ask you to provide us with certain information. We understand that you may be concerned about what we will do with such information particularly any personal or financial information. We agree that you have a right to know how we will utilize the personal information you provide to us. Therefore, together with our parent company, The First American Corporation, we have adopted this Privacy Policy to govern the use and handling of your personal information. Applicability This Privacy Policy governs our use of the information which you provide to us. It does not govern the manner in which we may use information we have obtained from any other source, such as information obtained from a public record or from another person or entity. First American has also adopted broader guidelines that govern our use of personal information regardless of its source. First American calls these guidelines its Fair Information Values, a copy of which can be found on our website at www.flrstam.com. Types of Information Depending upon which of our services you are utilizing, the types of nonpublic personal Information that we may collect include: Information we receive from you on applications, forms and in other communications to us, whether in writing, in person, by telephone or any other means; Information about your bansactions with us, our affiliated companies, or others; and Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Use of Information We request information from you for our own legitimate business purposes and not for the benefit of any nonaffihiated party. Therefore, we will not release your information to nonaffiliated parties except: (1) as necessary for us to provide the product or service you have requested of us; or (2) as permitted by law. We may, however, store such Information indefinitely, including the period after which any customer relationship has ceased. Such information may be used for any internal purpose, such as quality control efforts or customer analysis. We may also provide all of the types of nonpublic personal information listed above to one or more of our affiliated companies. Such affiliated companies Include financial service providers, such as title insurers, property and casualty insurers, and trust and investment advisory companies, or companies involved in real estate services, such as appraisal companies, home warranty companies, and escrow companies. Furthermore, we may also provide all the Information we collect, as described above, to companies that perform marketing services on our behalf, on behalf of our affiliated companies, or to other financial institutions with whom we or our affiliated companies have joint marketing agreements. Former Customers Even If you are no longer our customer, our Privacy Policy will continue to apply to you. Confidentiality and Security We will use our best efforts to ensure that no unauthorized parties have access to any of your information. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those Individuals and entities who need to know that information to provide products or services to you. We will use our best efforts to train and oversee our employees and agents to ensure that your information will be handled responsibly and in accordance with this Privacy Policy and First Americans Fair Information Values. We currently maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. c 2001 The First American Corporation - All Rights Reserved First American Title Insurance Company S L21TED ACCESS IN the Motkr of V=M State llthwo,j No. 1, 1Ut!04 TO U=ruu Go SNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS That the Grantor Vi REILLY T AR & C})UCAL 0011PUATIO41, forwrly 7)mm=o OWol'Iin =pAvri iii indum 000r*tion, tD for and in conidcration of the sum of ----- -------- —Ta AM liO/OO -------------------- and other 'ralablo oonztdora",ion herebij convey and warrant to the State of Washtngtcn, the following dccribcd TCO( estate situ- ated in Xing County, in the State of Was1ngton: in that po:tian of the toUai1ng deeoribod 'arcol M.V1 3ybw ssonthoaetcrlv of the foliuwing described lines ginning at a point oppaoite ltJnu' ginoerla Station 8+00 (64+86.9) &nd 125 teat )iorUnmetMr]y, ithen raesenred at rit anglee and/or re4ial' fron the cantor line of Primary Stato Ri&9V o. 1, Ronton to KGMVdalo, thence Suthweetcrl,y in & ntraight line to a point oppoeita Rtghy lkigiwarla Station 461+50 and 275 Loot Noejter].' therafron thenoe Nor heatcr1y- in a etraight line at right ..nglce to the katarly right, of way line of Lake Wathingt.on Boulo.ard to a point of in- otion with eaid right-of -wn.y.line; thonoc 5outesterly along said Eaetorl.y right of vay line of Lato Wazshington Boulaward to a point of intoreootion with the Northerly right of way line of Southoaet 80th Street and the and of thin iino don- cription, Parcel "A"z That portion of Qovexwnt Lot 5, Sction 29, Townahip 24 North, Range S East. W.M., 37in osetor3y of the aaator1j right of way lino of the North • ern Paciflo RLUMI Roopt Uout' Roads; And 2wept thoae portions convnyod to the State of 1hAngtcin for highway purpoeea t- dead recorded under Auditor a i?ile Nos. 3229177 and h17821t7 and SOl96o2, record.e of King Count; ajtwtt,o in the Oointr of King, State CL Wanngt.-- - - - - • '1I(L-' 'r The lends )oin cctyyed otttain an i &cqs, .mare or. ieee . the specqse decati., concerning au oj wrucn are 'o be foune WII(nn that certain rnaf of 1111114.' h'etzt ion now of record and on file in the office of the Drcctor of Highways at Olyinph, and bCurhl.!J date oJ Up-proral June h, 1963, and the contor line of thich in a.eo shown of record in Volume 3, of Highway Plato, page 51, records of aaU oout. Also, the grantor heroin conv's and warrant to the State of Vanhington all riihte of ir'r.ress and agrees (inoluding sil. exiatJ.ng, Ztux-e or )otantiali easements of accoas, light, View and air) to, frola and between Primary State Highway No. 1, Salmon Croak to %food1axd and the renaintior of aaid Parcel t'A". The undoraigned agreeo to surrender poaeozrnion of the protioe convoyed heroin on or before It is understood and agreed that the delivery of this dced is hereby tendcrcd and that the t and oblig 4 t,ns hereof shall not become binding upon the State of Wasliing:on unless and tuitil weepted and approved hcrcon in writing for the State of %Yahfngton, Departnent of I1ighwajs, by the Chief Right of Way Agent. Dated this .1.0 .... .day of !3 Parcel 1-2896 ;Acccpred and appro ed.f? I1 STATE OF WASHINGTON OF HIGHWAYS 5 ChtrIRlghtcfWij REILLY TAR & CItICM. .FEpurjc iosc'rrn; COYPANY 1 Prai 'vot4493 rnd81 (!(yldnl acknawI,ctgmuit tonr) STATt 05 WAs ThQTO?, I $1. Cottty co I, the u derslncd, a notary pubUc in and for the State of Wahington, heteby certify that on this ......... .... 4ay of........... ._..... .. _.. personally appeared before Inc If) to me knnn to be the diukinaL... dccribed in and who xteutcd the foregoing instrumrnt, awl w. nowtcdged thai ._.....stgncd and scaled the same as.......... . ........frcc and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and pvrposes therein nientioncd, Given under sny hand and official scat the day and year 1a4 above written. in an,t ,'ar Uc .:a:a oil INDIANA icurporation kcknowledgrnenl torrn) STATnor cç County On this day of. . before me persotinUj appeuri' and .. to tac known to be thcYe.8 ide't and. of the corporation that executed the Joreoin9 instrument, and acknowledged said inrunIi.n.io .bc il free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes thcrciutoi.E(oy on oath stated ....... attthoried to execute said instrument Act 4' jLxcd is the corporate scat of said. corporation. Given under my hand and official seat the day and year last above written, no. Pbtk In and for tle Sate id I S [1 200051 90011 79. S . Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 20080619001179 CXT( OF RENTON D 480 PAE001 OF 007 08/19/2008 14:23 KING COUNTY, WA E TAX SALE $0.PAGEOOI OF 001 DEED OF DEDICATION Property Tax Parcel Number: 2924059002 Project File #:LUA-02-040 Street Intersection: N 42°c' place and N 43Td St. Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference numbers are on page Grantor(s): Grantee(s): 1. Quendall Terminals, a Washington joint 1. City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation venture LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That portion of Government Lot 5, Section 29, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, W.M., as described on attached Exhibit A. The Grantor, for and in consideration of mutual benefits conveys, quit claims, dedicates and donates to the Grantee(s) as named above, for public road right of way purposes, the above described real estate situated in the County of King, State of Washington. This Dedication is located within a Federal Superfund Site regulated by the U.S. Environment1 Protection Agency. Grantee shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Grantor, its successors and assigns, from any damage, liability, claim, lien, or loss, including attorney's fees and costs, arising out of use of the Dedication by Grantee, its agents, contractors, successors in title, assigns, authorized persons, and/or all others acting on its behalf, except to the extent such damage, liability, claim, lien, or loss, is due to the negligence or intentional misconduct of the Grantor or an agent, contractor, successor in title, authorized person, assign of Grantor. Grantee shall be solely responsible for the management and disposal of any waste generated as a result of operation or maintenance within the dedicated area by Grantee or its authorized representative and Grantee shall be the generator of any waste resulting from those activities. Grantee shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Grantor, its successors and assigns, from any damage, liability, claim, lien, or loss or any costs of expenses, including attorney's fees and costs, associated with the generation, management, disposal of hazardous substances by Grantee or contact with or exposure to hazardous substances resulting from subsurface activities authorized or permitted by Grantee within the Dedication after the Dedication. Grantor hereby reserves the temporary right to use the dedicated area to complete any environmental testing, remediation or other activities required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Washington State Department of Ecology, or any other agency with authority pursuant to state or federal environmental laws ("Environmental Agencies"), without the requirement for a street use permit or other approval from the City and without payment of any fee to the City. Grantor reserves a right of access over the dedication area for Environmental Agencies and their authorized contractors in connection with its regulation of the Federal Superfund Site. Any work by the City or other person in the dedication area shall be done in compliance with requirements of the Environmental Agencies and only after 30-day notice to the appropriate Environmental Agency, and Grantee shall indemnify and hold Grantor harmless from any cost, liability or obligation relating to construction in or use of the dedicated area by Grantee or anyone authorized by Grantee, including but not limited to compliance with the requirements of any of the Environmental Agencies. [signatures on following page] -J 20080619001 179.. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed this( Q._day of_______ 2008. Approved and Accepted By: Grantor(s): QUENDALL TERMINALS, a Washington joint venture By Altino Properties, Inc., a Washington corporation, joint venturer By (lALk iP Robert Cugini, Vi( President By J. H. Baxter & Co., a California limited partnership, joint venturer By J. H. Baxter & Co., a California Corporation, general partner Georgia B ter, President and CEO Grantee(s): City of Renton By —L Denis Law, Mayor Attest : BLZk~ Michele Neumann, Deputy City Clerk S Exhibit A Legal Description STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF KING On this ___ day of_btiyi.j, 2008, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the state of Washington, duly commissioned and'sworn, personally appeared ROBERT CUGINI to me known to be the Vice President of ALTINO PROPERT)ES, INC. a Washington corporation, which is a joint venturer of QIJENDALL TERMINALS, a Washington joint venture, that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation and joint venture, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that s/he is authorized to execute the said instrument. IN WITNESS 4?j' I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. . H- p4qV )f4 42 Q cM. NOTARY PUBLIC in ann for e State of wo .- z Washington, residing at ____________ , My appointment expires 1 9/O g _ Print Name )9j 0y'j k c1Ayt_tv OF DWT2231339v1 0032695-0001111" Page 2 5 200&61 9001179. Exhibit A Legal Description Project: WOlf P1D GRANTOR: Street: EXHIBIT "A" NORTH 42'° PlACE LEGAL DESCRIPTION That pordoa of Goveznment Lot 5, Section 29, Township 24 Not-ti, Range 5 Eç WM., City of Renton, King County, Washington, dtsctibd as follows: Beiixning at the inetsccdoa of the sonti line of said Government Lot 5 and the westerly margin of the 100 foot wide Burlington Northcrn Railtoad Co. zight-of way; Thence N.3054'57"E. along the werer1v margin of said railroad right-of-way, 150.00 feer, Thncc leaving said right-of-way margin, N.59v05,U3W., 60.00 feet; Thence S.30°54'57"W. parallel to said right-of-way margin 18425 feet to the south line of said Government Lot 3; Thence S88°4.8'22"E, 69.09 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing an area of 10,027 square feet, more or less 1 of 2 U DWT 2237339.,1 0032695-000004 Page 3 S A Lr 20080619001179.:: Map Exhibit ii 4,/ I 7 69.09' $OUNUNE GOV'T LOL'9/ S 88'48'22 E T.24N.,/R.5E.. W.M. / / do 40' 0' 40' 80' SCALE IN FEET Dec.. 2007 Barbee Mill ACCESS ROADWAY prom RENTON, WASHINGTON RLS 30788 DLACE DI OF 2 w*.d e pr_ $. S788Y163 RIGHT—OF—WAY ____________ t N, DWT 2237339v1 0032695-000004 Page 4 S 20080619001179.Y State of California County of 1t-i9O On ) 0 before me, Date ReNameand personally appeared Ue of the Name(s) of Signer(s) 1 Commission# 1538054 1 Notaiy P1lc California I San MOteoCounty I j J Comm P(€Dec242OO8t who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person() whose name(u) is/am subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that 1sheIty executed the same in JherIir authorized capacity(), and that by 'her/Ur signature(e) on the instrument the person(v), or the entity upon behalf of which the person( acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. S Place Nolanj Seal Above Signature my seal. OPTIONAL JT e document Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove and could prevent fraudulent removal and reaftachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of DocumecII Document Date: 1 ? 1 - Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Number of Pages: Signer's Name: Signer's Name:__________________________________ O Individual 0 IndIvidual Corporate Officer - Title(s): C l C' 0 Corporate Officer - Title(s): O Partner —0 Limited 0 General - M . 0 Partner - 0 Umited 0 General • Attorney in Fact 0 Attorney in Fact 1 Trustee of thumb here 0 Trustee Top of thumb here Guardian or Conservator 0 Guardian or Conservator Juier ---- L 0kjuer ' Signer Is Representing Signer Is Representing e2007 National NotanjAssociation 9350 De Solo Ave., RO.Dox 2402 .Chatswo1h.CA 91313-2402-Na5on OtarOt9 Item e5907 Reoder:Carrotl•Free t-800-876-68V ii 2008000011 I' Plat Lot Layout / i TrnT 1rin--i ii YrT'r [p77K 2008061900117' I PO11ON OF GOVT. LOT 1, SE11ON 32, 124 t, R5 E, W.M. j CITY OF RENTQN, KING courrrr, WASHINGTON S 60'RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION SITE I . / UNPLAITED . T.L. 9002 - N - SW. 29-24--05 Ic*' 4•fr1g 9 N N RBET M/L 1 22" W 1085,58' A / N '--- --- 36.00° 36.00 - - - - ,36.00' 36.00 -- - -,36.00' 80.23'/ 23.68' 23.68' 1 N S.F. 3,34 S.F. 3,828 S.F. 3.822 S.F 31 815 S.F. 3.783 S.F. 881 1 88'48'22 W co 4 3 2 5'TT"7 3600 350 3 00 3 00 / )/1I O 3600 36 00 36 00 36 00 3 0 L /10 - 8' P.U.E. 4510 S.F.'o /.7;84 S.F. 3,384 S.F. 3.384 S.F. 3,384 S.F. 75 74 , 73 • 72 '' 71 5N OPEN SPAC/ / - b 6,298 S.F.In / 0 / 7*' 0 0' 36. 0' 35 6 ' Z • /, / J'Q. 9 W 1.38,6' N 8 '04'3 W CESS & PUBLIC Uliury 51.34 T. .ESM'T. ----L84 I t 5,895 S.F. cli \. 20.00' o/ "'PUBLIC ' 4. F - ' ' UDIJTY ESM'T. ." 0' (7 La 69. 5.6iS.F./ $0' 4! to 3600' 2 .43' S 89'04'" E p 75.98 Q. .--., . • QUIT CLAIM DEED £ THE GRANTOR, REU.LY TAR AND CRENICAL CORPORATION, an Indiana corporation, for and in consideration of TEN DOLLARS ($10.00) and other valuable consideration conveys and quit claims to QUENDALL TPR-14INALS, a 3Oint Venture copriséd of Puget Timber, Inc., a Washington corporation and AltinoProperties. Inc.. a Washington corporation, the following described real estate, situate in the Conntv of King, State of Wasnington: That portion of Government Lot S in Section 29, Township 24 North, Range S East, W.N. and shoreland adjoining lying Westerly of the Northern Pacific Railroad Right of Way and Southerly of a line described as follows: tegning at the c.uater corner on the Souti, line of said Section 29; thence North 89°58'36" West along the South line of said Lot 5, 1,113.01 feet to the Westerly line of said Northern Pacific Railroad Right of Way;hence North 29'44 1 54' East 849.62 feet along said Right of Way line to a point hereinafter referred to as Point A; thence continuing North 29°44'54" East 200.01 feet to the true point of beginning of the line herein described; thence South 56°28 1 50' West 222.32 feet to a point which bears North 59 0 24 1 56' West 100.01 feet from said Point A; thence North 59°24'56' West to the inner harbor line and the end of said line description; Also that portion of said Government Lot 5 lying Southeasterly of Lake Washington Boulevari, Westerly of Secondary State Highway Number 2A and Northwesterly of the Right of Way of Public State Highway Number 1 as established by (eed recorded under Auditor's File No. 5687408, containing 31.7 acres more or less (accuracy to one acre) of which 12.8 acres are underwater shorelands. TOGETHER with the following: The Harbor Area Lease dated the 30th day of November, 1943, between the Port of Seattle and Peter C. Reilly for that area between the inner and outer harbor lines lying adjacent to the area described above in Lake Washington. All rights and interest in and to that certain lease between Foss Tug & Barge for booming and rafting of logs on Lake Washington dated the 1st day of December, 1962, between Reilly Tar & Chemical and Foss Tug & Barge. All rights and permits, if any, from the Army Corps of Engineers for placing and locating structures, wharves, dolphins, piers and other devices that are in interference with navigation and require permits from the Army Corps of Engineers located in that area described in the Harbor Area Lease referred to above. THE GRANTOR, REILLY TAR AND CHEMICAL CORPORATION, warrants that it has not created any encumbrances on the subject property since the S S 0 S date of closing of the Real Estate Contract between Grantor and Grantee herein dated June 15. 1971, but expressly disc1ais any and all other varrnties, express or ip1ied. This deed is given in fu1fi11ent of that certain Real Estate Contract between the parties hereto, dated June 15. 1971. and conditioned for the conveyance of the above described property, and the covenants of warranty herein contained shall not apply to any title, interest or '0 encumbrance arising by, through or under the purchaser in said contract, '0 and shall not apply to any taxes, assess'ents or other charges levied, assessed or becoaiing due subsequent to the date of said contract. J-) Real Estate Sales Tax was paid on this sale under Rec. No. 148560. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this instrument to be executed by its proper pfficers and its corporate seal to be htQafixed this j_ day of 4C2 , 195. REI.Y TAR AND UEMtC, CORPORATION By irs By STATE OF INDIANA Secretary SS: Curty ot4ki:'/ On this II day of 1975, personally appeared -7 .j ' aMd , to me known to be thJresident and Secretary of REILLY TAR AND CHEMICAL CORPORATION, the corporation that executed the within and foreqoing QUIT CLAD DEED, and acnowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. I.'., Indiana, residing at NO ,.:. S .1 0 Ll 0- '0 FILEp41 Record uest of iLZ4 -IZc c•i 2L/L ECOROE& im JUL 16 PM I 3 &RECTC RECORDS & ELECTIONS KWG ccuury, w*s KNC COUNTY W'.TER L'I3TRiC1.O. 17 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NOTICE OF MDITIONh1, TAP OR C:'NNEcTION CHI\RGE O Notice is hurewith given that King County Water Distrirt O No. 107, King County, Wa;hington, has, on March 25, 1981, O under Resolution No. , determined '-hat a tap or connection charye, to be determined prioi to construction of ne' water facilities, '.i1l be assessed against the reel estatt described on Exhibit 'A" hereto attached. DATED this_____ day of March, 1981. 3OARD OF COMNISSIONERS KING COUNTY WATER..DISTRICT NO. 107 By:. -.-- ------- Henry F. McCullough, President STATE OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING On this day personally appeared before me, a duly commissioned Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, HENRY F. McCULLOUGH, to me known to be the President of the Board of Commissioners of King County Water District No. 107 and, being duly authorized, acknowiedged to me that he signed the foregoing document as his free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN under my hand and seal thisA3 dayof 1981. 1 / '. .-::-...... -- NOTPIR' PUBLIC in n6r theSEe of Washington, residing at Seattle. ---------- ) KIIG OJNTY WATER ['ISTRICT 'iO.107 LF'AL DESCRIPTION 440RAOIENT SERICE AREA 11) Irl PORTIONS ('F SECI0NS 9, 1G. 17. 20. ?1, 27. , 29, 3?, 33 AND 34, ALL C) IN TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE S EAST, N.M. AND PORTIONS OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, N.M. ALL IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON DESCRiBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY N0.2 AND THE CENTERLINE OF SECONDARY STATE HIGFAffiY NO.?A IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO.2A TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16 TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE CENTERLINE OF COAl. CREEK PARKWAY; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION WITH S.E. NEWPORT WAY; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. NEWPORT WAY TO STATION P.T. 79+66.85 ON THE NEWPORT- ISSAQUAH ROAD NO.941; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY TO THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF SAID S.E. NEWPORT WAY; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID MARGIN TO A POINT WHICH LIES SOUTH 2202923° WEST 544.58 FEET FROM THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEA'T QUARTER OF TE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE NORTH 810571 WEST 115.59 FEET; THENCE NORTH 22029123*1 EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF SAID S.E. NEWPORT WAY TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID EAST LINE AND ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SLCTIONS 21 AND 28 IN TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. TO THE CENTERLINE OF COAL CREEK PARKWAY S.E.; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION WITH S.E. 60TH STREET; -1- - - - ing wunt, Water District No.107 :.eqal Description 440 Gradient Service Area co Paqe Two 'C 0 0 C) THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 60TH STREET TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE PUGET SOUND POWER AND LiGHT CCMPANY TRANSMISSION 111E (BEVERLY-RENTON) EASEMENT; THENCE NORTHEASTERL' ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE EASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 7, BLOCK 2 OF NEWPORT HILLS NO.9 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 69 OF PLATS, PAGE 17, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; ThLNCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID BLOCK 2, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 2 TO THE EAST LINE OF NEWPORT HILLS NO.5 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 66 01 PLATS, PAGE 90, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NEWPORT HILLS NO.5 TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK 4, NEWPORT HILLS NO.13 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 73 OF PLATS, PAGES 53 AND 54, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID BLOCK 4 TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST ALON( THE NORT'- LINE OF SAID BLOCK 4, AND ALONG THE WESTERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO THE SURVEY LINE OF THE MERCER ISLt4D PIPE LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY (128TH AVENUE S.E.); S THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID SURVEY LINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF 127TH PLACE S.E.; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 13, BLOCK 3 OF SAID NEWPORT HILLS NO.13; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 28 IN SAID BLOCK 3; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 28 AND ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO THE CENTERLINE OF 126TH AVENUE S.E.; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 5, BLOCK 1, OF SAID NEWPORT HILLS NO.13; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG THE SOUTH LINE THEREOF TO THE SOUTHWEST '1 . _-'- C) C) Finr) oJnLy Water District ho.107 Leqal scription 440 Gradent Service Area Paqe Three CORNER OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY AND WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY AND SOUTHERLY LINES OF LOTS 22, 23, 24 IN SAID BLOCK 1, AND WESTERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 24 TO THE CENTERLINE OF 125TH AVENUE S.E.; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 14 01 NEWPORT HILLS 140.19 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 77 OF PLATS, PAGE 68, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 14 TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECitON 21, TOWNSITP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE AND ALONG THE EAST LTNE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 21 TO A POINT ON A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 150 FEET NORTH OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 60TH STREET; THENCE WEST ON SAID PARALLEL LINE TO THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION Or THE CENTERLINE OF 123RD AVENUE S.E.; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG SAID CENTERLINE 10 THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE hUH LINE OF BLOCK 4 OF NEWPORT HILLS NO.10 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 70 OF PLATS, PAGE a, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID EASTERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK O TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID BLOCK 4 10 THE NORTH LINE OF BLOCK 1, NEWPORT HILLS NO.15 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 72 F PLATS, PAGE 94, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 1; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF BLOCK I AND SCUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF BLOCK 2 OF NEWPORT HILLS NO.17, AS RECORDED IN VO'..UME 77 OF PLATS, PAGE 66, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, AND ALONG THE SOUTHERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 60TH STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE FtIST LINE '. -3- S inq Couny Water District No.107 Legal Description 440 Gradient Service Area Page Four 4J C WEST 723 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE S EAST, W.M. (ALSO KNOWN AS THE EAST LINE OF TAX LOT 4€ OF SAID SUBDIVISION); THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE 10 THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 504.02 FEET OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 300 FEET OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EA,T LINE TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE EAST ALONG SA1C SOUTH LINE TO THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE WEST LINE OF LOT 1, BLOCK S OF C.D. HILLMAN 4 S LAKE WASHINGTON GARDEN OF EDEN ADDITION TO SEATTLE, orviSroN NO.8 AS RECORDEO IN VOLUME 16 OF PIP&TS, PAGE 67, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF 5 SAID LOT 1, AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 4 OF SAID BLOCK 5 TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOTS 5 OF SAID BLOCK 6; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5, AND ALONG THE EA. RLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO THE CENTERLINE OF 120TH AVENUE S.E; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 84TH STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 84TH STREET TO THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE WEST LINE OF LOT 1, BLOCK 9 OF SAID C.O. KILLMANS PLAT; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID NORTHEI;_Y EXTENSION AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 1 AD ALONG THE WEST LINES OF LOTS 4. 5 AND B IN SAID BLOCK 9 TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 8, AND ALONG THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE CENTERELINE OF 122ND AVENUE S.E.; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 84TH STRZET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 84TH STREET TO A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 300 FEET EAST OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) THE CENTERLINE OF 122ND AVENUE S.E.; THENCF SOUTH ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE TO THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 2, L - --•-- -•--- ,,-. .-•----- K. y County Water District No.107 Legal Oescription 440 Gradhnt Service Area Pdqe Five '4; C C. BLOCK 10 OF SAID C.O. HILLMANS PLAT; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH ' LINE OF SAID LOT 2 AND ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 6, BLdCX 12 OF SAID C.D. HIUMAHI, PlOT TO A POINT ON A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 300 FEE' NORTHEASTERLY OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 69TH PLACE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE TO THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH LINE OF PCL 3 IN SHORT PLAT NO.877107 AS RECORDED UNDER KING COUNT'S AUDITOR'S FILE NO.7809110889; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY EXTENSION AND MLONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PCL 3 TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINES OF PCL 3 AND PCL 2 OF SAID SHORT PLAT TO THE NORHWEST CORNER OF PCL IN SAID SHORT PLAT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALOIj THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PCL 1 AND ALONG THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE ABANDONED PACIFIC COAST RAILROAD IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 89TH PLACE; IHErCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE MERCER ISLAND PIPE LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY IN SAID SECTION 33; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID PIPE LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE S EAST, W.M.; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SA T LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 416 FEET OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 208 FEET OF SITD SUBDIVISION; THENCE EAST ALONG -5- --.-'."..,-... ----------- - - - . . -. Jr king County Water District No.107 Leqal Description 440 Gradient Service Area Page Six 0 CD a SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO A POINT ON A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 30C FEET NORTHEASTERLY OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. MAY VALLEY ROAD; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE EAST LINE OF SHORT PLAT NO.677007 AS RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY AUDITORS FILE NO.7712090795; THENCE NORTH, WEST 4ND SOUTH ALONG THAT PORTION OF LOT 1 IN SAID SHORT PLAT LYING WITHIN THE SOL'IWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 34 TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST Q'JAITER OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE S EAST, W.M.; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3 TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 530 FEET OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF 136TH AVENUE S.E.; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF COAL CREEK PARKWAY S.f.; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF COAL CREEK PARKWAY S.E. TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE AND ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4 TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER PARADISE ESTATES NO.2 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 102 OF PLI\TS, PAGE 31, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PLAT AND ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF PARADISE ESTATES AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 95 OF PLATS, PAGE 93, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARADISE ESTATES; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WESC LINE OF a -6- co King County Water District No.107 - legal Description 440 Gradient Service Area CD Page Seven C C U) SAID PLAT AND ALONG THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION TEREOF TO THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF S.E. 95TH WAY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY MARGIN TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE WESTERLY 122 FEET OF TRACT 387 OF C.D. HILIMAN'S LAKE WASHINGTON GARDEN OF EDEN DIVISION NO.6 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PIATS, PAGE 84, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE AND ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO THE CENTERLINE OF GENSING AVENUE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE [PSI LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TO%'lNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGI 5 EAST, W.M.; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUA,ER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE WEST LINE OF SHORT PLAT NO.978054 AS RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY AUDITOR'S FILE NO.8004280744; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTH LIME OF THE RIGHT- OF-WAY OF THE ABANDONED PACIFIC COAST RAILROAD; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTH MARGIN OF S.E. 91ST STREET, BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE BOUN. Y OF WATER DISTRICT NO.107 ACCORDING TO RESOLUTION NO.332; THENCE FOLLOWING THE BOUNDARY OF WATER DISTRICT NO.107 IN A GENERAL NORTHiESTERLY DIRECTION THROUGH SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE WEST ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 180 FEET OF SAID SUBDIVISION: THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE INNER HARBOR LIN: ON -7- .. King County Water District No.107 co Legal )escription ID 440 Gradient Service Area o Page Eight 0 0 cO THE EAST SHORELiNE OF LAKE WASHINGTON; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID INNER HARBOR LINE 10 THE CENTERLINE OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO.2; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID CENTERLiNE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. S -B- I S flJtX7 State Utgh Jo ' .. . Dollar Iif . -c,- 7j'..O Qfl3 Sh S 4? • • f*O IIJde PC '4 V' : • ... . ..in - ...:, ..t.. i - . ..•• eet&-flf'VCY . . . .. • . '-... 1tcowth cth .L..• •..Z1 'v-.'-j. •. •. •.. t ..... ..+ ...... ;.:. . ::" .:.c .. . .................... • ..: j . _ -.. 41 41IL.0 n .). .L ' - ...: -, v -;:• •._ '' • I • • ......... . • . • . ...•. I. -. .:: :: • . . . . . 5: . . .... .. • . •...i&'7 2.Z). . • ...... ).. I the ceernn 't G h _ .. 2. . znt re I 'c geiu • . '":: . .y .. .. - •. t*&71I &MJb Cr ez. e" -. V7bQ th d1;t i) j wao ________ rj4 4j Hthu th R49h '~ t4ift .,,fl . ..•• ______ I.. I. •'I II - .... ____ wacfhmrsiM a nibitejj 's? :Ztuaed .. in ;t-'t '- ', -.. C t f +J _t/tt-iW _4-r - Ilia lie fin - '- - '-- & - øzrJ Sfl *"Y' aQCf$., iL",. 4± 11 tn,n m,: . mI - oethL 'i 2 .-,.-. . of = Vim-- S1)G J1 ' 4 2LJ a!1 •t i _ i.Y ;tLt - - - ••. .-OL11 •• .- i hc ' '-- ." .• • 4 *C!t3kS fop - CPO-atLc . -. $ATWAoi'. . •-. • CUfl?f. • . . - 1. Owffiui... dayf. • . - *- k9Qn t of t 4 eorPew1oiswt U L JkL JO.Z 1rme cic g'4.L U*'I'tI - afa n1O ke1 of td crporwon, y or affx.d i4*rpar Ir .? 1MC * ae4 ,i#g .. ...., ••.-. - . . •• c{ j .. . . . . •••••••.• - _•_.•__•_( • it. t - I. 0*439! 12I zaamt P PAIR LUU The grantor, Milly Tar $ theni.al Coeorstion, a corpora- tio*, for and in consid ration of the am if One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and ewlueble con*idirstjona, in hand paid, receipt whereof Is hereby acknowledged, do hereby grant, wall and convey to Pugst. Sound Power & Ught Csny, S corporation, its euccea- sore and asaigne, $ psIflsnt easowsnt for a po,.r line over and across the following dsseribed real property situated in King County, Washington, to-wit: That portion of Ooverta.nt Lot 5, Section 29, Township 24 N 1ngs 5 F, W,N., and adjacent shore lands of the second class in front.thereof lying Wi7 of the JIoitber* Pacific Reliwey Cpsny'e right-of-way, doacribed as fol1ew: Degirming at the quarter. corner of the S line of said Section 29; thence N 89058'36" W along the S line of said Lot 5, a distance of £113.01' to the Wly line of said Northern Pacific Railway Ceny's right-of-way; thence N 29*4'54" F along said right- of-way line, 99.63 feet to an iron pip. which point i the true point of beginning; thence S 29'44'514' W along the Wly • line of the Northern Pacific Railway Co.,ny 'a right-of-way 100.011 ; thence I 59 02'36" W 100.01'; thence N 562850 F 111.16' to a point f row which the true point of beginning bears S 5902 1 36 F a distance of 50 1 ; thence S 5924 1 6" F - 50' to the true point of hegitming; subject ;o the following terno and conditions; That Said power lines shall be constructed and o.ereted at such a he1t as to not. in- tertere with toe installation and operation of a spur railroad track over and across the above property end/or the operation of st.as cranna in connection therewith, provided that said power lines shall not be required to be constructed sore tnan sevent,,- five (75) feet above ground level; that grantee agrees to cor,- atruct no perwsnent structures on the above described real prop- erty but in the event that power poles are required to be con- structed, then said poles shall be constructed along the easterly wargin or the above dcecrlbsd property. DATED this am day of rs 1)63, at. IIaaaro1is, - - RFILLY TAR & CHEMICAl, CCP0RATo 001 TM Ii By_1. - Prea • S . sat at biters se the vaj4, S IstliT PZts 2h SM for the $tStS at b"- - ddy .tt.se4 aM mere, par,olly appeared L 3 to known to be the President eM TidU1- , stirsly, of the oorporetiO!% that '*2904444 fte lffelping itrSnt, and acknowl.dpd the said jnetM to be the. tr.e and voluntary act and dead of said coroiStion, for the usia and prpos.. therein sintiosid, and on os* ISaind Iht ths7 wire autboxised to execute the slid in*trnt and that the seal affixed is he corporate seal of said o,SIt1si. - wirss IAll) AM UWVML SUL berate affixed the dey and year first above written. . , W- ~.- - - Z-tw- of ummumboa rasidia A 2 .o S.."i. 140 co-..y teIT A C.av Mds .4 . 5814320 VL4JtJ EJ1IJ E t?IL1TY 5XMWP The undersigned Grantor, its heirs, successors and s.gna, (hereinafter together referred to .s raj:tor'). for and in con- sideration of the awn of TIN P0/LOU DQLLM (510.)) and other valuable consideration, the receipt of which is h.r.by acknowledged, hereby corveys and grants to the MUNICIPALITY OF ?4ETP0LITAM ct SEATTLE, its successors and asEigflL (hereinafter together referred to as MUNICIPALIT..'}, a permanent easement over, across, along, in, .on and under the following .ieicribed property: A portion of government Lot 5, Ssction 29, Township 24 North, Ra:ge S East, W.M., King 'ounty, Washington, said portion being a strip of land 10 feet in wth lying 5 feet on each aide of the following described center line: Beginning at a point on the south line of Government Lot 5 at the intersection of said south line with the west line of the Right of Way of the Northern Pacific Railway Company; chence North 29 44 1 54" East 854.62 feet algng said west line to the True Point of Beginotig; thence North 89 241 36 West to point of rerminus on a line which bears South SF, 281 50" West from a point on said west line of the Right of Way of the Northern Pacific RAilwa'? ComPanY distant 195.01 feet northerly along said west line from the True Point of Beginning. Said easement being for the purpose of installing, constructing, operiting, maintaining, removing, repairing, replacing and using a sewer line with all con.e.tions, manholes and appurtenances thereto, together with the right of ingress to and egress from said described property for the foregoing purposes. I By accepting andrecording this easement. MUNIC1P.LITY covenants as follows: . 1. MUNICIPALITY shall upon completion of any construction of any facilities described herein, remove all debris and restore the surface of the above-described property as nearly as possible to the condition in which it existed at the date of this agreement. . MUNICIPALITY agrees to indemnify and save harmless Grantor from and against any and all damage to the above-described property or any building located thereon at the date of this agreement, ar sing out of the construction, operation, maintenance, repair and rsplacement of the fciLitiC8 described above. All right, title and interest which may be used and enjoyed without interferiag with the easement rights nerein conveyed are reserved to the Grantor. The construction, installation or main- tenance, after the date of this agreement, of structures ot a per- manent nature within the above-deCribed easement shall be deemed an interference with said easement rights and as to such structures the provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 hereof shall not apply. MUNICIPALITY agrees to provide extra-strength pipe across the Grantor's property to protect the pipe should a railroad spur be routed through this area. Grantor shall have the right to use the above-described property for roadway purposes and to improve the surface thereof by paving any time after July 1, 1965. in the event that repair or replacement of the above-described facilities by MUNICIPALITY -1- Vol 460U M.Eif S S . damages the roadway surface, KUNICIPALITY agrees, following completion of such repair or replacent, to restore said surface as nax1y as practicable to the condition in which it existed prior to said repair or r.placent. ALSO, Grantor hereby corieya and grants to MUNICIPALITY a temporary construction easement across, along, in, twer, upon and under the following described property? N A strip of land 40 feet in width lying 20 feet on each side of the center line described in tha permanent easement shove, EXCEP'f any portior thereof lying within said permanent uasem'nt. ALSO, a strip ef land 15 feet in wic'th, the north line of said strip being described as follOws Beginning at a point on the West Lne of the right of way of the Northern Pcifc Railway company distant 849.62 feet norther'y alor.g said westerly line from the intersection of said wetcrly0lifle with the south line of Government Lot 5 thence North 59 241 36' West 100.01 feet to the True Point of Beginning of the north line of said 15-foot-wide strip of land being herein described: thence continuing North 59 24'3.6" West 480 feet to terminus. Sai easement being for the purpose of using the above-described area during construction and installation of a 8ewer line with all connections, manholes and appuztenanceS thereto on the adjoin- ing or adjacent property hereinhefore described in the permanent easement, together with the right of ing s to and egress from said described property for the foregoing - poses. By accepting and recording this easement, MUNICIPALITY covenants as follows: I. MUNICIPALITY shall upon completion of 'onstruction of any facLities described herein, and upon the completion of any repairs to any such facilities following construction, remove all debris and restore the surface of the above-described property as nearly as possible to the condition in which it existed at the date of this agreement. MUNICIPALITY agrees to indemnify a..J save arn1ess Gram. or from and against any and all damage to the abe-described proyerty or any building located thereon at the date .f this agreement. arising 'ut of the construction, operation, maintenanCe,repair -in.; replacement of the facilities described above. This temporary construction easement shall cozenc' and be in efect or. the date of this instrument and shii terminate on te date actual se of said easement area shall terminate or upnn July 1 1965, whichever date shall first occur. Payment for said temporary constructi')fl easement shall be made at the rate of FIVE 6 N0/100 )0U..RS per calendar week, or fraction thereof, that said temporary construction easement area in in actual use by MUNICIPALITY. Payment shall be made on or before the la3t day of the calendar month scce.ding th' calendar month when said temporary construction easement area is in actual use. ,. Actual use as used in this temporary construction easement shall be construed to include only the period from the start of construction of said sewer line in the above-described temporary construction ease- ment area until completion thereof including reconstruction of fencing 'nd curbing and resurfacing of isproved areas. - S -.-------- MA - -- - .46OO PAtZ5 /8 CORPORATION ( p. C. ai1y, PrssilSflt I: STATE OF INDIANA ) as. COUNTY OF NAIC$ On this 10th day of MoveabIr , 1964, before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State .f Indiana, duly ccenissioned and sworn, personally appeared 1>. C. Ri12' and R. J. Wseh.lIt , to me known to be the Preeint and Sser.tay respectively, of the REILLY TAR AND CB4ICAL C0RPOATION, the corporation that executed the foregoing inatr*nt and acknowledged the said £nstrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporan for the uses and purposee therein mentioned and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute the said instru- ment and '-hat the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corpora- t30fl. I wx3s my hand and official seal nereto afftxed the day '. and ytar in this certificate above written. S -3-- filedlørRscoid 4. .oid of M.I'O LOSEII .L MOU. Am&cf S LEASE TIlTS LEASE, made and entered into this 1st day of July, 1974, by and between QUENDALL TER?'IINM.,S, a Joint Venture of PUGET TIMBER COMPANY and ALTINO PROPERTIES, INC., hereinafter referred to as Lessor, and TURBO ENERGY U LElSING, INC., a corporation, hereinfter rif.erred to as Lessee. N I T N S S S I PH: For and in concideration of the mutual covenants herinafter set forth, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows: 1. LEASED PREMISES: The Lessor does hereby lease and demise until the Lessee those rertajn premises situated in King County, Washington, described as follows: See attached Exhibit "A" incorporated herein by reference. The Lessor has already entered into various leases concerning portions of the above-described premises. Copies of these leases are attached to and incorporated herein by reference. This Lease is subject to and subordinate to those prior leases and all other encumbrances on property. Lessor hereby assigns to the Lessee the Lessor's rights under said leases, and Lessee hereby assumes all obligations of Lessor under said leases and agrees to indemnify and hold Lessor harmless for any liability arising out of those subleases. In the event of termination of this Lease for -1- 1%i.ISWA,ØC any reason whatsoever, the assignmentof the subleases shall become immediately null and void and Lessee thereafter shall have no interest whatsoever in said subleases. In addition, all new subleases shall be assigned immediately by Lessee to Lessor. 11) 2. TERM: The tenancy created hereir, is a month- to-month tenancy commencing with the date of this Lease. The tenancy may be terminated atany time by either party upon thirty (30) days' written notice sent to the other party by certified mail at thu respective addresses desiy.ated herein. The Lease may be terminated for any reason whatsoever or for no reason and there shall be no requirement whatsoever of good cause or good faith as justification for any terminatián of this Lease. 3, RENT: The Lessee agrees to pay Lessor as rental herein, fifty (50%) per cent of all rentals received by Lessee under any subleases, iacluding but not limited to the subleases attached hereto and assigned herein, and any future subleases of any portion of the leased premises whatsoever. Rental shall be paid to Lessor by Lessee immediately upon receipt. The Lessee agrees to use its best efforts at all time to maintain the premises fully subleased at the best rate of return the Lessee is able to negotiate. All future subleases of the premises shall be subject to the prior written approval of the Lessor, which approval mall not be unreasonably withheld. Lessor shall have the right to inspect Lessee's books of account relating to this Le -2- S S at any time In addition to the rental stated above, the Lessee shall pay as additional rental one-half (1/2) of all taxes C'j). '••• (',_...L "''/ on the premises4and expeises in maintaining the premisesA ' All- COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS AND ORDINANCES: The Lessee herein covenants and agrees that it will comply with all the applicable terms, ordinances, rules, laws and regulations governing the use of property herein demised as provided by the State of Washington, the United States Government, and appropriate municipal agencies, including without limitation of the generality thereof all laws and ordinances and regulations enacted under the Shoreline Management Act and the W.shington State Environmental Pro- tction Act. LiABILITY FOR 0AMAGE: The Lessee assumes all ris) of damage to persons or properties incurred by reason of this Lease and it agrees it shall promptly pay all costs incurred in connection with any damage to any and all persons or property that it is legally responsible for, and Lessee further agrees that it shall indemnify and save Lessor harmless from any and all claims for damage arising from the exercise by Lessee of the privileges lawfully granted by this Lease. The Lessee further agrees that it shall secure and retain in force liability insurance policies in the minimum amount of $3,000,000.00, together with adequate fire insurance naming Lessor and Lessee as co-insureds according to their respective interests. The Lessee shall provide the El -3- 0 Lessor with certificates evidencing such insurance coverage. All insurance policies shall be subject to the prior written approval of Lessor. (71 6. ASSIGNMENT: The Lessee shall not assign any 41 of its rights under this Lease, nor sublet any portion of 0:) the lesed premises without first obtaining the written consent of the Lessor, but such consent shall not be on- reasonably withheld. 7. INDEMNIFICATION AND iNSURANCE: Lessee agrees that Lessor or its agents shall not be held liable for any dàniege to the Lessor's or Lessee's property, or any personal injury to any person caused by defects now in the premises, or hereafter occurring on the premises or operations of Lessor or Lessee. Lessee agrees to indemnify and hold Lessor, Lessor's employees and/or agents, wholly harmless from any damages, claims, demands or Suits by any person or persons including Lessee arising out of any acts or omissions by Lessee, its agents, servants or employees arising as a result of any activity done. in addition, the Lessor has in connection with the issuance of crossing permits with Bur- linton Northern Railroad, agreed, among other things, as follows: "9. Permittee shall and hereby does release and discharge Railroad of and from any and all liability for damage to or destruction of said roadway, or any property of Permittee thereon; and shall and hereby does assume any and all liability for injury to or death of persons, or loss of or damage to property in any manner arising from or during the use, maintenance, repair or removal of said roadway, however such injury, death, loss, damage or destzw.cion -4- ___ 0 - S S aforesaid may occur or be caused; and shall and hereby does indemnify and save harmless Railroad of and from any and all claims, demands, suits, actions, damages, recoveries, iudginents, costs or expenses arising or growing out of or in connection with any such injury, death, loss, damage or destruction aforesaid. Permittee further agrees to appear and defend in the nanip of Railroad any suits or actions at law brought against it on account of any such personal injuries, death or damage to property, and -: to pay and satisfy any final judgment that may be rendered against the Railroad in any such suit or action. The liability asumd by Permittee herein shall not be affected r diminished by the fact, if it be a fact, that any such suit or action brought against Railroad may arise out of negligence of Railroad, its officers, agents, servants or employees, or be contributed to by such negligence. - In the event Railroad shall require the use of its premises occupied by the said roadway or any part thereof for any purpose whatsoever, or if Permittee shall fail to keep and perform any of the terms and conditions of this agreement herein agreed by Permittee to be 3ept and performed, Railroad shall have the right to terminate this agreement at any time upon giving to Permittee thirty (30) days' written notice of its intention so to do and shall, upo expiration of said thirty (30) days, have the right to remove said crossing and barri- cade said roadway at the cost and expense of Permittee. Said notice shall be good if served personally upon Permittee or posted upon the premises or deposited post-paid in a United States Post Office, addressed to Permittee at Permittee's Post Office address above stated. No portion of any payments made hereunder will be refunded upon termination of this agrethnent. Permittee shall not assign this agreement or permit any other person or persons to use or occupy any portion of the premises of Railroad occupied by the said roadway without first having obtained the written consent of Railroad. -5- [1 .1 'I 12. This agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be bindingupon the parties hereto and their respective executorC, administrators, successors, and assigns.' 'the Lessee specifically agrees that any use of said railroad crossing or future crossing shall be subject to the prior consent of Burlington Northern, and further r) agrees to indemnify the Lessor for any liability to Burlin Eon under the above paragraph as a result of any Cctivities of Lessee, its agents, assigns, visitors, or anyone else coming onto the premises in furtherance of Lessee's business or at their direction or with their permission. INVOLUNTARY ASSIGNMENT: This Lease shall not be subject to involuntary assignment, transfer or sale, or to assignnunt, transfer or sale by operation of law in any manner whatsoever by the Lessee, and any such attempted involuntary assignmcnt, transfer or sale shall be void and of no effect. The Lessor shall have the right to assign its interests under this Lease dthout the prier consent of the Lessee and upon such assignment the assignee will become solely responsible for any duties to the Lessee hereunder. EFFECT OF BANKRUPTCY: Without limiting the generality of the provisions of the preceding sections, if a proceeding is under the Bankruptcy Act or any amendment ceto shall be commenced by or against the Lessee, and, if against the Lessee, such proceedings shall not be dismissed before either an adjudication in bankruptcy or. the confor- mation of a composition, arrangement, or plan of reorgani- zation or in the event the Lesse'- is adjudged insolvent or -6- 1. •- S - 0 ~' I S S makes an assignment for the benefit of its eredit'rs, or if a receiver is appointed in any proceeding or action to which the Lessee is a party, with authority to take possession or Control of the demised premises, and such receiver is not discharged within i period of thirty (30) days after his appointment, any such event or involuntary assignment pro hibited by the provisions of this Sction shall be deemed to constitute a breach of this Lease by the Lessee and shall, at the election of Lessor, terminate this Lease and all rights of any and all persons claiming under the Lease. 10, WAIVER OF BREACh: It is agreed that no waiver by either Lessor or Lessee of the breach by either of any covenant, agreement, stipulation or condition of this Lease shall be construed to be a waiver of any succeeding breach of the same covenant, agreement, stipulation or condition or a breach of any other covenant, agreement, stipulation or condition; also that all the covenants, stipulations, conditions and agreements herein contained shall extend to and be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. 11. IMPROVEMENTS: The Lessee shall not make any alcerations, additions or improvements in the premises or equipment or facilities thereon, without the cnsent of the Lessor in writing first had and obtained, and all alterations, additions and improvements shall become the property of the Lessor, and shall remain in and be surrendered with the premises as a part thereof at the termination of this Lease, -.7- w"-' •—r -- 0 4. I Ll without disturbance, molestation or iniury, and free of all mechanics', liens and encumbrances of any nature whatsoever. The cost of all alterations, repairs and improvements shall be split equally between Lessor and Lessee. 12 TERMINATION OF THE LEASE: If the Lessor or the Lessoe's use of the premises as currently understdod, that. s, for industrial tank storage purposes, shall be restrained or enjoined by judicial process, terrinated by municipal, Coast Guard or other government authority, ter- minated by la, or terminated by the right of eminent domain, the Lessor may terminate this Agreement on ten (10) days' written notice to the Lessee and shall not be liable for any damage whatsoever resulting from said termination. EASEMENTS, AGREEMENTS AND ENCUMBRANCES: The parties shall be bound by all existing easements, agreements and encumbra'ces either of record, or specified herein, or any others to which the parties have actual notice. DEFAULTS; In the event of any breach of this Lease by the Lessee, the Lessor shall give written notice to the Lessee of the sp5cific default and shall provide in that written notice that the Lessee has ten (10) days in which to cure the default or vacate the premises as provided herein. Redelivery of the premises to the Lessor shall in no wa, relieve the Lessee of any of its obligations to py rent or other obligations or liability for breach under this Lease. If the premises are relet by the Lessor, the amounts re- ceived from the new Lessee shall be applied, first, to the payment of any expenses of such reletting and of an: -8- ,?. .' , '... O '_ 0 S tions or repair necessitated by the default of the Lessee and subsequent reletting; second, to the pa1nent of rent due and unpaid hereunder, and the residue, if any, shall be held by the Lessor and applied in payment of future reut as the same may become due and payable hereunder. No such re-entry ON or taking possession of the premises by the Lessor shall be 1 cOnstrued as an election on the part of Lesso. to terminate this Lease unless a written notice of such intention is given to the Lessee, or unless the termination is decreed by a court of competent jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any such reletting without termination, the Lessor may at any time thereafter elect to terminate this Lease for such previous breach. In the event of breach, the Lessor shall have all rights provided by law. Specifically, Lessor may recover from Lessee any and all damages incurred or suffered by reason of such breach. This Lease shall be construed according to the laws of the State of Washington. In the event of any litigation involving this Lease brought by Lessor in which Lessor prevails, the Lessee agrees to pay on demand all costs incurred by the Lessor, including but not limited to all attorney's fees and costs of title search. All notices under this Lease shall be sent to the parties at the addresses indicated below unless other- wise agreed. This aqreement contains the entire under- standinq of the parties and cannot be modified except in writing, signed by all parties hereto. -9- IM II -..-- *' - 0 QUENDALL TERMIALS ByA,/A nald 0. 'Norman, Manager P. 0. Box 477 Renton, Washington 98055 TURBO ENERGY LF.ASINC, INC. 01 U) - r - f p(QSL'w7 Plaza 600 Building Seattle, Washington SPATE OF WASHINGTON) J SS: COUNTY OF KING) On this t day of /i',-,-. - , 1974, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared DONALD 0. N0RMN, to me known to be the Manager of QUENDAI,L TERNItffiLS, the Joint Venture that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said Joint Venture for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and c oath stated that he is authorized to execute the said instrument on behalf of said Joint Venture. WITNESS my hand and official seal, hereto affixed the day and year first above wr.i,tten. / —s- kNotaiy Public in and for. the •o Wa'hington, residing.-. fi'••";'•• -1D- 0- S S STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF K I N G On this /2. day of , 1974, before me, the undersigned a No66ry ublic in and for the State of Washington, commissioned and sworn, pçrsona1ly L) appeared duly e&IMtTnd ur A. to me known to be the President and Secretary, respectively, CO 0 of TURBO ENERGY LEASING, INC., the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instru- ment to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said N corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that they are authorized to execute the said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. WITNESS sy hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. .t/.. t""s • ' ' Notary Public in and'for the State of Washington, residing at -11- S .:;!rtT I c,:t tht tol tu.i to:tort '1 1.t TI')rC (ti 0 COrfl'i2flL I ill Soctioi 29, i<i..t..ditp 2' L,rth, l'.augct 5 E;i::t, W.M . 'i.i h',ro- 1.i'e Ii nin;', lying l!3terJy o the orth:ru iif of Way Jn SojtnyI V C.) ci .1 tt::.:Ict. ;:rt bed at; fol 1ow.: at the quar for corner on the c,tth I iN' of utid Sec:tLoi 70; therce Norr.h 89053 3(" t!('f a L(mi, , tht South I me o oicJ Lot 5 1,113.01. fe't ro hWe:;corly I. Inc of ?tLd Rort:herri °;tci lit P.atlroau Right of Way; thence rnrch 29064 5!" 62 cc-e L ;ton:', ni id Ri.p.hc of Way 1 iou ro a pniry to Ce rrod to as Point A; th.:nee co:tJ 'ittit, 29164' 54' R;tst 200.01 fuer to po,nt of he,;i.nntn. of Lb.: the wruin tIc'cr j•' ti Lhc;nc2 South 502 59' Wett 222. 3" [(.0 to 0 t:tich bteirc; orrh 59°.4'54'' at [00.01 trn::;aid f'oint It; iThca'u fortit 9 °2.'t 56" Wua;; t i:tr'.,f I;bor un" nod rh:. cud oi'ii_c I dC.4 ri pci ut ; ALSO 1n,:1: Port on of taid bovtrninea I. ni 1.u!:c tJauhiiicnr ;o;iJr'-aru '.It::;:.urLy of ;eeo'!:r' SJ.a 1Uoh ,:;t 26 and :trrh:uatct-iy of the R1:'.ht of Wo-' o Pu,I it L;ttc !Ii.hnty Nunbcmr I at etribI i.eh:;I by cleud r. oIc..d uo'!cr Adifor' t; File o. 568/1t'l. cOfOID CL...1 ROH 1914w; 8 PM 12 DIRECTOR RCOROS & ELEOT1 KING cily. W cu LAJ C' C-) CO C) '-4 '-4 F— 0' N 0 00 :: •• ct' •• 0 QUIT CLAIM DEED THE GRMTOR. REIf.LY TAR MD CHEXICAL COPPORflON, an Indiana corporation, for and in consideration of 1D1 DOLLARS ($10.00) and other valuable consideration corweys and quit claims to QUENDM.I. c") TFkMX1ALS, a 3oint Venture copriséd of Puget Timber, Inc., a Washington corporation and Altino-Properties. Inc., a Washington corporation, the following described real estate, situate in the £3 Countyof King. State of Wasnington: That portion of Government Lot S in Section 29, Township 24 North, Range S East, W.M. and shoreland adjoining lying Westerly of the Northern Pacific Railroad Right of Way and Southerl: of a line described as fol1ow: Beginning at the quarter corner on the South line of said Section 29; thence North 89'58'36" West along the South line of said Lot 5, 1,113.01 feet to the Westerly line of said Northern Pacific. Railroad Right of Way: thence North 29°44'54 East 849.62 feet along said Right of Way line to a point hereinafter referred to as POint A; thence continuing North 29°4454' East 200.01 feet to the true point of beginning of the line herein described; thence South 56'28'50' West 222.32 feet to a point which bears North 59°24 1 56 West 100.01 feet from said Point A; thence North 59°24'56" West to the inner harbor line and the end o said line description; Also that portion of said Government Lot 5 lying Southeasterly of Lake Washington Boulevari. Westerly of Secondary State Highway Number 2A and Northwesterly of the Right of Way of Public State Highway Number 1 as established by teed recorded under Auditor's File No. 5687408, containing 31.7 acres more or less (accuracy to one acre) of which 12.8 acres are underwater shorelands. TOGETHER with the following: The Harbor Area Lease dated the 30th day of November, 1943, between the Port of Seattle and Peter C. Reilly for that area between the inner and outer harbor lines lying adjacent to the area described above in Lake Washington. All rights and interest in and to that certain lease between Foss Tug & Barge for booming and rafting of logs on Lake Washington dated the 1st day of December, 1962, between Reilly Tar & Chemical and Foss Tug & Barge. All rights and permits, if any, from the Army Corps of Engineers for placing and locating structures, wharves, dolphins, piers and other devices that are in interference with navigation and require permits from the Army Corps of Engineers located in that area described in the Harbor Area Lease referred to above. THE GRANTOR, REILLY TAR AND CHEMICAL CORPORATION, warrants that it has not created any encumbrances on the subject property since the 0 -a date of closing of the Real Estate Contract between Grantor and Grantee herein dated June l, 1971, but expressly disclaims any and all other warranties, express or implied. a This deed is given in fulfillment of, that cetaiñ R;al7 Estate Contract between the parties hereto, dated June 15, 1971, and conditioned for the conveyance of the above described property, and the covenants of warranty herein contained shall not -apply to any title, interest or encumbrance arising by, through or under the purchaser in said contract, and shall not apply to any taxes, assessments or other charges levied, assessed or becoina due subsequent to the date of said contract. Real Estate Sales Tax was paid on this sale under Eec. No. 148560. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this instrument to be executed by its proper pfficers and its corporate seal to be affixed this j day of ____________ 195. / 7 \ REIëLY TAR AND ffEMI. CORPORATION By /•f-- y,c.et gresidatit By Secretary STATE OF INDIANA $5; CoUnty ot4ki" On this / day of , 2975, personally appeared -f .j_j,/ ad me known to be .4'. , to thç'resident and Secretary of REILLY TAR AND CHEMICAL CORPORATION, the"orporation that executed the within and foregoing QUIT CLAIM DEED, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, .and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. 0- NOTARY PUBLIC in andT t Stat o Indiana, residing at ?.y C; - . i -. 2 1978 ___________ . 0 S o IC '0 flLE4or Record at Ranuest of r -. ECOROEC, .REQUE$T O I95JUL 16 ri i 7 &!RCCTC RECORDS & EtECTIONS KM CCUNTY, WA8N. S I -V - S UTILITIES NI Tfl ITRUM r ,,mde this day of -. I9JQJ J by and between -_joint_venture_cQTprisedof.. ALTOP1*'ERIFS, INC. ,a_Waslthgthn cororatjon, and P(J('1'TIMBER,INC.,aWashio0cix>raticn .: - hereinafter called -"Gi-antor(s)", and the CITY OF RENTON, a MinlclparCorportion of King County, Washington, hereinafter càlled-"Grantee". WITNESSETH '-I That said Grantor(s), for and in considerat ion of the sum of $One E11ar ($1.00)---- -. paid by Grantee, rand other valuable consideration, do by ' •these presents,.grant, bargain, sell, convey, and warrant unto the said Grantee, Its successors and assigns, an easement for public utilities (including water and sewer) with --$ necessary appurtenances over, through, across and upon the following described property in King County, Washhigton, more particularly descrtbed as follows That ixrtion of (Averrinent lot 5, Section 29, Itinship 24 Nolth, Range 5 East, W.M., ' King Ccxsty, Wahinton, lying Westerly of the Northern Pacific Railway right-of -- way (now BurlingtOn NOrthern) together withecxod class shoreland aliutting thereen described as follows: Ccstinncing at the intersection of the South line of said Qwexnnnt Lot 5 with the - Wéstérly line of said railway right-of-way; thence North 30°55'53" Eastàlcg said 4ght-of-say line 435.00 feet to the true çoint of beginning; thence Ndrth 68°44' 15" West 350:00 feet; the SOuth 21015l45 West 150.00 feet; thence lorth 680 44 115" West 15.00 feet; thonceNorth 21°1545" Eait 265 feet; thñee South 680 44'15 East __ 15.00 Eeet; t1ence South 21015'45" st ibo feet; thence South 68°44'15" East. I.0 352.56 feet to the Westerly line of said taiixoad right-of-way; thence South 30e55153 West along said Westerly line 15.22 feet to the true point of beginning. Q . THIS. EASENrENT S}LAtLONTINuE SO LONG AS THE WATER tINE IS MAINTAINED I"— ON THE LOCATION STATED HEREIN SHOULD SAID WATER LINh BE RE!'OVED OR 0 )ELOATED, THIS EASEMENT WLL -TERMINATE INMEDIATELY AND SHALL REVERT TO THE GRANTOR AND/OR HIS SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST. Grantor reserves the right to relocate or remov said water lines at - its sole discretion. EQ(JjRED iir5 Co. Recc?ds DMsin Deputy - . . pr('c'rFn '.• Ji 7 H -. REOi-L E7. CT'OS -- . T "- Said heretofore mentioned grantee, itsuc;essors or assiyns,:shafl have the right, without prior notice or proceedingatl, at such t1iis as may be necessary to eflter upon said above described' property for the purpose of constructing, malt.a1ning, repairing, altering or reconstructing said utility, or making any connections therewith, without incurring any legal øbligations. or liability therefore, provided, that such construction, main- taining, repairing, altering or reconstruction of such utility shall be acconIished in such a manner that the private vrovements existing in the right right(s)-of-way shall not be disturbed or damjed, or in the event they are disturbed or damaged, they will be replaced in as good a condition as they were' inirediately before the property was entered upon by the Grantee. The Grantor shall fully use and'enjoy the aforedescrlbedpremises, inclüdThg the right to retain the right to use he surface of said right-of-way if such ue does not Interfere with installation and maintenance of the utility - -"i- line. However, the- grantor shall not irect buildings or structures over, under ' or across the right-of-way durinft the existence of such utility. This easement, shall be a covenant running with the land and shall be bind- 0 ing on the Grantr, his successors, heirs and assigns. Granthrs covenant that - they are -the lful owners of the above properties and that they have a guod and lful right to execute this agreement. . - and - ,. f Añd - - - - and..______________________ If and STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss C-OililY OF KING ) - 1, the undersigned, a notary public in and for the State of Washingto. her f n eby o l980 lcertify that on this 1Lday ly àppeazd 'beforene -I _________________________ and and . -. and - ; to me known to be indlvduai(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, -and acknowledged that sined -and seálèd the same 'as free and vohmtary act an deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned; ' •' - •. ,Vi4 74J •.., . •- ' NryPub'c hia d or thete,o hington, residing at ___________________ .01 riLED for eord - • I UE1 -Za .- 4 .- -' • • : • - - •- -. - .• ASSIGNNENT OF LEASES AND CASH COLLATERAL THIS ASSIGNNENT OF LEASES AND CASH COLLATERAL (hereinafter referred to as the "Assignnient") is made by and between DOUGLAS E. McKEEN and OLIVE S. McKEEN, husband and wife (hereinafter jointly and severally referred t'i as the "Assignor"); and O'DONNELL, BRIGHAI'I & PARTNERS - NORTHWEST PROPERTIES, a general partnership. RECOOF-!" Fth1 I 1il9 W I T N E S SETH: RE-ORDS4 U '. ILicC:::, FOR VALUE RECEIVED, As'ignor does hereby ABSOLUTELY AND INNEDIATELY SELL, ASSIGN, TRANSFER, CONVEY, SET OVER and DELIVER unto Assignee any and all existing and future leases (including subleases thereof), whether written or oral, and all future agreements for use and occupancy, and any and all extensions, renewals and replacements thereof, upon all or relating to any part of the real property described as follows: Lot 5, Block 5, Southcenter Corporate Park, as per Plt recorded in the records of King County, Washington, under Record- ingNo. 8003140871. TOGETHER WITH all buildings and improvements thereon (which real property, buildings and improvements are referred to herein as the "Premises"), but excluding any trade fixtures, inventory, equipment or other property owned or leaied by the tenant under any lease assigned hereby. The identified Leases, if any, are either presently existing or future leases, and are as shown in the Schedule of Leases attached s'TJJ tOOn ;l:1'': AT hereto and made a part hereof as "Exhibit A." All such leases, subleases, tenancies agreements, extensions, re- newals and replacements are hereinafter jointly and col- lectively referred to as the 'Leases;" provided, that any and all leases set forth in the Schedule of Leases may be 0 sometimes referred to herein as the "Identified Leases." TOGETHEfl with any and all quarantis of tenants' us) petformance under any and all of the Leases. TOGETHER with the immediate and continuing right to collect and receive all of the rents, income, receipts, revenues, issues, profits and other income of any nature now due or which may become due or to which Assignor may now or shall hereafter becc.e entitled to o. may make demand or claim for, (including any income of any nature coming due during any redemption period) arising or issuing from or out of the Leases or from or out of the Premises or any part thereof, including but not limited to, minjrj'i rents, addi- tional rents, percentage rents, parking or common area maintenance contributions, tax and insurance contributions deficiency rents and liquidated damages following default in any Lease, and all proceeds payable under any policy of insurance covering loss of rents resulting from untenant- ability caused by destruction or damaje to the Premises, together with any and all rights and claims of any kind which Assignor may have against any tenant under the Leases or any subtenants or Occupants of the Premises (all such monies, rights and claims described in this paragraph being hereinafter jointly and severally referred to as the "Cash Collateral"), EXCEPTING THEREFROM, any sums which by the S . ~1_ 2 S I --------.- - - -- _____ -- --- .-- -. - - a express provisions of any of the Leases are payable directly to any governmental authorit or to any other person, firm or corporation other than the landlord under the Leases. in TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the Assignee, its successors and assigns forever, or for such shorter period as hereinafter may be indicated. 00 SUBJECT, however, to a license hereby granted by Assignee to Assignor, but limited as hernafter provided, to collect and receive all of the Cash Collateraj. THIS ASSIGNMENT IS GIVEN FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECUR- ING the payment of the indebtedness evidenced by a certain Deed of Trust Note or Promissory Note (hereinafter referred to as the "Note") of even date herewith, made by Assignor, payable to the order of Assignee in the amount of SIX HUN- DRED THIRTY THOUSAND AND N0/100 DOLLARS ($630,000.00), and presently held by Assignee, including any extensions, moth- ficati.ons and renewals thereof and any supplemental note or notes increasing such indebtedness, as well as the payment, observance, performance and discharge of all other obliga- tions, covenants, conditions and warranties contained in an All-Inclusive Deed of Trust of even date herewith (herein- after called "Mortgage") made by Assignor, recorded or to be recorded in the real property records of King County, Wash- ington, and in any extensions, modifications, supplements and consolidations thereof, covering the Premises and secur- ing the Note and supplemental notes, if any. TO PROTECT THE SECURITY OF THIS ASSIGNMENT IT IS COVENANTED AND AGREED AS FOLLOWS 1. Assignor's Warranties Concerning Leases and Cash Collateral. That Assignor represents and warrants: Lii 3 - -- - —fl. ----.-- --.--IL -. S (a) That it has good right, title and interest in and to the Leases and Cash Collateral hereby assigned and gooc right to assign the same, and that no other person, partnership entity or corporation has any right, title or ifl 0 interest therein. That Assignor has duly and punctually per- formed all and singular the terms, covenants, conditions and 00 warranties of the Leases on Assignors part to be kept, observed and performed. That the Identified Leases, if any, and all other existing Leases are valid and unmodified except as indicated herein and are in full force and effect. That Assignor has not previously sold, 5 assigned, transferred, mortgaged, pledged or granted a security interest in the Identified Leases or Cash Colla- teral from the Premises, whether now due or hereafter to become due. That none of the Cash Collateral due and isSuiny rom the Premises or from any part thereof has been collected for any period in excess of two (2) months from the date hereof, and that payment of any of same has not otherwise been anticipated, waived, released, discounted, set off, or otherwise discharged or Compromised. That Assignor has not received any funds or F deposits from any tenant for which credit has not already been made on account of accrued Cash Collateral. That the texiits üñder the Idèñtified Leases, if any, are not in default of any of the terms or provisions thereof. 2. Assignor's Covenants of Performance, The Assignor covenants and agrees: • 4 S I To observe, perform and discharge, duly and punctually, all and stngular, the obligations, terms, cove- nants, conditions and warranties of the Note and Mortgage, of the Identified Leases, if any, and of all future Leases affecting the Premises on the part of Assignor to be kept, observed and perform, ed; and to give prompt notice to Assignee of any 1ail're on the part of Assignor to observe, perform Co and discharge sane. To notify and direct in writing each and every present or future tenant or occupant of the Premises or of any part thereof that any security deposit or other deposits heretofore delivered to Assignor have been retained by Assignor or assigned and delivered to Assignee as the case may be. To enforce or secure in the name of Assignee (upon notice to Assignee) the performance of each and every obligation, term, covenant, condition and agreement in the Leases by any tenant to be performed, and to notify Assignee of the occurrence of any default under the Leases. To appear in and defend any acti - or pro- ceeding arising under, occurring out of, or in any manner connected with the Leases or the obligations, duties or liabilities of Assignor or any tenant t.ereunder, and upon request by 1.ssignee, Assignor will do so in the name and on behalf of Assignee, but at the expense of Assignor. To pay all costs and expenses of Assignee, including attorneys' fees in a reasonable sum, in any action or proceeding in which Assignee may appear in connection herewith. To neither create nor permit any lien, charge H I 5 or Pncumbranc upon its interest as lessor of the ases except the lien of the Mortgage or as .rovided in the Mort- gage. Assignor further covenants and agrees that this Assign.- - inent creates and constitutes an equitable and 3pecific lien upon the Cash Collateral, and that this Assignment does not create or constitutc a pledge of or conditional security CD interest in such Cash Collateral. CD 3. Prior Aroval For Actions AffectinS Leases That Assignor, without the prior written consent of the Assignee, further covenants and agrees: Not to receive or collect any Cash Collateral from any present or future tenant of the Premises or any part thereof for a period of more than two (2) months in advance (whether in cash or by promissory note), nor pledge, transfer, mortgage, grant a security interest in, or other- wise encumber or assign fu.ure payments of Cash Collateral. Not to waive forgive, excuse, condone, dis- count, set off, compro&se or in any manner release or liacharge any tenant under any Leases of the Premises of and from any obligation, covenant, condition and agreement by tenant to be kept, observed and performed, including the obligation to pay the Cash Collateral thereunder in the manlier and at the place and time specified therein. Not to cancel, terminate or consent to any surrender of any of the Leases, nor commence any action of ejectment or any summary proceedings for dispossession of the tenant under any of the Leases, nor exercise any right of recapture of the Premises provided in any Leases, nor modify or in any way alter the terms thereof. [1 S 6 I I S (d, Not to lease any part of the Premises, nor renew 01 extend the term of any Leases of the Premises unless an option therefor was originally so reserved by tenants in the Leases for a fi:ed and definite rental. Not to relocate any tenant withja. the Premises, - nor consent to any modification of the express purposes for which the Premises or any part thereof is to be used, or to CM any assignment of the Leases by any tenant thereunder or to any assignment or further subletting of any sublease. 00 Not to assign, oledge, encumber or place any security agreement against the Leases or Cash Collateral. 4. Rejection of Leases. That Assignor further cove- nants and agrees as follows: That in the event any tenant under the Leases should become the subject of any proceeding under the Federal Bankruptcy Act or any other federal, state 0' local statute which provides for the possible termination or rejection of the Leases assigned hereby, Assignor covenants and agrees that in the event any of the Leases are so reected, no damages settlement shall be made without the prior written consent of the Assignee. That any check in payment of damages for rejection or termination of any such Lease will be made payable both to the Assignor and Assignee. (C) Assignor hereby assigns any such payment to Assignee and further covenants and agrees that upon request of Assignee, it will duly endorse to the order of Assignee any such check, the proceeds of which will be applied to any portion of the indebtedness secured by this Assignment in such manner as Assignee may elect. 7 -. . L.. -. ..........0 I 5. DefaultDeemed Default Under Deed of Trust. The Assignor hereby covenants and agrees that in the event any representation (jr warranty herein Df Assignor shall be found to be untrue or Assignor shall default in the observance or perfcrmance of any obligation, term, covenant, condition or warranty herein, then in each such instance, the same shall constitute and be deemed to be a default under the Note and 0 Mortgagt thereby entitling Assignee to declare all sums secured thereby and hereby immediately due and payable and to exercise any and all of the rights and remedies provided thereunder and herein, as well as those provided by law or in equity. 0. 6. License to Collect Cash Collateral. The parties agree that as long as there shall exist no default by Assignor in the payment of any indebtedness secured hereby or in the observance and performance of any other obligation, term, covenant, condition or warranty herein or in the Note and/or Mortgage or contained in the Leases, Assign'-'r shall have the right under a license granted hereby (but limited as provided in the following section) to collect, but not prior to accrual, all of the Cash Collateral arising from or out of said Leases, or any renewals, extension' and replacements thereof, or from or out of the Promises or any part thereof; and Assignor shall receive such Cash Collateral and hold the Cash Collateral, together with the right and license herein graited, as a trust fund to be applied, and Assignor hereby covenants to so apply them, as required by Assignee, first to the payment of taxes and assessments upon said Premises before penalty or interest - is due thereon; second to the costs of insurance, maintenance and repairs required by the E 8 I I S terms of said Mortgage; third to the satisfaction of all obligations under the L'ses; and fourth to the payment of interest, principal and any other sums becoming due under the Note and Mortgage, before using any part of the same for C) any other purposes. Ln 7. Performance and Termination of License. (a) The parties agree that upon the conveyance by Assignor and its successors and assAgns of the fee title of the Premises, all right, title, interest and powers granted under the license described above shal.l automatically pass to and may be exercised by each subsequent owner; and that upon or at any time after default in the payment of any indebtedness secured hereby or in the observance or perfor- mance of any obligation, term, covenant, condition or warranty contained herein, in the Note, Mortgage or in the Leases, the Assignee, at its option and without notice, shall have the complete right, power and authority hereunder to exercise and enforce any or all of the following rights and remedies at any time. (1) To terminate the license granted to Assignor to collect the Cash Collateral without taking possession of the Premises or the Leases, and to demand, collect, receive, sue for, attach and levy against the Cash Collateral in Assignee's name; to give proper receipts, releases and acquittances therefor; and after deducting all necessary and proper costs and expenses of operation and colj.ection as determined by Assignee, including reasonable attorneys' fees, to apply the net proceeds thereof, together with any funds of Assignor deposited with Assignee, upon any indebtedness secured hereby and in such order as Assignee may determine. 9 U To declare all sums secured hereby imme- diately due and payable and, at its option, exercise all or any of the rights and remedies contained in the Note and/or Mortgage or other instrument given to secure the indebted- mess secured hereby. C Without regard to the adequacy of the security or the solvency of Assignor, with or without any action or proceeding through any person, agent, trustee or receiver under the Mortgage, or by a receiver to be appointed by court, and without regard to Assignor's possession, to enter upon, take possession of, manage and operate the Premises or any part thereof; make, modify, enforce, cancel or accept surrender of any Leases now or hereafter in effect on said Premises or any part thereof; remove and evict any tenant; increase or decrease rents; decorate, clean, repair and otherwise do any act or incur any costs or expenses as Assignee shall deem proper to protect the security hereof, as fully and to the same extent as Assignee could do if in possession; and in such event, to apply the Cash Collateral so collected in such order as Assginee shall deem proper to the permanent operation and management fees and costs, brokerage and attorneys' fees; payment of the indebtedness under the Note and Mortgage and payment to a reserve fund for replacements and capital improvements, which fund shall not bear in'est. -. Require Assignor to transfer all security deposits to Assignee, together with all records evidencing such deposits. (b) Assignor further agrees and covenants that for the purposes hereinabove enumerated in this section, S 10 &. .:.,.-. C-) tf) ci 0 1) I -I p Assignee shall have constructive possession, whether or not it is in actual possession, in order to effectuate such purposes, and in no event shali Assignee accrue any liabilty by reason of such constructive possession. Assignee shall not be required to give notice, or make demand, to Assignor or any tenants under then existing Leases of its actions to effectuate such purposes; provided, however, that the acceptance by Assignee of this Assignment, with all of the rights, powers, privileges and authority created hereunder shall not, prior to entry upon and taking possession of the Premises by Assignee, be deemed or construed to constitute the Assignee a "rlortgagee in Possession," nor thereafter or at any time or in any event obligate Assignee to appear in or defend any action or proceeding relating to the Leases or the Premises, or to take any action hereunder or thereunder, or to expend any money or incur any expenses or perform or discharge any obligation, duty or liability under the Leases, or to assume any obligation or responsibility for any secur- ity deposits or other deposits delivered to Assignor by any tenant thereunder and not assiqned and delt"ered to Assignee; nor shall Assignee be liable in any way for injury or damage to person or property sustained by any person or persons, partnership, firm or corporation in or about the Premises. (C) That the collection of the Cash Collateral and application thereof as aforesaid and/or the entry upon and taking possession of the Premises shall neither cure or w,tive any default nor waive, modify or affect any notice of default required under the Note and/or Mortgage nor invali- date any act done pursuant to such notice. The enforcement of any right or remedy by Assignee, once exercised, shall continue until Assignee shall have collected and applied such Cash Co.. ateral as may be necessary to cure the then existing default and for so long thereafter as Assignee may, in its sole discretion, deem necessary to secure the in- debtedness. Although the original default be cured and the >1 o exercise of any such right or remedy be discontinued, the same or any other right or remedy hereunder shall not be (3) exhausted and may be reasserted at an-- time and from time to time following any subsequent default. (d) The rights and powers conferred upon Assignee hereunder are cumulative of and not in lieu of any other 4 .1 rights and powers otherwise granted by Assignee. 8. ppointxnent of Attorney. The Assignor hereby • constitutes and appoints Assignee its true and lawful attor- ney-in-fact, coupled with an interest; and in the name, p)ae and stead of Assignor, to subordinate at any time and TA from time to time, any Leases affecting the Premises or any ' part thereof to the lien of the Mortgage or any other mort- gage or deed of trust, security interest, lien or encum- brance of any kind encumbering the Premises, or to any ground lease of the Premises; and to request or require such • subordination where such option or authority was reserved to Assignor under any such Leases, or in any case where Assignor otherwise would have the right, power or privilege so to do. This appointment shall be irrevocable and continuing and these rights, powers and privileges shall be exclusive in Assignee, its successors and assigns as long as any 'art of the indebtedness secured hereby shall r'unain unpaid. As- signor hereby warrants that it has not, at any time prior to S the date hereof, exercised any right to subordinate any such 12 S... -• -• 0 U) I S Leases to the Mortgage or to any other mortgage, deed of trust, interest, lien or encumbrance of any kind, or ground lease (except the ground lease or leases creating the Prem- ises, if any) and further covenants not to exercise any such right. indemnification. The Assignor shall indem. and hold Assignee harmless from and shall defend Assignee against, any and all liability, loss, damage or expense which Assignee may incur under or by reason of this Assignment, or for any action taken by Assignee hereunder, or by reason or in defense of any and all claims and demands whatsoever which may be asserted against Assignee arising out of the Leases, including but not limited to, any claims by any tenants of credit for rent for any period under any Leases for more than two (2) months in advance of the due date thereof and security deposits paid to and received by Assignor, but not delivered to Assignee. Should Assignee incur any such liability, loss, damage or expense, the iount thereof (including reasonable attorneys' fees) with interest thereon at the maximum r't.e permitted by law shall be payable by Assignor immediately without demand, and shall be secured as a lien hereby and by said Mortgage. Records. Until the indebtedness secured hereby shall have been paid in full, Assignor shall deliver to Assignee executed copies of the Leases and any and all renewals of existing Leases and future Leases upon all or any part of the Premises, and will transfer and assign such Leases upon the same terms and conditions as herein con- tained. Assignor hereby covenants and agrees to make, execute and deliver unto Assignee, upon demand and at any time, any :13 -.- !I and all assig ments and other records and instruments, including but not limited to, rent rolls, tenant financial statements and books of account sufficient for the purpose that Assignee may deem to be advisable for carrying out the purposes and intent of this Assignment. - U. No Waiver. The failure of Assignee to avail itself of any of the terms, covenants and conditions of this CQ Assignment fo- any period of time or at any time shall not 0 be, nor anything done or omitted to be done by Assignee co pursuant hereto shall be deemed, a waiver by Assignee of any of its rights and remedies under the Note and/or Mortgac' or of the benefit of the laws of the State in which the said Premises are situated. The rights of Assignee to collect the said indebtedness, to enforce any security therefor, or to enforce any other right or remedy hereunder may be exer- cised by Assignee, either prior to, simultaneously with, or 3ubsegnent to, any such other action hereinhefore described, and shall not be deemed an election of remedies. 12. Primary Security. This Assignment is absolute, unconditional and primary in nature to the obligation evi- denced and secured by the Note, Mortgage and any other document given to secure and collateralize the indebtedness secured hereby. Assignor agrees that Assignee may enforce this Assignment without first resorting to or exhausting any other security or collateral; provided however, that nothing herein contained shall prevent Assignee from suing on the Note, foreclosing the Mortgage judicially as a mortgage or non-judicially as a deed of trust, or exercising any other right or remedy under any other document evidencing or collateralizing the indebtedness secured hereby. L 14 L I iw - ... .-. I Merger. The fact that (i) the Lease-. or the leasehold estate created thereby may be held directly or indirectly by or for the account of any person or entity - which shall have an interest in the fee estate of the Prem- 0 ises, :11) the operation -'f law, or (iii) any other event 00 shall not merge any Leases or the leasehold estates created O thereby with the fee estate in the Premises so long as 'ny 00 of the indebtedness secured hereby and by the Note and Mortgage shall remain unpaid, unless Assignee shall consent in writing to such merger. - Termination of Assignment. Upon payment in full of all of the indebtedness evidenced by th Note and secured by the Mortgage and payment of all sums payable hereunder, this Assignment shall be void and of no further effect and no judgment or decree entered as to said indebtedness shall operate to abrogate or lessen the effect of this Assignment until such indebtedness has actually been paid; provided, that the affidavit, certificate, letter or statement of any officer of Assignee showing that any portion of said in- debtedness or sums remains unpaid shall be, and shall con- stitute, conclusive evidence of the validity, effectiveness and continuing force of this Assignment. Any person, firm or corporation may, and is hereby authorized by Assignor to, rely on such affidavit, certificate, letter or statement. A demand by Assignee of any tenant for payment of Cash Col- lateral by reason of any default claimed by Assignee shall be sufficient direction to said tenant to make future pay- ments of Cash Collateral to Assignee without the necessity for further consent by or notice to Assignor. Notice. All notices, demands, requests or docu- 15 ....--.-. .- -..-.- - --.--,.-... .-- .........-. S ments of any kind which Assignee may be required or may desire to serve upon Assignor hereunder shall be suffi- ciently delivered by delivering same to Assignor personally or by leaving a copy of same addressed to Assignor at Assignor's address herein set forth, or by Assignee deposit- ing a copy of same 4 n a regularly maintained receptacle of the United States mails, prsLge prepaid, certified or registered mail, addressed to Assignor at said address. Notices, demands, requests and documents given in such manner shall be deemed sufficiently delivered, served or given for all purposes hereunder at the time such noticc-, demand, request or document shall have been delivered to or mailed as hereinhefore provided to the addressee. Any party hereto may, by delivery to the other party of notice, desig- nate a different address. Assignment Binds Successo2 The terms, covenants, conditions and warranties contained herein, and the powers granted hereby, shall run with the land and shall inure to the benefit of, and bind all parties hereto and their respec- tive heirs, executors, administrators, marital communities (if any), successors and assigns and all tenart and their subtenants and assigns and all subsequent owner~ f the Premises and subsequent holder of the Note and/or Mortgage. Additional Rights and Remedies. In addition to, but not in lieu of, any other rights hereunder, As'ignee shall have the right to institute suit and obtain a protec- tive or mandatory injunction to prevent a breach or default of, or to enforce the observation by such Assignor of, the agreements, covenants, terms and conditions contained herein, and shall have the right to attorneys' fees, costs, expenses, 0.- 0 16 S and ordinary and punative iamaqes .ccasjoned by any such breach or default by Assignor. Location of Performance. Assignor expressly agrees that this Assignment is performable at the county in which the Premises is located and waives the right to be sued elsewhere. The Assignor agrees and consents to the jurisdiction of any court of competent jurisdiction located in the co'nty in which the Premises is located Severability. If any provision of this Assignment or the application thereof to any entity, person or circum- stance shall be invalid or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this Assignment and the application of such provisions to other entities, persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby, and shall not be affected thereby, and shall be enforced to the greatest extent permitted by law. No Third Party Assignees. It is expressly agreed by Arsignor that this Assignment shall not be construed or deemed made for the benefit of any third party or parties. Entire Agreement. This Assignment conta.-s the entire agreement concerning the Assignment of Leases and Cash Collateral between the parties hereto. No variations, modifications or changes herein or hereof shall be binding upon any party hereto unless set forth in a document duly executed by or 'n behalf of such party. Construction. Whenever used herein, whenever the context so requires, the singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of any gender shall include all genders. The word, "Mortgage," as used herein shall mean Mortgage, Deed of Trust, Trust Deed, 17 Iff - S I Security Deed or Deed to Secure Debt. All obligations of each Ass:i'cor hereunder shall be joint and several. Multiple Countex-arts This instrument may be executed in multiple counterparts, all of which shall be deemed originals and with the same effect as if all parties If) hereto had signed the same document. All of such counter- 00 parts shall be construed together and shall constitute one c.'J instrument, but in making proof, it shall only be necessary 3:) to produce one such counterpart. Governing Law. The parties agree that the law of the State in which the Premises is located shall govern the performance and enforcement of this Assignment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Assignment on this / day of ASOR /L / DOUG E. MCKEEN OLIVE S. tICKEEN Husband and Wife Address: 6203 South 194th Street Kent, Washington ASSIGNEE OtDONNELL, BRIGIW & PARTNERS NORTHWEST PROPERT ES, Y..Dove 1? ter p _____________________ aging artner Address: Street Suite 760 Newport Beach, CA 92660 18 — ;..'.- . -.. - . . ,-.. n.- •' .- .. STATE OF ) ss. COUNTY OF o,C,U- On this day of , 198, before me, the undersigned, a Notary PUblic hiifor the State of duly commissioned and sworn, person- ally appeared . to me known to be the Managino Partner of O'DONNELL, eRIGHAN & PARTNERS - NORTH- WEST PROt'ERTIES, a General Partnership, the partnership that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said partnership, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the said instrument. WITNESS my hand and olf:icial seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. OFF[CItIL SEAL MARSHA I. AUST)N k NOIARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA ORANGE cowcrr I, Mp ceun. eiprts JUL Notay Public in and for the State of residing at S a I STATE OF / ) SS• COiJNTYOF '•' '.J ) I On this /'—day of ____ ____, before me, tpe unders,igned, a Notary Public4 and for the State of personally appeared DOUGLAS E. McKEiN and OLIVE S. McKEEN, to me known to be the persor3 named in the foregoing document, and acknowledged to me hat they executed the same freely and voluntarily for.the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Witness my hand and official seal the 6ay in this certificate first above written Not9y Public in and ,for he,B4te of ., resiing WDS/3lB I 19 c) U) 0 c\j - ASSIGNMENT OF LEASES AND CASH COLLATERAL THIS ASSIGNMENT OF LEASES AND CASH COLLATERAL in (hereinafter referred to as the ssignment") is made by and a between DOUGLAS E. MOKEEN and OLIVE S. McKEEN, husband and wife (hereinafter jointly and severally referred t') as the LO "Assignor'); and O'DONNELL, BRIGHP.N & PARTNERS - NORTHWEST PROPERTIES, a general partnership. RECOOET: FEÜ1 I ti19ñH8 WITNE5SETH: RE0RUSUi;-- Itc::': FOR V1'J,UE RECEIVED, Asrigrior does hereby ABSOLUTEL? AND TMNF.DIATELY SELL, ASSIGN, TRANSFER, CONVEY, SET OVER and DELIVER unto Assignee any and all existing and future leases (including subleases thereof), whether wdtteri or oral, and all future agreements for use and occupancy, and any and all extensions, renewals and replacements thereof, upon all or relating to any part of the real property described as follows: Lot 5, Block 5, Southcenter Corporate Park, as per Plat recorded in the records of King County, Washington, under Record- ing,No. 8003140871. TOGETHER WITH all buildings and improvements thereon (which real property, buildings and improvements are referred to herein as the "Premises"), but excluding any trade fixtures, f inventory, equipment or other property owned or leaied by the tenant under any lease assigned hereby. The identified Leases, if any, are either presently existing or future leases, and are as shown in the Schedule of Leases attached '., fl!I:? fN.1:A Li- p.It vi.ir; : . •;; ( -7iUF.1' 1 hereto and made a part hereof as "Exhibit A." All such leases, Subleases, tenancies, agreements, extensions, re- newals and replacements are hereinafter jointly and col- lectively referred to as the "Leases;" provided, that any and all leases set forth in the Schedule of Leases may be 0 sometjaies referred to herein as the "Identified Leases." TOGETijfl with any and all guaranties of tenants' performance under any and all of the Leases. T0SETHR with the inuediate and continuing right to collect and receive all of the rents, income, receipts, revenues, issues, profits and other income of any nature now due or which may become due or to which Assignor may now or shall hereafter becc.'e entitled to o may make demand or claim for, (including any income of any nature coming due during any redemption period) arising or issuing from or out of the Leases or from or out of the Premises or any part thereof, including but not limited to, minir-am rents, addi- tional rents, percentage rents, parking or common area maintenance contributions, tax and insurance contributions, deficiency rents and liquidated damages following default in any Lease, and all proceeds payable under any policy of insurance covering loss of rents resulting from untenant- ability caused by destruction or damage to the Premises, together with any and all rights and claims of any kind which Assignor may have against any tenant under the Leases or any subtenants or occupants of the Premises (all such monies, rights and claims desar1bed in this paragraph being hereiy&after jointly and severally referred to as the "Cash Collateral"), EXCEPTflG ThEREFROM, any sums which by the S S Rq .-- ____-,p_ - - - -- - -- - -.-----,-, -: .-r. - - S LI express provisions of any of the Leases are payable directly to any governmental authorit or to any other pc'rson, firm or corporation other than the landlord under the Leases. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the Assignee, 0 its successors and assigns forever, or for such shorter period as hereinafter may be indicated. 00 SUBJECT, however, to a license hereby granted by Assignee to Assignor, but limited as hernafter provided, to collect and receive all of the Cash Collateraj. THIS ASSIGNMENT IS GIVEN FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECUR- ING the payment of the indebtedness evidenced by a certain Deed of Trust Note or Promissory Note (hereinafter referred to as the "Note") of even date herewith, made by Assignor, payable to the order of Assignee in the amOunt of SIX HUN- DRED THIRTY THOUSAND AND NO/lOO DOLLARS ($630,000.00), and presently held by Assignee, including any extensions, ruodi- fications and renewals thereof and any supplemental note or notes increasing such indebtedness, as well as the payment, observance, performance and discharge of all other obliga- tions, covenants, conditions and warranties contained in an All-Inclusive Deed of Trust of even date herewith (herein- after called "Mortgage") made by Assignor, recorded or to be recorded in the real property records of King County, Wash- ington, and in any extensions, modifjbatjons, supplements and consolidations thereof, covering the Premises and secur- ing the Note and supplemental notes, if any. TO PROTECT THE SECURITY OF THIS ASSIGNMENT IT IS COVENANTED AND AGREED AS FOLLOWS; I. Assignor's Warranties Concerning Leases and Cash Collateral. That Assignor represents and warrants: I r L 3 S - - - - --I. - - --- - - - ..- - -- S -, That it has good right, title and interest in and to the Leases and Cash Collateral hereby assigned and gaoc right to assign the same, and that no other person, - partnership entity or corporation has any right, title or Ln c) interest therein. That Assignor has duly and punctually per- formed all and singular the terms, covenants, conditions and warranties of the Leases on Assignor's part to be kept, observed and performed. That the Identified Leases, if any, and all other existing Leases are valid and unmodified excapt as indicated herein and are ia Lull force and effect. That Assignor has not previously sold, assigned, transferred, mortgaged, pledged or granted a security interest in the Identified Leases or Cash Colla- teral from the Premises, whether now due or hereafter to become due. That none of the Cash Collateral due and issuin,, .rom the Premises or from any part thereof has been collected for any period in excess of two (2) months from the date hereof, and that payment OF any of seine has not otherwise been anticipated, waived, released, discounted, set off, or otherwise discharged or compromised. That Assignor has not received any funds or deposits from any tenant for which credit has not already been made on account of accrued Cash Collateral. That the teajts üñder the Idèntifiéd Leases, if any, are not in default of any of the terms or provisions thereof. 2. Assignors Covenants of Performance. The Assignor covenants and agrees: 4 -- ---- -., - .- - ,.-- - - - .-- - - S - I To observe, perform and discharge, duly and punctually, all and singular, the obligations, terms, Cove- nants, conditions and warranties of the Note and Mortgage, of the Identified Leases, if any, and of all future Leases affecting the Premises on the part of Assignor to be kept, observed and performed; and to give prompt notice to Assignee of any iail'ire on the part of Assignor to observe, perform aD and discharge same. To notify and direct in writing each and every present or future tenant or occupant of the Premises or of any part thereof that any security deposit or other deposits heretofore delivered to Assignor have been retained by Assignor or assigned and delivered to Assignee as the case may be. To enforce or secure in the name of Assignee (upon notice to Assignee) the performance of each and every obligation, term, covenant, condition and agreement in the Leases by any tenant to be performed, and to notify Assignee of the occurrence of any default under the Leases. To appear in and defend any acti-'-' or pro- ceeding arising under, occurring out of, or in any manner connected with the Leases or the obligations, duties or ]iabilities of Assignor or any tenant t.ereunder, and upon request b !ssignee, Assignor will do so in the name and on behalf of Assignee, but at the expense of Assignor. To pay all, costs and expenses of Assignee, including attorneys' fees in a reasonable sum, in any action or proceeding in which Assignee may appear in connection herewith. To neither create nor permit any lien, charge I 4 or encunthranc upon its interest as lessor of the ames except the lien of the Mortgage or as •.rovided in the Mort- a gage. Assignor further covenants and agrees that this Assign- - ment creates and constitutes an equitable and specific lien - upon the Cash Collateral, and that this Assignment does not create or constitute a pledge of or conditional security 0 — interest in such Cash Collateral. a) j9 3. PriorAprova1 For Actions Affecting Leases. That Assignor, without the prior written consent of the Assignee, further covenants and agrees: (a) Not to receive or collect any Cash Collateral tv,, ••;, from any present or future tenant of the Premises or any .,,(, part thereof for a period of more than two (2) montos in advance (whether in cash or by promissory note), nor pledge, transfer, mortgage, grant a security interest in, or other- t wise encumber or assign fu;.ure payments of Cash Collateral. (b) Not to waive forgive, excuse, condone, dis- count, sat off, compromise or in any manner release or 3icharge any tenant '.inder any Leases of the Premises of and from any obligation, covenant, condition and agreement by tenant to be kept, observed and performed, including the obligation to pay the Cash Collateral thereunder in the manner and at the place and time specified therein. (a) Not to cancel, terminate or consent to any surrender of any of the Leases, nor commence any action of ejectxnent or any summary proceedings for dispossession of the tenant under any of the Leases, nor exercise any right of recapture of the Premises provided in any Leases, nor modify or in any way alter the terms thereof. (d, Not to lease any part of the Premises, nor renew or extend the term of any Leases of the Premises unless an option therefor was originally so reserved by tenants in the Leases for a fi:ed and definite rental. Not to relocate any tenant withii. the Premises, nor consent to any modification of the express purposes for which the Premises or any part thereof is to be used, or to CO any assignment of the Leases by any tenant thereunder or to any assignment or further subletting of any sublease. 00 Not to assign, Pledge, encumber or place any security agreement against the Leases or Cash Collateral. 4. Rejection of Leases. That Assignor further cove- nants and agrees as follows: That in the event any tenant under the Leases should become the subject of any proceeding under the Federal Bankruptcy Act or any other federal, state o' local statute which provides for the possible termination or rejection of the Leases assigned hereby, Assignor covenants and agrees that in the event any of the Leases are so reiected, no damages settlement shall be made without the prior written consent of the Assignee. That any check in payment of damages for rejection or termination of any such Lease will be made payable both to the Assignor and Assignee. Assignor hereby assigns any such payment to Assignee and further covenants and agrees that upon request of Assignee, it will duly endorse to the order of Assignee any such check, the proceeds of which will be applied to any portion of the indebtedness secured by this Assignment in such manner as Assignee may elect. I 7 - . DefaultDeemed Default Under_Deed of Trust. The Assignor hereby covenants and agrees that in the event any representation or warranty herein 3f Assignor shall be found to be untrue or Assignor shall default in the observance or perfcrmance of any obligation, term, covenant, condition or warranty herein, then in each such instance, the same shall cj constitute and be deemed to be a default under the Note and C Mortgag, thereby entitling Assignee to declare all sums secured thereby and hereby immediately due and payable and to exercise any and all of the rights and remedies provided thereutider and herein, as well as those provided by law or in equity. 6. License to Collect Cash Collateral. The parties • agree that as long as there shall exist no default by Assignor in the payment of any indebtedness secured hereby or in the observance and performance of any other obligation, term, covenant, condition or warranty herein or in the Note and/or Mortgage or contained in the Leases, Assignrr shall have the right under a license granted hereby (but limited as provided in the following section) to collect, but not prior to accrual, all of the Cash Collateral arising from or out of said reases, or any renewals, extension' and replacements thereof, or from or out of the Prcmises or any part thereof; and Assignor shall receive such Cash Collateral and hold the Cash Collateral, together with the right and license herein granted, as a trust fund to be applied, and Assignor hereby covenants to so apply them, as reguired by Assignee, first to the payment of taxes and assessments upon said Premises before penalty or interest is due thereon; second to the costs of insurance, maintenance and repairs required by the 8 C,-) 0 XD C\J 0 EN L I terms of said Mortgage; third to the satisfaction of all obligations under the Lsses; and fourth to the payment of interest, principal and any other sums becoming due under the Note and Mortgage, before using any part of the same for any other purposes. 7. Performance and Termination of License. (a) The parties agree that upon the conveyance by Assignor and its successors and ass.gns of the fee title of the Premises, all right, title, interest and powers granted under the license described above shall automatically pass to and may be exercised by each subsequent owner; and that upon or at any time after default in the payment of any indebtedness secured hereby or in the observance or perfor- mance of any obligation, term, covenant, condition or warranty contained herein, in the Note, mortgage or in the Leases, the Assignee, at its option and without notice, shall have the complete right, power and authority hereunder to exercise and enforce any or all of the following rights and remedies at any time. (1) To terminate the license granted to Assignor to collect the Cash Collateral without taking possession of the Premises or the Leases, and to demand, collect, receive, sue for, attach and levy against the Cash Collateral in Assignee's name; to give proper receipts, releases and acquittances therefor; and after deducting all necessary and proper costs and expenses of operation and col'ection as determined by Assignee, including reasonable attorneys' fees, to apply the net proceeds thereof, together with any funds of Assignor deposited with Assignee, upon any indebtedness secured hereby and in such order as Assignee may determine. VI - ------ - --- .---.-- ______ (2) To declare all stuns secured hereby imme- diately due and payable and, at its option, exercise all or any of the rights and remedies contained in the Note and/or Mortgage or other instrument given to secure the indebted- CO ness secured hereby. Ln CO (3) Without regard to the adequacy of the IN security or the solvency of Assignor, with or without any action or proceeding through any person, agent, trustee or receiver under the Mortgage, or by a receiver to be appointed by court, and without regard to Assignor's possession, to enter upon, take possession of, manage and operate the Premises or any part thereof; make, modify, enforce, cancel or accept surrender of any Leases now or hereafter in effect on said Premises or any part thereof; remo.'e and evict any tenant; increase or decrease rents; decorate, clean, repair and otherwise do any act or incur any costs or expenses as Assignee shall deem proper to protect the 3ecurity hereof, as fully and to the same extent as Assignee could do if in possession; ctid in such event, to apply the Cash Collateral so collected in such order as Assginee shall deem proper to the permanent operation and management. fees and costs, brokerage and attorneys' fees; payment of the indebtedness under the Note and Mortgage and payment to a reserve fund for replacements and capital improvements, which fund shall not bear inF'est. (4) Require Assignor to transfer all security deposits to Assignee, together with all records evidencing such deposits. (b) Assignor further agrees and covenants that for the purposes hereinabove enumerated in this section, S 10 - --------- - - -,-- :-- - .-----. - -- - - , - .- - -. - - - EXhIBIT A Lot 5, Block 5, Southcenter Corporate Park, as per Plat recorded in Volume 114 of Plats, pages 36-42 inclusive, records of King Couit.v. a Washington. I .---- - - -- - - •4.•;.: I Assignee shall have constructive possession, whether or not it is in actual possession, in order to effectuate such purposes, and in no event shall Assignee accrue any liabilty by reason of such constructive possession. Assignee shall not be required to give notice, or make demand, to Assignor JO or any tenants under then existing Leases of its actions to effectuate such purposes; provided, howevet, that the acceptance by Assignee of this Assignment, with all of the rights, powers, privileges and authority created hereunder shall not, prior to entry upon and taking possession of the Premises by Assignee, be deemed or construed to constitute the Assignee a "Mortgagee in Possession," nor thereafter or at any time or in any event obligate Assignee to appear in or defend any action or proceeding relating to the Leases or the Premises, or to take any action hereunder or thereunder, or to expend any money or incur any expenses or perform or discharge any obligation, duty or liability under the Leases, or to assume any obligation or responsibility for any secur- ity deposits or other deposits delivered to Assignor by any tenant thereunder and not assigned and deli"ered to Assignee; nor shall Assignee be liable in any way for injury or damage to person or property sustained by any person or persons, partnership, firm or corporation in or about the Premises. (c) That the collection of the Cash Collateral and application thereof as aforesaid and/or the entry upon and taking possession of the Premises shall neither cure or ve any default nor waive, modify or affect any notice of default required under the Note and/or Mortgage nor invali- date any act done pursuant to such notice. The enforcement of any right or remedy by Assignee, once exercised, shall 11 continue until Assignee shall have collected and applied such Cash Co.. ateral as may be necessary to cure the then existing default and for so long thereafter as Assignee may, in its so le discretion, deem necessary tc, secure the in- debtedness. Although the original default be cured and the CO exercise of any such right or remedy be discontinued, the same or any other right or remedy hereunder shall not be U) exhausted and may be reasserted at an- time and from time to time following any subsequent default. - , (d) The rights and powers conferred upon Assignee hereunder are cumulative of and not in lieu of any other rights and powers otherwise granted by Assignee. 8. ppointnent of Attorney. The Assignor hereby constitutes and appoints Assignee its true and lawful attor- ney-in-fact, coupled with an interest; and in the naxue, • plac.e and stead of Assignor, to subordinate at any time and TA from time to time, any Leases affecting the Premises or any part thereof to the lien of the Mortgage or any other mort- gage or deed of trust, security interest, lien or encum- S brance of any kind encumbering the Premises, or to any ground lease of the Premises; and to request or require such S subordination where such option or authority was reserved to Assignor under any such Leases, or in any case where Assignor otherwise would have the right, power or privilege so to do. This appointment shall be irrevocable and continuing and these rights, powers and privileges shall be exclusive in Assignee, its successors and assigns as long as any '.,art of the indebtedness secured hereby shall rnmain unpaid. As- signor hereby warrants that it has not, at any time prior to the date hereof, exercised any right to subordinate any such 12 I S Leases to the Mortgage or to any other mortgage, deed of trust, interest, lien or encumbrance of any kind, or g1.ound lease (except the ground lease or leases creating the Prem- ises, if any) and further covenants not to exercise any such right. Indemnification. The Assignor shall indem. and 0 hold Assignee harmless from and shall defend Assignee against, any and all liability, loss, damage or expense which Assignee 5 may incur under or by reason of this Assignment, or for any action taken by Assignee hereunder, or by reason or in defense of any and all claims and demands whatsoever which may be asserted against Assignee arising out of the Leases, including but not limited to, any claims by any tenants of credit for rent for any period under any Leases for more than two (2) months in advance of the due date thereof and security deposits paid to and received by Assignor, but not delivered to Assignee. Should Assignee incur any such liability, loss, damage or expense, the - ount thereof (including reasonable attorneys' fees) with interest thereon at the maximum r?t.e permitted by law shall be payable by Assignor immediately without demand, and shall be secured as a lien hereby and by said Mortgage. Records. Until the indebtedness secured hereby shall have been paid in full, Assignor shall deliver to Assignee executed copies of the Leases and any and all renewals of existing Leases and future Leases upon all or any part of the Premises, and will transfer and assign such Leases upon the same terms and conditions as herein con- tained. Assignor hereby covenants and agrees to make, execute and deliver unto Assignee, upon demand and at any time, any 13 _______ - - -• •- i er and all assig ments and other records and instruments, including but not limited to, rent rolls, tenant financial statements and books of account sufficient for the purpose that Assignee may deem to be advisable for carrying out the purposes and intent of this Assignment. - 11. No Waiver. The failure of Assignee to avail itself of any of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Assignment fo" any period of time or at any time shall not - be, nor anything done or omitted to be done by Assignee pursuant hereto shall be deemed, a waiver by Assignee of any of its rights and remedies under the Note and/or Mortgacc or of the benefit of the laws of the State in which the said Premises are situated. The rights of Assignee to collect the said indebtedness, to enforce any security therefor, or to enforce any other right or remedy hereunder may be exer- cised by Assignee, either prior to, simultaneously with, or ,ubsequent to, any such other action hereinbefore described, and shall not be deemed an election of remedies. 12. Primary Security. This Assignment is absolute, unconditional and primary in nature to the obligation evi- denced and secured by the Note, Mortgage and any other document given to secure and collateralize the indebtedness secured hereby. Assignor agrees that Assignee may enforce this Assignment without first resorting to or exhausting any other security or collateral; provided however, that nothing herein contained shall prevent Assignee from suing on the Note, foreclosing the Mortgage judicially as a mortgage or non-judicially as a deed of trust, or exerci'ing any other right or remedy under any other document evidenciIig or co]lateralizing the indebtedness secured hereby. S 14 ...-,,"-- ..-...... I I - -- wu11r1PIII Merger. The fact that (i) the Lease. or the leasehold estate created thereby may be held directly or indirectly by or for the account of any person or entity which shall have an interest in the fee estate of the Prem- ises, .ii) the operatjoi-, nf law, or (iii) any other event 0 shall not merge any Leases or the leasehold estates created c\J O thereby with the fee estate in the Premises so long as ny of the indebtedness secured hereby and by the Note and Mortgage shall remain unpaid, unless Assignee shall consent in writing to such merger. Termination of Assignment. Upon payment in full of all of the indebtedness evidenced by th Note and secured by the Mortgage and payment of all sums payable hereunder, this Assignment shall be void and of no further effect and no judgiient or decree entered as to said indebtedness shall operate to abrogate or lessen the effect of this Assignment until such indebtedness has actually been paid; provided, that the affidavit, certificate, letter or statement of any officer of Assignee showing that any portion of said in- debtedness or sums remains unpaid shall be, and shall con- stitute, conclusive evidence of the validity, effectiveness and continuing force of this Assignment. Any person, firm or corporation may, and is hereby authorized by Assignor to, rely on such affidavit, certificate, letter or statement. A demand by Assignee of any tenant for payment of Cash Col- lateral by reason of any default claimed by Assignee shall be sufficient direction to said tenant to make future pay- ments of Cash Collateral to Assignee without the necessity for further consent by or notice to Assignor. is. Notice. All notices, demands, requests or docu- 15 ments of any kind which Assignee may be required or may desire to serve upon Assignor hereunder shall be suffi- ciently delivered by delivering same to Assignor personally or by leaving a copy of same addressed to Assignor at - Assignor's address herein set forth, or by Assignee deposit- Ln ing a copy of same 4 n a regularly maintained receptacle of the United States mails, prstge prepaid, certified or 0 - registered mail, addressed to Assignor at said address. co Notices, demands, requests and documents given in such manner shall be deemed sufficiently delivered, served or given for all purposes hereunder at the time such notice, demand, request or document shall have been delivered to or mailed as hereinbefore provided to the addressee. Any party hereto may, by delivery to the other party of notice, desig- nate a different address. Assignment Binds Successo'. The terms, covenants, conditions and warranties contained herein, and the powers granted hereby, shall run with the land and shall inure to the benefit of, and bind all parties hereto and their respec-. tive heirs, executors, administrators, marital communities (if any), successo:s and assigns and all tenar'-s and their subtenants and assiqns and all subsequent owner. f the Premises and subsequent holder of the Note and/or Mortgage. Adthtional Rights and Remedies. In addition to, but not in lieu of, any other rights hereunder, As'ignee shall have the right to institute suit and obtain a protec- tive or mandatory injunction to prevent a breach or default of, or to enforce the observation by such Assignor of, the agreements, covenants, terms and conditions contained herein, and shall have the right to attorneys' fees, costs, expenses, S 16 - -- 'S I and ordinary and punative damages ccasjoned by any such breach or default by Assignor. Location of Performance. Assignor expressly agrees that this Assignment is performable at the county in which the Premises is located and waives the right to be sued elsewhere. The Assignor agrees and consents to the jurisdiction of any court of competent jurisdiction located (0 in the cotrity in which the Premises is located Severability. If any provision of this Assignment or the application thereof to any entity, person or circum- stance shall be invalid or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this Assignment and the application of such provisions to other entities, persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby, and shall not be affected thereby, and shall be enforced to the greatest extent permitted by law. No Third Party Assignees. It is expressly agreed by AFsignor that this Assignment shall not be construed or deemed made for the benefit of any third party or parties. Entire Agreement. This Assignment conta.-s the entire agreement concerning the Assignment of Leases and Cash Collateral between the parties hereto. No variations, modifications or changes herein or hereof shall be binding upon any party hereto unless set forth in a document duly executed by or on behalf of such party. Construction. Whenever used herein, whenever the context so requires, the singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of any gender shall include all genders. The word, "Mortgage," as used herein shall mean Mortgage, Deed of Trust, Trust Deed, Iff L 17 Q I :. 1 - -' -Tiii -i- -----MEL - - -.. o Security Deed or Deed to Secure Debt. All obligations of each Assi-ror hereunder shall be 'joint and several. Multiple Counterparts. This instrument may be executed in multiple counterparts, all of which shall be - deemed originals and with the same effect as if all parties c) LI) hereto had signed the same document. All of such counter- 00 parts shall be construed together and shall constitute one instrument, but in making proof, it shall only be necessary a) to produce one such counterpart. Governing Law. The parties agree that the law of the State in which the Premises is located shall - govern the performance and enforcement of this Assignment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Assignment on this day of EZ. , LDOU?G / E. McKEEN - OL'IV S. McKEEN Husband and Wife Address: 6203 South 194th Street Kent, Washington ASSIGNEE O'DONNELL, BRIG}Thl'l & PARTNE ORTHWEST PROPERT ES, ?*elP tar 'p Address; Dove Street Suite 760 Newport Beach, CA 92660 18 - ''-'------ ,... •, ,. I _.. -- S aw STATE OF ) ss. COUNTY OF o#CdMie- On this j ' day of 'for before me, the undersigned, a Notary Pub11 aid for the State of duly commissioned and sworn, person- ally appeared ,. to me known to be the Managino Partner of O'DONNELL, BRIGHAM & PARTNERS - NORTH- WEST PRO'ERTIES, a General Partnership, the partnership that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said partnership, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the said instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. OFFICIAL SEAL MARSHA I. AUSTIN NOIARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA 4 ORANGE COBlffr I L-:My Comm. e1rtI JUL 2, 1B82 4 Notary Public in and for the State of residing at I STATE OF ) ss. COUNTY OF On thi /.'day of before me,tpe undersigned, a Notary Public .-h and for the State of , ftZ-,,. personally appear4 DOUGLAS E. McKEuN and OLIVE S.McKEEN, to me known to be the persor.5 named in the foregoing document, and acknowledged to me °hat they executed the sane freely and voluntarily for.the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Witness my hand and official seal the day an year. in this certificate first abn.ye written. - ,' / ..• ... NotY Public in and ,for of 47%., resiing WDS/3 lB I 19 .--.------.---. - - -- N1'U' - -,.-- S EXhIBIT A Ln Lot 5, Block 5, Southcenter Corporate Park, :0 as per Plat recorded in Volume 114 of Plats, pages 36-42 inclusive, records of King Coutitv. o Washington. Eel ST 5 CDVWT Agreenent nade, effective as of /3' 1996. between Quendall Terninal8, a joint venture ccc?rised of Altino Properties, Inc., a Washington corporation, and J. H. Baxter & Co., a California lihited partnership (hereinafter Grantors) • and Barbee Mill Co. • Inc., a Washington corporation, and J. H. Baxter - & Co. • a California liaited partnersnip (hereinafter Granteea'). WEAS. Gra.utors are the owners of certain real priperty whose location is cts.-dy known as 4503 Lake Washington Blvd. H., Renton, Washington. the legal description of which is attached hereto as EXHIBIT A and by this reference incorporated herein N (Parcel A). WHEREAS • Grantee (Barbee Mill Co., Inc.) is the owner of certain real property tily known as 4101 .ake Washington Blvd. N., Renton, Washington, the legal description of which is attached hereto as EXHIBIT B and by this ref erases incorporated herein (Parcel B). WS, Grantee (3. H. Baxter & Co.) is the owner of certain real property cnly known as 5015 Lake Washington Blvd. H., Renton, Washington, the legal description of which is attached hereto as EXHIBIT C and by this reference incorporated herein (Parcel 'C'). I t -- I- - . - - - -- - W!EREAS, Grantees desire to acquire certain rights in Parcel A. WHERE?S, the parties hereto wish to establish a legal description as to the location of an easement for access and right of way, the terms and conditions for the maintenance of the roadway, and future relocation of the roadway. FOR TEN ($1O0) DOLLARS AND IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the sufficiency of which is unconditionally acknowledged by Grantors and Grantees, the parties hereby agree as follows: I. hT Grantors hereby agree to grant and convey in perpetuity from the effective date of this conveyance to Grantees an easement for 94 roadway uses and utlrtes over, across and under Parcel A. The C t easement granted in this instrssent is appurtenant to Parcel B and C, Parcel C. XX. USU PtG The easement shall be for the purpose of providing access for ingress and egress and for underground utilities between Parcel A and Parcel B. between Parcel A and Parcel C. and between Parcel B and Parcel C. The roadway shall provide access sufficient and adequate for the purposes of Grantees' uses to the highest use permitted by the then current zoning, including two access points to the public highway from Parcel A. The easement may be used by .1) 2 $ S N E the owners of Parcel B and Parcel C. as well as their officers, employees, agents. tena;1LS CULt iii. UsT LOCICm The easement granted in this instrument is located on the east 60 feet of that portion of Parcel A lyiflg imeediately west of railroad right-of-Way. IV. ROIIQY RXLOCATICK The Grantors or Grantors • successors or assigns may relocate the easement across Parcel A at their sole discretion and expense provided passage between Parcel B and Parcel C reeai.nn uninterrupted, and at least two access points ren'in f roe Parcel A to the public highway. Grantor or Grantor B successors or assigns further agree to record a restated legal description for this easement upon relocation. They shall also dedicate the easement to the City as a public right-of-way, if such dedication is required by the City as a conditiOn for approval for any platti processes involving either Parcel B or Parcel C. '4 V. ____ The easement granted herein shall exist in perpetuity, and shall run with the land and the title to such property, and shall inure to the benefit of the parties to this Agreement, their respective heirs, successors or assigns. vi. mtm Grantees, their respective successors, heirs and assigns, covenant with Grantors, their respective successors, heirs and assigns that Grantees, f roe time to time, and at all timea after 3 I. S I S S-i the effective date of this instrument, at '.ranteea own cost and expense, wiLL repair and maintain, in a piope, u., JLA& rkerlike manner, the above-described roadway. As between the Grantees • the costs of repair and maintenance shall be equitably apportioned based unon each party' a use of the easement. VII. CurJ.u.L* RXrS OP GRANTOR Grantors and their successors, heirs and assigns may continue to use the easement for teir ',wn purposes so long as their use is not inconsistent with the purpose of this grant. ViII. IND&rC*rx Each party hereto will be responsible for claims or damages resulting from or arising out of the use of the easement by such party and shall indesniify and hold all other parties hereto harmless from any claims or damages arisirg therefrom. IX. INTM AGUDIT This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties and any prior understanding or representation of any kind preceding the date of this Agreement shall not be binding upon either party except to the extent incorporated in this Agreement. X. JSVIFXTT Any medification of this Agreement or additional obligation assumed by either party in connection with this Agreement shall be binding only if evidenced in writing by each party or an authorized repreaentat.ve of each party. I. S i 4 fl I S i XL. ).rve..z' PUS In tbe event or any controversy, ciai, or dispute reiatiny 1u this instrient or its breach, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable expenses, attorneys fees and costs. m. 3IU This agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the respective heirs, personal representatives, successors • and assigns of the parties. im. GOUNKM LX It is agreed that this Agreement shall be governed by, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the state of ) Washington, and venue shall be in ling County. 0 nv. VMCNS U, ny notice provided for or concerning this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deened sufficiently given when sent by C') certified or registered nail if sent to the respective address of each party as set forth at the beginning of this Agreenent. xv EDI The titles to the paragrapbs of this Agreeaent are solely for the convenience of the parties and shall not be used to explain, dify, silify, or aid in the interpretation of the provisions of this Agreeent. IS wimss *IEP e,p party to this Agree.ent has caused it to be executed at . igton on the date indicated below. S. . - -- - - -- - - - - - - - $ DATED this /,jday of -. 1996 GRAWMRS Q?DALL TERPCMkLS. a joint venture cosiprised of Alt mo Properties, Inc., a Washington corporation, and J. B. Baxter & Co. • a California united eartnership ALTnao PROPTIES, INC. By: its _______ J. H. BAX1 BARBEE PuLL CO., INC., a Washngton corporation By:_____ J. II. BAXTER & Cx)., a California partnership STATE OF )sa. COMM OF KM I certify that I kum or have satisfactory evideca that the peras aearing before w and sakisg this ackawle4goent are the persons wheat true signatures appear m this docusezt. 6 r - - - -- - - W. On this day of fe.b . 1996, before me personally axpeared . to se known to be the 9 ox ALt operes. inc_ Ulle corporation that executed the within and foregoing instznt • and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said coxpoatiou, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said corporation. WITNESS my hand and official seal bereto affixed the day and year first above written. ln~ I .JOQn \4yjft• dUt( {a Not Public in f the State of Whington, residinQt: my coission expires: (-gi% n4 Type or Print Notary NF WASHING!O ss. COUNTY OF xflG STATE OF eMIORNTh I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that the persons appearing before me and making this acknowledgment are the persons whose true signatures appear on this document - On this J3day of . 1996, before me personally appeared *.j £qs , to me known to be the of J. H. baxter & Co.. the corporation that executed the within and foregoing inatrnt, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntaxy act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said corporation. WITNESS my band and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first shove written. I Q#and4er the WIN 0 • riditiy at iL I iW-.-*E my cissios expires: (Type or /D Print Notary W) .11 7 1• a STATE OF )tASRINGTOM 58. COWTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that the persona appearing before me and asking this acknowledent are the persons whose true signatures appear on this document. On this j S1 day of F eh . 1996, before as personally appeared , to me knoqin to be the o Mill Co., Inc.. the corporation that executed the iii thin and foregoing instrument • and acknledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute said intruaent and that the seal affixed, if any, 18 the corporate seal of said corporation. WIThESS sy band and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. ii Public in and for ie State of Wahington, residing My ionexpir :4q( LType or Pr at Notary Namejj :1' 8 49. -- - .--- I 1 That portion of Governaeut Lot 5 in section 29, Tovnnhip 24 $ortb, Range S East, V.M. and shoreland adjoining lying westerly of the Northern Pacific Railroad right of way and southerly of a line described as follows: Beginning at the quarter corner on the south lisa of said Section 29; thence north 89159 361 west along the south line of said Lot 5, 1,113.01 feet to the westerly line of said Northern Pacific ailroad right of way; thence north 29044'54 east 849.62 feet along said right of way line to a point hereinafter referred to as point A; thence continuing Norh 29144541 east 200.01 feet to the true point of beginning of the line herein described; thence south 4 All that portion of Goverzect X00t 1, Section 32, Township 24 North, Rae S East, LN. • in King Counts • and of Second Class Sb"re Lands adjoining, lying .esterly of Northern Pacific Railroad right-of-way; EXCEPT that portion, if any, of said Shore Lands lyinu north of the westerly production of the north line of said Govexnt Lot - I Lnh'3hL5/4224*/.fl,3,SI II S S right-of-way line, 100.Ql'; thence I 59'24'36 R 103926 1 , more or less, to the Inner Harbor Line of Lake Washington; thence I 44 0 2000 B along said Inner Harbor Line 102.95 to a point non which the true point of beginning bears S 5924 36 B; thence S 5902436 B 1013.23' • more or less, to the true point of beginning. EXCEPT portion thereof described an follons: Beginning at the true joint of beginning of the above described prerty; thence S 29044 1 54 U along the Hi1 line of the Northern Pacific Railway 'ompany right-of-way 100.01; tbeDoe H 59241 36 H 100.011 ; thence B 562850' C 111.16 to a point from which the true point of beginning bears S 5902436 B a distance of 50'; thence S 590241 36 B 50' to the true point of beginning, and EXT that portion of said shore lands lying northerly of the northerly line of said Govenint !ot 5 produced westerly; situate in the County of King, State of Washington. I I 2 a AND C ORN ER REC ORD GRANTOR: LAND SURVEYOR: This cnou reconi conealy repecscots woet puboomcd by me or trsdermy dàctioa is cnfotmance with the Surney RecmdissgAce CtMtANYOAG1Cy BUXTON K.. H.AERISON, P.C. Lnd Sarv*,lmg avid Mappiag M ADVtESS: 301 116tAvt.S.E., S*1te560 Bclleiie Wasblagtoa 93M GRANTFM PVØUC LEGAL TWP 84 N. ROE S E CoRtespcoog: V.6-7 (WiUvnooe Mcndnos) (Soo iec,cdom no back of LCRI ADOITIONAL fDETTIF1ER: (e.g.. BL%1 dcsitrnot for the mmd. soon itOOcctioO. pf ntnse.bfeck, lOt. On.) Mesndcr Corner, SGu Lion Scvtioa 29 COt King Co. WASHINGTON PiANE COORJMNATES: N: 196,769.44 E: 1.302,54149 ORDER: ZONE: North DA11JMI8EArNGS: NAD83 (1991) CORNER IF4lORMAT1ON: bre the anon below to poosidc tho toflOoksg inbsnn*too repodtog the oon'c LI) tdt,t rlO.-.f) E.IC Fe*jl at the Cot. noo1scar,er t5tlS T*tlo. Pleoxtole apd nambcrthe paso ot> disctosiaa mrdinjly. Itaódkionol opc is no,d. use the bxt. Foe hoe,), d4no, 8e sejoreeou. Also. poos)de the reference to a nip ottecvd. if ipplinable the owse re's fof4 book no.) page no red the dzc of ,n.t 15cc the hick stOut form foe the requirements of the Surmy Rcnodorg AO't) I ((1 Prtjnent Cornet Hi)(Qfy: 1904 LAKE WASFI1NGTON GARDEN OF EDEN (V. ii, Pg. 81) 1921 Lake Washington Shore Lands (Pg. 29-301 1941 KCAS teaserce coordinate sheets 1964 Section 29 breakdown Vy Harry P. losses (21 En dence Found at the Corngç Pont (3) Center Per nlnatIet1nforgeip: The reestablished ponn,on along the tooth line of th SW ;4 of Section 14 29, was &aed upon holding the monsamesoo found marking the South 114 corner thcrcot, and fuming the interned angle of the 1921 Shore Lands maps, from the snorrumefli li,nd mtking the NE Section corner o(Section 29. The f. Meander Corner was then calculated by holding the innersed distance from the t91 Shore Lands maps along the 19 eompssted sooth iuse of the SW 1:4. Set 5',. 5' concrete rtwtoumertt wi3" brass esp in case. as a Witnean Corner (hI: 196.763.38. E: 1.302331.41), 2S9.9* Icet eastetly of the cotnpiatd position of the Meander Comet. Monursteot tied to NAD 13 I 1991) network 10. 19'95. Also, rel'cr to City of Bellevsse Station Data Cards Nu.0189 and 0432. \ a N C C U') . I N Ir I I 0 P 0 a p F U V a V 1' • -. r r 4-' -. - +1- 4-. ± -i.-j-+ : ±4- I--H- - : - ± -'-- -) -+ -i- '74- -.:,--s-•n- • 8 +8 -f-i + --- + ± 4 -4--4 4- - 4-4 13 - 4. + i-H . e3'• - 4. -+-f--i-' i--- - - - . ,4-' - . -f-: -•. .- - - - 4-+- +-l- 4 4 .4 A - . A I For ccnsos *the insses of two lics, dkc comer code is the a1plas ccoorchsc tbat ,mee,,.uds b the burpection For coens thuc only on one lisic, The comer code is the line dm4pawn wd the reUxed line scgmort i.e., $ cnor on line S bdweus W*sdD dcsigned BC-S. Fcc consus bwcas tinsu ft cgonor todt isboth lint 3cncms; Le, acncr inthc SE 114 sf the SE 14rf Scction It is dcsignd MN 4-5. 123451 1 24•6780901,2zu,, IS .I7* tP 2021s,1425 RCW 58.09.060(2) reqssuts the f011oWing information go this form: an acsuraxe description and loc*tioe, in referetce replaced at the cornor (e.) basis of beatings used to dcsctibc or locate such inontmsnns or ascessones; and (d.) coroliaty InIOTTDedOO that may be helpful to relocate or idetitify the cornor position. I. ... S S S T OUTERHARB0RNE T8 O,( Zco > LAKE I .WASHNdON 0 C . •. I rn ii' P . :. CL S .: Im "1N ..,. .:• Zh 00 5 ç (J) . ..• --- '• z rn Vi rrI jV cc -' •. ...•• .. -. 55 .. - — ! IL) Al C— > J > — .:• 03 llF _Tl Id C) o . , - / -U - .. (I) ... - -.c' '.. S o -. .> (U ..- •. >< ' IQN< - I m i '9 3L / WARE, 00 '. Ro Z (v po ± cn ;.voi ivis — S oi — IVs?NI 7/ oZ o rri -• . rn I z \ \ z C) 01 l)(QI >—.. P1 1 // j - - •.. .5 5 . /1331.58, opo.oxoo 0 C(J)JC - - 5'- 1 w z riU) o C Z O .'. 00)z> C) d Z o o = 8 • . zZ ZZz ow t-o ] t. , NL; z ' N fl I . - r • Z 0003 o — — m 0 n CS 0 5 .• - - z-- ..- 0 P 0 O fl 0J I 8 6 -< .Yz_lc_tfl -° z < o . 0(11 I o o .-D ... _1r1 .. > I (y . .CO .:.... :02 z!-i d . - - - S ./ - •. S. - / — IOO5633E z co 26O.96 — -4 . .. < - I— 0 01 C) 0 Q 01 '-' S - 005•1> (I) oc —I I 0 1 ...... ... zm CL . . c . _..-_> 0 8 ~ . . >. — .. ... . p N .• •. m .. a> 0 cx rn m u . 000 Lo co Z I . a n C' '., . .. .,... co 4' . ..•..•.-•. f i. • C) •• ;. .•.. •T\ . N) o ; - / •• • .. Z ,. • .., . .• \ Az 1 . ". .. II 0 ,... ••'-•--. — o0 4 / Cal -.••. / .• •.. ...••• z y•L. • • . . ... P1 0 co Ir . Ui 0 / . ... • - ' / SI / 0 > . .. -• I / Vi / - ol- G) Z it / o o . A/ .:- •-•••..•• Ni;'! 20 — — -?i- •.-" '..:- r — — 0 rn n !; NO ,:- —cZ -:-' ••--••... W • •:-.• - -. . •- - z•0c ..•. ---- - -- - — 0 > > - . ,• .. >C . . . i •.> 0 - oo - -. _ • .. - --H -- a - - -- N00563 — - - - -. — - -,-. .— - — - -- S S . Q 00 - D z-c '< - - ZmZI0 --I(D --it> --m z -iv) -- ''-7 C) ZZI> oz-i -- ci,. -in 6nz> -< ,,VO 0 Qx(oQtInn XnIZ114.I> tr 011>1 C-. - 0 -0>- zIoIQI1>fl z'0I J_ - Xx >o - w - X) nmC) C)rnC)01'10 moz> ._O -- - v m1r'ir'in---no -, ij> -no çr 0 >0 -' -1nZ 4 ZZn ZZZZ LJ PlO Z ZZ >" O >C 00 g 0 -1 e-i j ;0-4 g OC)Z Z O-Z T-- <; >- 0 O. -<--,, 00 0-Q rrlc 5 o -iOfl > '- Z_1-i >0 1.JO0C 0fl0 0> > •,,Z pij., >-> ç-p C) rn i_ ->-ol))) > 3 XZZ0-r Cl> OCU)>C X0 cr,cQ CmZC)C....flZ> '. Z>C,>Z .D -' o C) Z - I rZ0-4 •> 9) flZ r 1lJ T1% I - n Z 1 Ln 0o3_0 > c Z . rr) 0,< . o P * tP Z o>- z " m>z . m 0 i d 'O -1 'Q 1 )N0 0 P1'U > rim n C) o g 1 ( - ) ' ( t c C P1 . z < >o f 1 1 lP 0 '1 & — Z < . 0- -I p >. n j)C° > • > fl=, 0 OC) - fl' - >C) 0 >C Z - CZ -Z- " Z -O X r o rn )O ( --j rj oi L)i 0 ) > z _0) 2 g - 9 0 P1m o °0 CL U) - C)> 1:-i z )Q))) _1 Z P,•. -n>O -'l -fl 1 irnz ' O Z 2 2 (fl rO 0C)_IZ 2 Mm > .•... •-, \ P1 0 > ' C)- c Z ZC Z I m Ln a Mo Cl)ci .--) - 2. Z ,.0 Y > •-. -. l Lo I o co > > -. th zwoI-jz-- C)I P1 -lu)P1-4 -1-0 ->)0 0>Z> rIWr-IZP10 0 -1 1> C) -. IOri0P1 .LI.0 C)rn x.or". ._P1IP1X> I'P1 P1p100r >_rn-LTQCrn -n-<cc or iRl Ct- 0'ij0P1 P1P.P1c-'1 00 oCrnC'm r-r1rn0P100rfl -" U)c.flU) CmnC,r1-nm -c) o vI LC) zZ_IZ flmZ_I _izP1 zIZ_)Z_Z - . -C ZZZZZ 1 -10rn 0 >P10X 0C)C)I0 P1 Z ••J QC) C)Z.C)••1V)C) -C)rC).)X-. )C)1C)OOX j ) ID -, ç-y 1x)r'I-.r),, r'r'inrn Z)_. -1 0 r1 _IP1_tr' rn_. 'C)>rn - - .cn - .rnrn_.P1crlm -- zjz - . >C--XC)C)C > C-1 0 -ir > >OU)Z :.C.cJ>> -I om > 1cu p r- -c-i . 7_ U1 _I 'X.O'lOO))bC)CO ' flt0p .CC) ;) >tC).0 'r- 0 P1 G)X 'lØ -. - c - - - .rz>>z 4c)n_Ip,OCW 1 O >1 ci - o zL C)1 9OU) fl.C)C P1<0 8 -lS U)0 _IQ - . 0 Z > C) -nO '1-_I >O )U)_ dz - -n -.0Z rn>! Zc2:<C) Q =-n r1- • 4_)Cf rn_I;C)ç% -:12 -1 J- rnzz O 2 2 - O QZ 0 'or' (i_I ir1P10no> C) )Ofl1 0 0 P1 (P I 0 0 -1Z --, C C) C/) U) 0 <C) c-n -. .- -- U) - O) 0 );) 0-i "1 - c-n = -iX 0 O_c- IZ -- I 0 - C_) t (1) -1 I-i;rIr OZ> fl--c-j., > > - =i (0 •c-P n0 -<Z< m P1 ro 9' r i ~-n >M. -,0 z n P1 0 -o P1 O r' ) i c- - 1 > c 0.4 tj -. - - -' - -- --- . ---. -- k C) .- .-•C : o - C .- > >-- X -- 0.0 m c - — — - jll c- C 0 r0 ) ;.< 1flT - -.• Z <- :- —J 200809020011 78. .,, [1 Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 SANJTARY'SEWER.UTJJ.ATY. EASEMENT Property, Tax Patcel Number: 2924050gZ. Project File #: LUA-02-040 . Street Intersection or Project Narne:Baxter Lift Station -, lReference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference numbers are on page_. Grantor(s): Grantee(s): 1. Quendall Terminals 1. City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation The Grantor(s), as named above, for and in consideration of mutual benefits, do by these presents, grant, bargain, sell, convey, and warrant unto the above named Grantee, its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive easement for public sanitary sewer with necessary appurtenances over, under, through, across and upon the following described property (the right-of- way) in King County, Washington, more particularly described in Exhibit A: For the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, installing, repairing, replacing, enlarging, operating and maintaining sanitary sewer utilities and utility pipelines, together with the right of ingress and egress thereto without prior institution of any suit or proceedings of law and without incurring any legal obligation or liability therefor. Following the initial construction of its facilities, Grantee may from time to time construct such additional facilities as it may require. All facilities shall be underground. This easement is granted subject to the following terms and conditions: The Grantee shall, upon completion of any work within the property covered by the easement, restore the surface of the easement, and any private improvements disturbed or destroyed during execution of the work, as nearly as practicable to the condition they were in immediately before commencement of the work or entry by the Grantee. Grantee shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Grantor, its successors and assigns. from any damage. liability. claim, lien, or loss, including attorney's fees and costs, arising out of use of the easement by Grantee, its agents. contractors, successors in title, assigns. authorized persons, and/or all others acting on its behalf, except to the extent such damage, liability, claim, lien, or loss, is due to the negligence or intentional misconduct of the Grantor or an agent, cotu or, successor in title, authorized person, assign of Grantor. All construction and installation of improvements within the easement and the operation and maintenance thereof shall be performed (a) in accordance with applicable laws, regulations and permits, (b) in a lien-free, professional and safe manner, and (c) with due diligence at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner to minimize interference with other uses on the property. Prior to entry onto the easement for repair or maintenance, Grantee shall provide reasonable notice to Grantor, except to the extent of an emergency. Grantor shall retain the right to use the surface of the casement, and to grant utility casements to other utility providers, as long as such use or additional easements do not interfere with the easement rights granted to the Grantee. Grantee will cooperate with Grantor for the location of additional utilities within the easement area. Grantor shall not, however, have the right to: Erect or maintain any buildings or structures within the easement; or Plant trees, shrubs or vegetation having deep root patterns which may cause damage to or interfere with the utilities to be placed within the easement by the Grantee; or C. Develop, landscape, or beautify the easement area in any way which would unreasonably increase the costs to - the Grantee of restoring the easement area and any private improvements therein. 200809020011 7Rn. Dig, tunnel or perform other forms of construction activities on the property which would disturb the compaction or unearth Grantee's facilities on the right-of-way, or endanger the lateral support facilities. Blast within fifteen (15) feet of the right-of-way. 4. This easement is located within a Federal Superfund Site regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Any work by the Grantee or other person in the easement area shall be done in compliance with requirements of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Washington State Department of Ecology, or any other agency with authority pursuant to state or federal environmental laws ("Environmental Agencies), and only after 30-day notice to the appropriate Environmental Agency, and Grantee and any other person using the easement shall indemnif' and hold Grantor harmless from any cost, liability or obligation relating to construction in or use of the easement area by Grantee or any other person, including but not limited to compliance with requirements of any of the Environmental Agencies. Grantor reserves a right of access over the easement for Environmental Agencies and their authorized contractors in connection with its regulation of the Federal Superfund Site. Grantee shall be solely responsible for the management and disposal if any waste generated as a result of the installation, operation or maintenance of improvements within the easement and shall be the generator of any waste resulting from those activities. Grantee shall indemnr defend and hold harmless Grantor its successors and assigns from any damage, liabi1ty claisnjsen or loss or any costs of expenses, including attorney's feesand costs, associated with the generation, managemnt, disposal of hazardous substances by Grantee or contact with or exposure to hazardous substances resulting from subsurface activities authorized or permitted by Grantee within the easement. This easement shall run with the land described herein, and shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors in interest and assigns. Grantors covenant that they are the lawful owners of the above properties and that they have a good and lawful right to execute this agreement. By this conveyance, Grantor will warrant and defend the easement granted hereby to the Grantee against all and every person or persons, whomsoever, lawfully claiming or to claim the same. This conveyance is subject to all existing easements, reservations, restrictions, covenants, encumbrances, and all other matters of record. This conveyance shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators and assigns forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed this IQ....day 0f34fr 2008. Approved and Accepted By: S O__ Grantor(s): QIJENDALL TERMINALS, a Washington joint venture By Altino Properties, Inc., a Washington corporatio joint ye turer By (1r.t.k \/P Robert Cugini, Vicesident By J. H. Baxter & Co., a California limited partnership, joint venturer By I. H. Baxter & Co., a California Corporation, general partner By qi Georgia 'èxter, President and CEO Grantee ' City of Ren By WtcC) Denis Law, Mayor Attest: Bonnie I. Walton, City"C1erk r-' "-..J ';.7\ (T •'.' DWT2236882v1 0032695-000004 Page 2 FORM 03 0008/bhl 20080902001178 Exhibit A Legal Description STATE OF WASHEGTON COUNTY OF KING On this ______ day of_Fthr4'tf , 2008, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the state of Washington, duly commissioned anfi sworn, personally appeared ROBERT CUGINI to me known to be the Vice President of ALTINO PROPERTIES, INC. a Washington corporation, which is a joint venturer of QUENDALL TERMINALS, a Washington joint venture, that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the ..said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation and joint venture, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that /he is aithorized to execute the a ............ instrument. IN WITNESS have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. • 0 $OH - - Lu:-o -0 zz~ . NOTARY PUBLI 'C in and for tate of ( 2.1 Washington, residing at My appointment expires 5/ (9/ c)' \\ '' ' Print Name cDf 16 '&5 hhI;11'Qp wP y STATE OF WASmNc+b ) ) ss. tUN:Z.Y OF KING On this of ___________, 2008, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the state of Washington, duly cd1Timisioned and sworn, personally appeared GEORGIA BAXTER to me known to be the President and CEO of J. H. AX3ER & CO., a California Corporation, which is general partner of J. H. BAXTER & CO., a California limited pai e ip, which is a joint venturer of QUENDALL TERMINALS, a Washington joint venture, that executed the fore I s/he nstrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and volunta ry act and deed of said corporation, ed partnership and joint venture, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oa th stated th isaiiihejze4 to. execute the said instrument. written. i& seal. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and oE the day and year first above fQ_ NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at My appointment expires Print Name S S DWT2236882v1 0032695.000004 Page 3 FORM 03 0008ThW 20080902001178.:: STATE OF WASIffl4GTON ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) (2 On this I 6 day of ttji, 2008, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the state of Washington, duly comm issione and sworn, personally appeared DENIS LAW to me known to be the Mayor of the CITY OF RENTON, that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said City, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that s/he is authorized to execute the said instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto s my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. ..... NOrAki PUBLICin aá fthe S te of Washington residing at . My appointment expires 110,I Print Name_____________________ .. W.- DWT 2236882v 1 0032695-000004 Page 4 FORM 03 000SIbh/ UU$UO2uOi 1 7:::: EXHIBIT 'A° SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION A saoitazy sewer raseracot over the followntg drsctthcd peoporcyi That potoot, C ,c,.econsene lot 5 in S,s.tion 29, Township 24 North, RngcS Rtot, W.M. and thoeclandi adjoinong lying westerly of lion Northern PaciEc R.oilroad Right of Way and soudtealy of a line drseribrdas foilntvw Binriingttt the Quarter Corncr on the south use of said Section 29; thence North 89°58'36' Wntr1ong the South lion of said lot 5,o dietsatco 0(1,113.01 (cr1 to the weateniy Iliac of said Noerheen PariOc Railroad Right of Way; thence North 29a4454 549.62 feet thing said Right of Way Line to a point berelnidhi rr e refeed tons Point A; thence continuing North 29t44540 East, T 205.01 fee; to the RUE POINT OF BEGINNING of the line hcrtin described; thence South 56°28'50" Weir, 222.52 feet to a poinr which beat. )Io.ls)e $924 86' W 10001 (cnn (eDen nerd Pen thence North 59°24 56" Went to the TdiieiHr.cs)orTj- arid the and -of ,nid lieedciet41fn(oe;.........-- - Also dint porreon of said Goerrsrnonot LotS Lying aouthcnetcriy of Like Washington Boulevard, westerly of Snrodetv State l-Eighway Wurnitor 2A and oorrhwrsicciy of the Right of Way of Public Ststn Higlais-ay Nesniact I as eatol)(inhtd by deed recorded underAoilitoc', File No 5687408, contaoon5 31.7 scent mare or Into (accuracy to one ac-nc) of which 12.8 Acres are udntwocr nboeelaatds. Said easerncsst being describes a, follows; Cousoaencizsg at the toast noethneseerly comae of the above deocnibed pnoprny thence along the westerly margin of said Railroad tsght.of.way South 2994454. West 102.11 fret to th e I'RUE PO1N'r OP BEGINNING; thence leaving tied rig1anofway taax$io North 6Qc1S.u6 Wear, 42.00 feet; thence South 25d445S4 Woit, 55.00; thence Sooth 60t1806. Best, 42.00 fee; to said tlght.of.wsy inargire thence aIon said tight-of-way margin North 39t44.54.. Ease, 55.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF 0EQ;9INUiG. Contssrnag in area of 2,330 square feet, mare or less. Basis o1Beseiog Deed recorded under Audiros Pile - OPFUMMMOi I of 2 [] DWT 2236882v1 0032695-000004 PageS FORM 03 0008/bh/ 200809020011 78:" 6", / Poot of Commencment PROPOSED EASEMENT 7 SOUTh UWE GOVT LOT 5. SZC.29. /T.24N., R.SE... W.U.7/ 0, ON w November 26. 2007 Quendall Terminals WCL RET0N, WASHINCTON RLS 30788 EXHIBIT 'A P.3788'fl67 BA)crER LIFT STATION ... .. . SANITARY SEWER: ASEMENT 2 OF 2 LINE Tft1.E LINE OEARING I DISTANCE 1.1 S 29'4454 W 1 102.1I N 60 I5'06 W 42.00 L L3 29'4454 w 55.00 L_!L4 s so &os I 1.5 N 294454 E 1 55.00 0'- S. DWT 2236882v1 0032695-000004 Page 6 FORM 03 0008/bh/ 20080902001178.: O CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of')i J on- 1 i- before me, 42t/ . 4 Date ere nsert Name and TWO át the Otlicer personaUy appeared £ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is/Me subscribed, to the within instrument and acknowledged_to me that ./she/tj executed the same in t/her/Øir authorized capacity(, and that by-isTher/r signature(e) on the instrument the person), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. seal. Signatü OPTIONAL LORI J. STUMPF Commission # I538054 No - tary Public - Culitoutta Savi Mateo C'nty My Comm. ExpIres Dec 24.20 I LORI J. STUMPF Commission # 1538054 1 — No$aiy Public - Cailfomla I San Mateo County Comm. ExpWes Dec 24, 2008) V '' My S w w w w w w w Place Nolary Seas Above Though the in formation below is not required bylaw, it may prove and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: 1 3 i ' Number' of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Caacitis)Ciarrndby Signer(s) CLevy Signer's Name: ________ 0 Individual l-Corporate Officer - Title(s): L O Partner —0 Limited 0 General Attorney in Fact Trustee Top of 7thumb C Guardian or Conservator O Other: Signer's Name:_______________ 0 Individual O Corporate Officer - Title(s): - O Partner —0 Limited 0 General O Attorney in Fact O Trustee O Guardian or Conservator O Other: RIGHT ThUMOPRINT OF SIGNER Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: 0 Sip - / 1 SW 29-24-05 / / / /'• /' ,/ 'N LHLT Lp [il95 IL tJ:.a :Tii i 1. I-- ____________________________________ - ,- -•. — - -. - T —r— v-1 NW32-24-05 —lt - OoIbw l I:HH( -. ............ V . / . ... . uj -- 1' (,(.•(.; /:/f-.--' j'r 4,: -. __ MR IRE NAL IRMO .. - .0 91 2 cc I) (7) co O)Z Q. cc 0 0 co 0 i L)rn 0 E 0) co C) U) -o 0 C'4 0 0 : -a '- OD 0 — cn to U) co— to cc to (n 0)5 >a. 0- C'J O) LU cD 4t . c U qt 06 (c (I) Coco 0 CF)= 0 0 -, - c 0)o — L c5 .. 9 c',l (U O, 0 C 0 C - 0 1 T7 u rn 00 CO 00 0 Li ca 0) 2 Z+cO _____ S 5 S S - - earth +water PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL STUDY Quendall Terminals Renton, Washington Prepared for: Altino Properties Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Company Project No. 020027-0 1 0-04 • November 11, 2009 è Aspectconsuiting PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL STUDY Quendall Terminals Renton, Washington Prepared for: Altino Properties Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Company Project No, 020027-01 0-04 November 11, 2009 S Aspect Consulting, LLC John L. Peterson, PE Henry H. Hascltou, PE Senior Associate Geotechnical Engineer Senior Associate Geotechnical Engineer jpetersonaspectconsuiting.com hhaselton®aspectconsulting.com V:\020027 Qucdall Tcmi:uaJeGcotccbmca1 StudyVinahQumdall Finai Gcech niCIeuicjit) 1 11 20i<-c 0 ASPECT CONSULTING Contents Project and Site Conditions .......................................................................I 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................1 1.1.1 Purpose and Scope..............................................................................1 1.2 Authorization ..............................................................................................2 1.3 Project Description .....................................................................................2 1.4 Adjacent Properties....................................................................................3 2 Site Conditions............................................................................................5 2.1 Surface Conditions and Topography..........................................................5 2.2 General Geology........................................................................................6 2.3 Seismic Setting ..........................................................................................9 2.4 Field Exploration ......................................................................................10 2.4.1 Review of Existing Subsurface Information.........................................10 2.5 Subsurface Conditions.............................................................................11 2.5.1 Potential Modifications to the Subsurface...........................................11 2.5.2 Groundwater.......................................................................................12 3 Geotechnical and Environmental Considerations .................................13 3.1 Soft Ground..............................................................................................13 3.2 Seismic Hazards ......................................................................................14 3.2.1 Surface Fault Rupture ........................................................................14 3.2.2 Ground Response ..............................................................................14 3.2.3 Liquefaction........................................................................................15 3.3 Environmental Considerations..................................................................16 4 Site-Wide Geotechnical Options..............................................................18 4.1 Mitigation of Lateral Spreading.................................................................18 4.1.1 Ground Improvement..........................................................................18 4.1.2 Lateral Resistant Piles/Anchors..........................................................18 4.2 Building Support.......................................................................................19 4.2.1 Static and Seismic Settlement ............................................................ 19 4.2.2 Displacement Piles.............................................................................19 4.2.3 Structural Slabs..................................................................................20 4.3 Earthwork.................................................................................................20 4.3.1 General Site Preparation....................................................................20 4.3.2 Shallow Groundwater and Dewatering................................................20 4.3.3 Preloading ..........................................................................................20 4.3.4 Infrastructure Development Considerations........................................21 PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11, 2009 E ASPECT CONSULTING 5 References .................................................................................................22 Limitations and Additional Services...............................................................23 List of Tables 2.5.1 On-Subsurface Geologic Units and Properties ........................................12 3.1.1 Estimates of Static Settlement...............................................................14 List of Figures 1.1.1 Site Vicinity Map 1.1.2 Site Plan 1.1.3 Proposed Site Plan 2.2.1 Geologic Cross Section A-A' 2.2.2 Geologic Cross Section B-B' 2.2.3 Geologic Cross Section C-C' is 2.2.4 Geologic Cross Section D-D' List of Appendices A Existing Site-Wide Geotechnical Data S ii PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 ASPECT CONSULTING .., I Project and Site Conditions 1.1 Introduction This report presents the results of a preliminary engineering study by Aspect Consulting, LLC (Aspect) to provide a planning-level understanding of geotechnical considerations, and support a development entitlement process for re-development of the Quendall Terminals property (Site) located in Renton, Washington. Aspect is also engaged in assessing environmental conditions and evaluating cleanup alternative to address site impacts associated with past industrial activities at the Site. The environmental work is being completed under agreed order with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The environmental studies will be documented in separate reports. Geotechnical recommendations, as presented herein, have been developed in coordination with the clean-up study planning. The location of the Site is presented on Figure 1.1.1. The approximate locations of selected explorations previously accomplished on-site are presented on Figure 1.1.2. 1.1.1 Purpose and Scope KPFF and Century Pacific have prepared conceptual development plans for the approximately 19-acre Site and have requested this geotechnical evaluation to assist in the master planning process. 0 The development concept under consideration is mixed-use commercial and high density multi-story residential. Buildings would generally be setback from the shoreline. We understand the proposed buildings typically will be 5 to 7 above-ground stories with the lowest 2 stories dedicated for parking. Street-level space will also be used for commercial purposes. No below-ground levels are planned. A preliminary site plan is shown on Figure 1.1.3. Site development will need to consider the environmental Site characteristics and constraints relating to site environmental cleanup, and the relatively weak, compressible soils known to be present on-site. Grades would be raised across the Site with a generally 2- to 5-foot capping fill. Thicker fills might be required at certain locations. We anticipate that typical development features such as underground utilities, pavement/roadways, and grading will be important considerations for the conceptual plan. The principle objective of this study is to provide planning-level geotechnical engineering recommendations to support the development entitlement process. Additional studies and design will be necessary after detailed development plans become known. The key geotechnical conditions that must be considered include: Seismic hazards, such as liquefaction, lateral spreading, and amplified seismic response; PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11, 2009 ASPECT CONSULTING . • The need for enhanced building support on special foundations such as improved ground or piling; Geotechnical considerations for designing and constructing utilities, grading, and other development features on weak, compressible ground; and, Potential construction costs associated with special geotechnical construction methods that could be used to mitigate the geotechnical challenges at the Site. Geotechnical solutions for site development must also be consistent with selected environmental remedies, and will be subject to approval by EPA. Our study included reviewing available geologic literature, maps, and Site data to assess the physical properties of the subsurface soils at the Site. This information was used to develop concept-level conclusions and recommendations for the potential Site development. 12 Authorization Aspect entered into a Professional Services Agreement with Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Company to perform this work. The Professional Services Agreement was authorized by the Altino Properties, Inc. on August 19, 2009 and J.H. Baxter & Company on August 31, 2009. Our scope is based on our proposal dated April 17, 2009. 1.3 Project Description The proposed project is illustrated on Figure 1.1.3. It would include the construction of 800 residential units plus office, retail, and restaurant space. Parking would be accommodated in the lowest two levels of the buildings. The buildings would be up to seven stories high. We assume that the buildings will be steel and/or concrete-framed and would have foundation loads that are typical for buildings of this size and type. The development plan is divided in to "Quads" separated by proposed roadways running east-west and north-south. A roundabout is planned at the intersection of the central roads and at the south end of the central north-south roadway. Another roundabout with parking is planned at the western terminus of the central east-west roadway, adjacent to the shoreline. Roads are also planned along the eastern, northern and southern property boundaries. We understand the roadways will become public right-of-way and will be constructed in accordance with City of Renton standards. We assume that typical utility infrastructure, including domestic water supply, sewer, power, communications and possibly natural gas, will be constructed in the rights-of-way. Open space and a recreational trail are planned for the waterfront. The shoreline is irregular, and the proposed buildings are generally set back from the shoreline greater than 100 feet from the shore. However, there are two locations where the setbacks will be less than 100 feet, as shown on Figure 1.1.3. The planned buildings include 450 residential units in the SW Quad, bordering Lake Washington. This Quad will include three buildings separated by landscaped courtyards. The northernmost building (bordering the central roadway) in the SW Quad will have PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 ASPECT CONSULTING retail and restaurant space. Buildings in the SW quad will have five residential floors over two floors of parking and/or commercial space. is The NW Quad, also bordering the lake, would have 175 residential units within two buildings, and commercial space in the building bordering the roadway. A landscaped courtyard will separate the buildings. These buildings will also have 5 floors of residential space over two floors of parking and/or commercial space. The SE Quad would have 175 residential units and office space within three buildings, separated by landscaped courtyards. The buildings will include five floors of residential or office units over two floors of parking. The NE Quad will have one office building with five stories of office space over parking levels, and a large parking structure on the NE corner of the Site. Geotechnical and Environmental Constraints Geotechnical study of the Site indicates weak, compressible soil with considerable static and seismic settlement potential, liquefaction potential, and liquefaction-induced lateral spreading potential. The proposed multistoiy buildings will require a deep foundation system to address settlement concerns. Lateral spreading can be mitigated through engineered lateral resistance features associated with individual buildings, such as batter piles or anchors. Alternatively, site-wide lateral spreading mitigation could be accomplished with broader scale lateral restraint techniques such as in-situ stabilization, soil densification, soil replacement, or a containment structure. Deep foundations and/or site-wide lateral spreading mitigation 0 measures must be coordinated with environmental remediation, long-term environmental protection objectives, and civil/structural design. The implementation of geo technical solutions for site development is subject to review and approval by the EPA. Fill cap construction will need to be scheduled such that time is allowed for the majority of the soil consolidation to be completed prior to the installation of grade-sensitive utilities or roadways. Special building/utilities connection may be required to account for long term organic and seismic settlement. 1.4 Adjacent Properties To the north of the Site is the former Baxter property, currently used as the Football Northwest training facility. The Site had contamination related to past wood treatment processes, and a shallow groundwater table with weak shallow soils. The geology and contamination issues are similar to those at the Site. However, a distinct geologic difference at the Football Northwest site is the presence of relatively shallow bedrock in the northern section of that property, where the structure was built. Large diameter drilled shafts were used for the building foundations on that property, and they were designed to resist lateral movement. No significant improvements for liquefaction and lateral spreading were made for the remaining (southern) portion of the on-grade fields. The property to the south, formerly known as Barbee Mill, is a residential subdivision being developed by Conner Homes. This site was also contaminated from wood 40 PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11, 2009 ASPECT CONSULTING S treatment processes, and has geologic conditions that are similar to the Site. Areas of high arsenic level were excavated and refilled with compacted gravel. A permeable reaction trench was provided down-gradient of the contaminated area, which treats impacted groundwater. Soils at the Conner Homes site are weak and highly varied across the site. A structurally- compacted cap fill was placed over the site. Shallow foundations in the structural cap were allowed by the City of Renton for the lightly loaded single family homes, except where sited directly over the reaction trench where structures were placed on pin piles. No apparent mitigation for lateral spreading was performed. 4 PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 ASPECT CONSULTiNG 2 Site Conditions This section provides a discussion of the physical site conditions, including our characterization of the subsurface conditions. Figure 1.1.2 illustrates the current Site features layout and selected historical features. 2.1 Surface Conditions and Topography The Site borders approximately 1,500 feet of Lake Washington shoreline, and is bordered on the east by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks and right-of-way. Immediately adjacent shoreline properties include Conner Homes to the south (former Barbee Mill property) and Port Quendall Company/Football Northwest to the north (former J.H. Baxter & Company property). Access to the Site is across the railroad tracks from Lake Washington Boulevard, located along the eastern side of the property. Interstate 405 is located approximately 500 feet to the east. The Site had been a wood treatment facility from about 1917 to 1977. From 1977 to present, the Site has been used as a log sorting and storage yard. Various structures, docks, pits, and tanks have existed from time-to-time on the Site. Only small scattered buildings remain currently on the Site. Several utility easements currently exist on the Site. Further details of the Site history are documented in a prior report supporting the on- going environmental investigation (Anchor and Aspect, 2007b) The Site is located on Lake Washington in the northermnost limits of the City of Renton (City). The Site occupies the middle portion of a roughly 70-acre alluvial plain, which was historically formed as a delta where May Creek enters Lake Washington. The topography has been modified over the past 90 years by filling and grading activities. The property currently slopes at a 1 to 1½ percent grade towards the shoreline, having a maximum relief of about 15 feet across the 19 acre area. Upland elevations at the Site range from approximately 35 feet on the east side of the property to about 20 feet at the lakeshore (all elevations reported in NAVD88). At the shoreline, the slopes increase to about 20 percent for about 20 feet in elevation to lake level. The lake-bottom portion of the alluvial fan grades at approximately 10 percent or less toward the center of the lake. The Site surface is predominately wood dust/soil fill or wood debris. Gravel access roads and remaining structure foundations make-up less than 5 percent of the surface area. Site drainage is relatively poor because of the flat topography and the fine-grained nature of the surface soils. During the active log yard operation and prior to implementing the interim measures, most runoff was directed into two stormwater collection ponds on the west side of the Site (Quendall Pond and South Detention Pond) and a drainage ditch along the southern property boundary. Stormwater also accumulated in low-lying areas east of BH-24, southwest ofBH-21AIB, and south of BH-20AIB (refer to Figure 1.1.2). Following curtailment of the log sorting operation, interim stormwater management measures were implemented in October 2008, to control stonnwater discharges to the S PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11, 2009 5 ASPECT CONSULTING 0 lake, promote infiltration in less contaminated areas, reduce inflow into Quendall Pond, and prevent erosion (Anchor and Aspect, 2007b). 2.2 General Geology The geologic units beneath the Site Consist of highly heterogeneous shallow alluvial and lacustrine silts, sands, and peat underlain by a coarser sand-gravel alluvium. The shallow alluvial deposits are overlain by fill deposited over the years since the lake level was lowered in 1916. The alluvium was deposited by May Creek and the Site is located within the creek's delta. The delta extends well below lake level, approximately 5,000 feet along the shoreline of Lake Washington, and projects up to 3,000 feet offshore toward Mercer Island. Normal delta depositional processes where the May Creek channel changes position periodically, and episodic earthquake-induced slumps that occurred at the face of the delta, have resulted in a deposit with abrupt changes in lithology and little vertical or lateral continuity of units. Detailed geologic cross sections along four alignments show subsurface conditions and the relationship of the uplands portion of the Site to Lake Washington and underlying sediments. Cross section locations are shown on Figure 1.1.2 with the cross sections on Figures 2.2.1 through 2.2.4. The major geologic units are described below. Fill and Fill History Fill is found across the entire Site. Draft Task 3 report (Anchor and Aspect, 2007b) S provides a detailed histoiy and annotated observations of the surface activity and fill soils. A condensed presentation of this information is presented below. Along the southern and eastern boundaries, fill ranges from 1 to 2 feet in thickness, while in other areas, the fill ranges to more than 10 feet thick. Most commonly, the fill is a mix of silt, sand, and gravel with wood debris. Wood chips and bark from the log sorting operations are common in the upper few feet with finely ground wood dust covering the Site up to a foot in depth. Where creosote and pitch-like (tar) material has been encountered in soil explorations, such materials have generally been observed at depths greater than 2 feet below the ground surface. In addition to the industrial surface contaminants, dense non-aqueous liquids (DNAPL) contamination has been observed at the Site to a depth of generally 25 feet, with a maximum depth of 32 feet below ground surface. Specific areas of fill include: Northwest Quarter of Site: Fill may be as thick as 10 to 14 feet in this portion of the Site. Fill in this area includes abundant wood material, glass, brick, and pitch-like material. East of Qüendall Pond: Fill is 7 to 9 feet in thickness with brick and pitch-like material observed in area explorations (BH-5/5A, TP-4, and TP-9). Former May Creek Channel: Exploration logs from this area indicate that some of the fill used in this area includes tar, brick, wood, and metal fragments to depths of 6 to 7 feet. PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 ASPECT CONSULTING Former Tank Area: Tar and pitch were logged at a depth of 5 feet in borings BH-5, BH-6, and BH-25. This may represent a previous ground surface in the former tank area (the tanks areas are shown as circles on Figure 1 .1.2). West of South Detention Pond: In July 2007, slag-like material was observed in near-surface soils in the area of former well BH-12. Fill history is informed by geologic characteristics identified in subsurface explorations and historical records. Key episodes of fill placement at the Quendall Site are summarized below: The Lake Washington Ship Canal was completed in 1916, which resulted in the lowering of the lake level by about 9 feet. Not long after the lake was lowered, tar refining operations began at the Site. Both the existing shoreline and the historical (pre-1916) lake shoreline based on historical DNR maps are shown on Figure 1.1.2. May Creek stream channels were located on the southern portion of the Site until the creek was rerouted sometime between 1920 and 1936. These channels have now been filled in. The former channel locations on the Site, indicated by early DNR maps, are shown on Figure 1.1.2. Solidified tar products (pitch or "Saturday coke") were reportedly placed on the Site during the period of creosote manufacturing. These materials as well as other debris, including brick, concrete, and metal have been observed in the fill unit. Foundry slag from PACCAR, Inc. was reported by Roberts (Anchor and Aspect 2007b) to have been placed as fill along the shoreline. Although geologic logs in this area generally have not identified slag, a few pieces of slag-like material were identified in the June 2007 well survey east of the former location of well BH-12 during the environmental review of the Site. In 1983, Quendall Terminals placed approximately 3 feet of fill consisting of sawdust and soil over most of the Site. Ongoing log yard operations have resulted in the creation of several piles on the Site consisting largely of wood debris. Shallow Alluvium The shallow alluvium at the Site consist of interbedded sand, silt, clayey silt, organic silt, and peat beds, characteristic of a deltaic environment. The shallow alluvium occurs throughout the Site to a depth of about 25 to 50 feet, with thinner deposits in the eastern portion of the Site. Saturated conditions have been encountered at depths ranging from 2 to 10 feet depending on groundwater elevation and seasonal recharge. The shallow alluvium was deposited by the May Creek delta. The delta complex is composed of three general sets of strata. Nearly horizontal topset beds were deposited in the former floodplain and shallow marshy areas near the mouth of the creek. Inclined foreset beds were deposited on the delta face below lake level near the mouth of the former creek, and dip into the lake at low angles (less than 10 degrees). Nearly horizontal bottomset beds were deposited on the lake floor well away from the mouth of the creek. The majority of the delta is composed of the gently dipping foreset beds. 40 PROJECT NO.020027-010-04. NOVEMBER 11,2009 ASPECT CONSULTING S Very soft peat and organic silts present within the shallow alluvium is interbedded with very loose silty fine to medium sand. Interbedding occurs when sandy sediment is deposited on the gently sloping delta face to form foreset beds. The sediment is deposited on the delta slope at an angle that is marginally stable. During this delta forming process, the accumulated sediment periodically slumps or flows down the face of the delta to form a poorly graded and laterally discontinuous lens of sediment. Fine-grained silt and clay sediment carried in suspended load is carried farther and deposited as thin layers on the delta face and on the lake floor beyond the delta foreset beds. Occasional floods deposit fine sediment on the marshy area at what was once near lake level. The process of alternating deposition of finer and coarser sedimentation continued as the delta accumulated material over time. As the sediment built up a topographic mound around the mouth of May Creek, the stream would periodically jump its bank and shift laterally to a new position (a process called avulsion). Deposition of coarse-grained sedimentation then resumed elsewhere on the delta and the former location of sandy deposition was blanketed with silt and clay and organic-rich wetland deposits. Periodic large earthquakes also created significant disturbance of the sediments. Since much of the sediment that composes the delta foresets was rapidly deposited in the quiet water of the lake, the soils are weak and the delta is at the margin of its presumed stability under static conditions. During an earthquake, large portions of the outer surface of the delta slumped into deeper water, disrupting strata and re-depositing sediment. The result of normal delta avulsive processes and periodic earthquake-induced landslides is a deposit with abruptly changing lithologies and potentially limited vertical and lateral continuity of beds, when considering the entire delta. Deeper Alluvium The deeper alluvium is generally coarser, consisting of medium dense to dense sand and gravels. This unit occurs below a depth of 30 to 50 feet, with a shallower occurrence of about 25 feet at the southeast corner of the Site (BH-17B). The sand and gravel most likely represents an earlier phase of delta growth when the sediment supply to the area was coarser, likely following de-glaciation of the lowland during the late Pleistocene and early Holocene. Borings SWB-3 and SWB-4B were completed to depths of 121 and 151 feet, respectively (Anchor and Aspect, 2007a). In these borings, a fine to medium sand was encountered at approximately 90 feet, followed by a silty clay deposit at approximately 120 -135 feet. Lacustrine Deposits As inferred from geophysical explorations (Woodward Clyde, 1988) and deep borings completed at the Site, the base of the alluvium is estimated to be in the range of 90 to 135 feet below ground surface (bgs). Below this a silt/clay was interpreted to be a lacustrine deposit consisting of a very soft to medium stiff silty clay. A third deep boring (SWB-8) was completed to a depth of 121.5 feet near the lakeshore and did not reach this fine grain sequence. A fourth deep environmental boring (BH-20-C) was recently completed near the shoreline with a fine to medium sand encountered at approximately 80 feet, followed by a silty clay deposit at approximately 135 feet. S PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 ASPECT CONSULTING 2.3 Seismic Setting The Site is located in a moderately active seismic zone. The subsurface soils beneath the Site exhibit susceptibility to liquefaction to a depth of about 80 feet. The Site is within an area of active tectonic forces associated with the interaction of the offshore Juan de Fuca plate, the Pacific plate, and the onshore North American plate. These tectonic forces result in earthquakes generated in three source areas: subduction zone; deep intra-slab or Benioff zone earthquakes; and shallow crustal earthquakes. Each of these three sources has characteristic magnitudes, rupture characteristics, length of shaking, and average recurrence intervals. Subduction zone earthquakes occur during rupture of the contact between the subducting oceanic plates and the over-riding continental plate. Rupture zones for these earthquakes can occur over several hundred miles of length along the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) and extend from offshore to near the longitude of the Site. Ground shaking could last for up to several minutes with magnitude on the order of 9 or higher. Strong aftershocks are common. The distance from the Site to the rupture surface would reduce the intensity of the shaking at the Site. The recurrence interval for a CSZ earthquake is believed to range from around 200 to 700 years, averaging about 500 years. The last great CSZ earthquake occurred about 300 years ago. Deep intra-slab, or Benioff Zone earthquakes occur due to tensional rupture within the subducting Juan de Fuca plate at depths of 45 to 60 kilometers (kin). Earthquakes from this source have potential for magnitude 7.5 events. Due to the great depth of these earthquakes, very strong shaking is attenuated at the surface. These earthquakes occur every few decades and include the 2000 Nisqually earthquake. Strong aftershocks are not common and ground rupture is uncommon. Shallow crustal earthquakes potentially present the greatest concern to proposed Project features. These earthquakes occur when the shallow crust ruptures due to compressive forces associated with interaction of regional tectonic blocks within the larger North American plate. They generally occur within the upper 30 km of crust. Because the source is shallow, they have the potential for strong ground shaking, with magnitudes up to 7.5, which would produce intense shaking at the Site, and numerous aftershocks. Crustal faults exist in the region. The most significant to the Project is the Seattle fault, an east-west running compression fault zone that separates the Seattle Basin to the north from the Seattle Uplift to the south. The southern edge of the currently mapped fault zone crosses the Site and has a number of identified past rupture surfaces, some of which have been active during the Holocene epoch (the last 10,000 years). The Seattle fault is considered "active" which means it is anticipated to generate earthquakes in the future. Large shallow crustal earthquakes can conceivably produce ground rupture at the Site. Large Seattle fault earthquakes capable of causing regional uplift or subsidence are thought to occur on the order of every few thousand years, with smaller events capable of localized uplift or subsidence occurring about every thousand years. The most recent event was large, caused regional land level changes, numerous landslides (both subaerial and subaqueous) into Lake Washington, and occurred about 1,100 years ago. PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 ASPECT CONSULTING S Due to the distance to known past fault rupture surfaces and the large width of the fault zone, the potential for ground rupture at the Site is considered low during the life of the proposed development. Due to the lengthy recurrence intervals, the potential for strong ground shaking is low during the life of the proposed development, but must be considered for the structure design as required by the building code. The potential for moderate shaking from all identified sources is considered high during the life of the proposed development. 24 Field Exploration No new geotechnical field exploration was conducted for this stage of study; however, new environmental borings (sonic core)/probe data have been incorporated into this study along with review of previous explorations and investigations as shown on Figure 1.1.2. Descriptions of the sediments encountered in past explorations by others, as well as the depths where characteristics of the sediments changed, are indicated on the exploration logs presented in Appendix A of this report. Generalized subsurface conditions are interpreted from our review of existing subsurface data and associated environmental exploration program, with respect to overall site geology, and are shown on Figures 2.2.1 through 2.2.4. 2.4.1 Review of Existing Subsurface In formation Various environmental borings have been performed on the Site in the past by Hart Crowser, CH2MI-Iill, and Woodward-Clyde Consultants, and others. These data were S compiled and categorized to support the on-going environmental investigation (Anchor and Aspect, 2007a). Some of the explorations by Shannon & Wilson collected geotechriical blow count data using hollow-stem auger (HSA) and mud rotary drilling methods. Four mud rotary borings by Shannon & Wilson were on or close to the Site. Aspect has added to the subsurface database with a series of probes and environmental borings, which are currently in draft form to be released under separate cover. Substantial weight was given to the mud rotary borings for evaluating soil engineering properties at the Site, since they represent the best standard-of-practice sampling for soft/loose soils relative to SPT blow count testing, and they were deep. A selection of other HSA boring data, which where shallow, were compared to the analysis results from the mud rotary and produced similar trends of potential liquefaction prediction. As expected, these borings did not indicate as severe a potential as the mud rotary data. Those HSA borings and other environmental borings and probes were used to extend our interpretation of the extent of strata across the Site, based on the qualitative field-based textual and strength descriptions of the different soil strata encountered in the explorations. This has allowed for reasonable extrapolation of the deep mud rotary boring data across the Site. C 10 PROJECT NO. 020027-01 0-04 • NOVEMBER 11, 2009 ASPECT CONSULTING 2.5 Subsurface Conditions 2.51 Potential Modifications to the Subsurface Environmental investigations at the Site have identified the presence of DNAPL within the Shallow Alluvium across much of the Site, and also under the BNRR property along the eastern property boundaxy. The DNAPL is the source of dissolved phase chemical constituents observed in groundwater beneath the Site which discharges to Lake Washington. The process for assessing environmental conditions, and evaluating and selecting a cleanup remedy is still on-going. This process includes a feasibility study of cleanup alternatives to evaluate the range of potential remedies to address environmental impacts. Remedial actions to address existing soil contamination will be a key component of the remedy. Although the remedy has not been selected, it is anticipated that alternatives will include actions that may modify the subsurface conditions at the Site and therefore need to be considered when evaluating geotechnical constraints for site redevelopment. Modifications to the subsurface may include (but is not limited to) one of the following actions, either as a stand-alone or in combination of other actions: soil capping, in-situ stabilization, and removal/replacement. Modification of subsurface conditions would likely occur in the upper 25 to 30 feet bgs. Some of the actions will alter the engineering properties discussed below. It will be important from a design and implementation cost standpoint, to integrate the proposed geotechnical solutions for Site redevelopment with site cleanup actions, to the maximum extent pàssible. Site development constraints, such as the need for pile supported foundations, need to be identified and considered as part of the remedial evaluation process. Summary of Geologic Unit Properties Surface and near-surface conditions are especially variable across the Site, in terms of presence, thickness, and composition of various fill units. Deep subsurface conditions should also be considered to be approximate, as available subsurface data below approximately 40 feet below ground are somewhat limited. In general, soils from 0 feet to approximately 25 feet deep (Fill and Shallow Alluvium) are relatively weak with variable compressibility and permeability characteristics. Soils from approximately 25 feet to 135 feet (Lower Alluvium Deposits) are moderately strong with low compressibility and high permeability. Below 120 feet, soils consist of Lacustrine deposits with moderate strength, low to moderate compressibility, and low permeability, which are presumed to overlie other glacial deposits and rock. General engineering properties of these subsurface units are summarized in Table 2.5.1. S PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04. NOVEMBER 11, 2009 11 ASPECT CONSULTING sable 2.51 - On-site Subsurface Geologic Units and Properties Min to Geologic Max USCS Relative Description Depth Classification Strength Compressibility Permeability (ft bgs) Fill 5 to 14 SP to SM, GP to OW, Low to moderate Low to high Low to high ML, various debris Organic Silt/Peat 4 to 24 ML, OH, MH, PT Low High Low to Moderate Shallow Alluvium 5 to 50 SM, SP, SP-SN Moderate Low to Moderate High Deeper Alluvium 25 to 50 SP, SP-SM, GP, OW Moderate to High Low High Lacustrine 115 to 135 ML, CL Moderate Low to Moderate Low Deposits 2.5.2 Groundwater Twenty-four groundwater monitoring wells are located on the project Site. Aspect is currently monitoring water levels in these wells as part of ongoing environmental investigations at the Site. Groundwater is typically encountered between approximately 2 and 10 feet bgs, with groundwater flow generally east to west/northwest direction . towards the lake. Vertical groundwater flow gradients in the Shallow and Deep Alluvial units at the Site exhibit downward gradients along the eastern portion of the Site becoming upward near the lake shoreline. The adjacent Lake Washington is influenced by the lake level management of the U.S Army Corps of Engineers Chittenden Locks in Seattle. Lake level varies two feet during seasonal changes, with the lowest level typically maintained from November to Februaiy. The groundwater levels in site monitoring wells show a varying degree of response to lake fluctuations, which appears to correlate with distance to the lake. Water levels during the winter are typically higher on the eastern side of the Site, due to greater recharge from adjacent uplands, and lower on the western side of the Site, due to the controlled lake level, than during the summer. 12 PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11, 2009 ASPECT CONSULTING S 3 Geotechnical and Environmental Considerations This section provides a discussion of the planning-level geotechnical and environmental considerations that should be considered for the development entitlement process. 3.1 Soft Ground This section discusses soft ground conditions under static (non-seismic) conditions. Soft ground considerations as they relate to seismic conditions are discussed in a later section of this report. Our characterization of subsurface conditions suggests the Site is underlain by a surface layer of Fill that is variable in composition and density, and is generally on the order of 8 to 10 feet thick. The Fill mantles a sequence of very, soft Shallow Alluvium ranging in thickness from about 20 to 35 feet and consisting primarily of fine-grained organic-rich and peaty soils with scattered loose sand layers. Deep Alluvium consists of generally more competent sands and gravels to a depth of 130 feet or more. Very soft, fme-grained Lacustrine deposits were encountered beneath the alluvium. Competent, glacially consolidated soil and/or bedrock were encountered beneath the alluvium on the adjacent shoreline properties (Football Northwest to the north), but were not encountered in explorations on the subject property. 5 The near-surface soils (Fill and Shallow Alluvium) are considered to be compressible and weak. Soils of this nature cannot be expected to support the foundation loads anticipated for the planned buildings. Therefore, deep foundations (piles) will be required to support the buildings and any other heavily loaded and/or settlement-sensitive structures. Certain ground improvement technologies may be applicable to support structures, subject to further analysis. The implementation of pile foundations and/or ground improvement is subject to review and approval by EPA. The near-surface soils will also compress under the load of new fills that would be placed to grade the site. Settlement of new fills would be variable due to the variability of the Fill properties, combined with the variable thicknesses of the Fill and Shallow Alluvium. Static settlement occurs in two forms: primary compression from static loading of new structures and fills, and secondary compression, which stems from decomposition of organic materials. Building settlement is not considered since, as previously discussed, it is assumed that buildings will be supported on piles. However, settlement of the compressible sediments after pile installation can produce negative skin friction, or down-drag loads, on deep foundations, which must be considered in design. If the fill cap is placed and allowed to settle before building and utilities are constructed, subsequent total and differential settlements can be minimized. Primary settlement estimates for the placement of a 5-foot cap, and additional amounts of new fill are summarized in Table 3.1.1. An estimate of secondary settlement is also provided. S PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11, 2009 13 ASPECT CONSULTING 0 Table 3.1.1 - Estimates of Static Settlement Source Amount at Surface (inches) Primary Compression from New Fill (5-foot-thick) 18 Primary Compression from 1.5 inches per foot of fill Additional_Fill Secondary Compression over 100- 5 year_Design_Life I The shallow groundwater across the Site would present construction challenges for trenching and excavating below the water table. Construction dewatering should be anticipated for these deep excavations. If deep excavations occur after parts of the Site are developed, construction dewatering plans will have to consider the potential of dewatering-induced settlement caused by draw-down of the water table. Any dewatering activities will need to consider health, safety and water treatment issues associated with potential exposure to and extraction of dissolved phase chemical constituents in groundwater. .3.2 Seismic Hazards Seismic hazards to consider for Site development include surface fault rupture due to the proximity of the Site to the Seattle Fault Zone, amplification of strong shaking as a result of the soft soil profile, and liquefaction of the relatively weak granular soils beneath the Site. Hazards associated with liquefaction include lateral spreading, where the low- sloping unsaturated, near-surface soils tend to translate shore-ward during soil liquefaction, surface settlement caused by the shaking-induced consolidation, temporary loss of strength (and bearing capacity), and sand boils caused by the expulsion of excess porewater pressures during liquefaction. The following sections described these hazards in greater detail. 3.2.1 Surface Fault Rupture Faults that could produce surface rupture in the project area are not well-defined and are thought to have recurrence intervals in the range of one to several thousand years. The current state of engineering practice in the Seattle area is such that surface fault rupture is only considered in extraordinary cases. In our opinion, the relative risk of fault rupture at the surface of the Site is very low, and it is unlikely that development plans in the near future will explicitly design for this risk. 3.2.2 Ground Response The soft ground conditions are expected to cause moderate amplification of seismic shaking, compared to the inertial seismic forces that would be expected at a similarly located site with a firm soil profile. Appropriate design of structures in accordance with 14 PROJECT NO. 020027-01 0-04 • NOVEMBER 11, 2009 ASPECT CONSULTING the current International Building Code (IBC) will mitigate seismic hazards to acceptable risk levels. 0 IBC requires design for a "Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE)" with a 2 percent probability of exceedance (PE) in 50 years (2,475-year return period). The United States Geological Survey (USGS, 2002) has completed probabilistic ground motion studies and maps for Washington. The USGS maps indicate that for recurrence intervals of 475 and 2,475 years, the peak bedrock acceleration in the Site vicinity would be 0.32g and 0.66g, and have magnitudes of 6.5 and 6.7, respectively. Current IBC design methodologies express the effects of site-specific subsurface conditions on the ground motion response in terms of the "Site Class" for IBC. These factors represent the density and stiffness of the soil profile underlying the Site, and are used to account for the seismic response of the soil profile. Based on our characterization of the subsurface conditions, the soil profile at the Site would fall into IBC Site Class "F". With the limited set of data available at this time, a preliminary seismic analysis was performed for the Site. This analysis was based on the non-site specific seismic factors allowed by Chapter 18 of the 2006 version of the IBC using a Site Class "D". IBC Chapter 18 allows that in lieu of using a site-specific study, the peak ground acceleration used for design can be set as the 5% damped design spectral acceleration at short periods, SDS, divided by 2.5 (SDS/2.5) for the purposes of evaluating geotechnical site effects. Therefore, a peak ground acceleration (PGA) of 0.39g (SDsI2.5) was used for evaluation of the ground motions at the Site. Given the amount of liquefaction forecasted by our analysis and the type of proposed structures, a site-specific study will be required for the actual design of the structures. 3.2.3 Liquefaction Liquefaction occurs when loose, saturated and relatively cohesionless soil deposits temporarily lose strength as a result of earthquake shaking. Primary factors controlling the onset of liquefaction include intensity and duration of strong ground motion, characteristics of subsurface soil, in-situ stress conditions, and the depth to groundwater. Liquefaction evaluations were conducted with the aid of LiquefyPro, a seismically induced liquefaction and settlement analyses software program developed by CivilTech Corporation (2009) and WSliq, a liquefaction analysis software program that was created as part of an extended research project supported by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and authored by Kramer (2008) Based on our characterization of the Site, and the ground motions described in the previous section, our analyses indicate that moderate liquefaction hazards exist to a depth of about 80 feet, with the exception of fine-grained Shallow Alluvium layers, which are not considered to be liquefaction-prone. Seismic Settlement Liquefaction-induced settlements were estimated using the recommended methods presented by Kramer (2008) and CivilTech (2009), and our characterization of the Site subsurface conditions. Based on these studies, we estimate that seismic settlements PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 15 ASPECT CONSULTiNG S produced from a design-level earthquake could range from about 12 to 30 inches across the Site. A comparative analysis of the 1 in 74 year return period earthquake is predicted to cause 4 to 5 inches of settlement at the surface, indicating Site design concerns from a much more likely event. Due to the variability of the seismic settlement results, it should be assumed that fairly significant differential settlement on the order of several inches can occur after a design level earthquake. Lateral Spreading Lateral spreading is the movement toward the shoreline of the "crust" of soil above the liquefiable layer. Since liquefaction of the underlying soils appears likely during the design earthquake, there is also potential for seismically induced lateral spreading towards the shoreline. Because of the size of the Site, we evaluated lateral spreading magnitudes at varying distances from the shoreline, using the Site topography, and our characterization of subsurface conditions. Using the empirical methods presented by Kramer (2008) and Youd, et al. (2002), we estimate the lateral spreading could result in horizontal displacements from 8 to 13 feet near the shoreline, and 1 to 3 feet along the eastern edge of the Site. The empirical methods are not site-specific, and the regression formulas that form their basis could over-estimate predicted displacements. Given the unique, deltaic geologic environment of the Site, site-specific numerical analyses would be appropriate S for predicting post-liquefaction ground displacements with a higher degree of confidence. Sand Boils Sand boils are liquefaction-related features that could potentially result from subsurface porewater pressure relief via the path of least resistance. They manifest themselves as small mounds on the surface of ejected soil slurry. They are typically several feet in diameter and cause a mound that can be several inches high. Up to several cubic yards of material can be ejected. If sand boil occur, their locations are typically random, and the prediction of their occurrence is not considered practical for design. 3.3 Environmental Considerations A summary of existing Site conditions and environmental investigations completed to date are summarized in a report by Anchor and Aspect (2007a). The primary contaminants of concern are DNAPL in soil, and dissolved-phase chemicals in groundwater. Soil contamination is generally limited to the Fill and Shallow Alluvium. Environmental remedies currently under consideration will focus on protecting the aquifer that is present in the Deep Alluvium, and water quality in Lake Washington. The geo-structural solutions that could enable site development include pile foundations and/or ground improvement technologies, as discussed in Section 4. The final cleanup action at Site is anticipated to include leaving DNAPL contaminated soil in-place. Design of these solutions must consider protection of the deep aquifer (Deep Alluvium) when and if they penetrate the contaminated upper strata beneath the Site both during S construction and in the long term. The design and installation of deep piles and ground improvement will require coordination and approval by EPA as part of the remedy - 16 PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 ASPECT CONSULTING selection process. The following provides a starting point for consideration of pile installation techniques. 0 Limited research has been performed on the issue of potential carry down of contamination and cross-contamination of aquifers stemming from installation and long- term presence of piling at contaminated sites. Since 2000, several investigations have been completed on the installation of driven piles in "Brownfield Sites", including those with DNAPL-related contamination. An EPA-funded, state-of-the-art paper by Boutwell, et al. (2005) summarizes the current body of knowledge, and provides recommendations for pile foundations at Brownfield Sites. In the past, environmental regulators have required expensive protection measures for pile installation, generally focusing on surface casing measures through the contaminated zone to prevent carry down. Boutwell (2005) identifies the potential mechanisms of aquifer cross-contamination resulting from the installation and presence of driven piling, and how these mechanisms can be overcome by appropriate design. With proper consideration to these mechanisms, standard driven displacement piles can be safely used without special near-surface protection measures. Regulators in some states have allowed driven piles under these circumstances and without special near-surface protection measures. The current state-of-practice is such that driven displacement piles can be used in the conditions at the Site, provided that proper pile materials and installation techniques are used. Impermeable pile materials are necessary, such as steel or concrete, in order to not provide a conduit of contaminants by "wicking". Piles should be installed using displacement methods, such that in-situ soil is displaced during their installation, resulting in densification of the soil immediately adjacent to the piles and sealing of the pile-soil interface. Pointed pile tips should be used during driving to avoid carry-down of a "plug" of contaminated soil during driving. Ground improvement technologies could also be considered for stabilizing the Site with respect to soft ground and seismic hazards. Ground improvement could potentially be used in concert with environmental remedies. Appropriate ground improvement technologies would involve in-situ strengthening of soil by densification, in-situ soil stabilization by a variety of grouting techniques, soil removal and replacement and internal drainage to dissipate excess porewater pressures that can cause liquefaction. Near-shore ground improvement utilizing internal drainage techniques could potentially be feasible due to the upward hydraulic gradient of the deep aquifer. These ground improvement technologies have the potential to be applied singularly or in combination with each other. The use of ground improvement technologies will be considered in consultation with EPA as part of the evaluation of site remedial alternatives. E PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 17 ASPECT CONSULTING [] 4 Site-Wide Geotechnical Options Technically viable geotechnical options exist to develop the Site as planned. As noted previously, structures with vertical settlement sensitivity will need to be placed on piles or improved ground to maintain design functionality. Options are available to mitigate the post-earthquake lateral spreading problems. Geotechnical options must also consider the environmental site cleanup, and the need for EPA approval, given the soil and groundwater contamination that is known to be onsite. Sequencing of site work (major ifil grading) will be an important consideration to minimize total and differential settlement of features that gain their support from shallow soil. The geotechnical site improvement options create an additional expense to the project when compared to a location with competent soil and no contamination. Different geotechnical mitigation strategies, combined with potential contamination remediation strategies, may produce combined cost effectiveness, when compared to a strategy of each mitigation effort being performed independently. 4.1 Mitigation of Lateral Spreading Given the calculated predication of large post-earthquake lateral spreading at the shoreline (8 tol3 feet) and the significant movement (1 to3 feet) at the eastern boundary, buildings must be designed to resist such movement/soil loading to maintain structural safety. Based on our review of the available data, using anchors or battered piles at the building foundations, or a designed ground improvement program, would provide the necessary lateral movement mitigation for the buildings. While augmented foundations would provide protection of individual buildings, a ground improvement program has the potential to protect larger areas of the Site and possibly provide Site-wide benefits. 4.1.1 Ground Improvement Ground improvement strategies could be used to produce area-wide or site-wide protection from lateral spreading. Site-wide protection would have the benefit of increased seismic performance of proposed buildings, roads, open space and utilities during and afler strong shaking. The extent and depth of improved ground. in combination with building foundations, must be such that life safety is protected in accordance with applicable building codes. This could be accomplished with deep foundations for buildings and ground improvement designed to limit seismic-induced ground displacements to tolerable limits. Further analysis and EPA approval would be required to develop preliminary design and cost analysis of such an appropriate ground improvement program. 4.1.2 Lateral Resistant Piles/Anchors ,a If the building foundations are to independently resist the lateral movement imposed by lateral spreading without ground improvement, then the following loads would need to be 18 PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 ASPECT CONSULTING considered. The upper soil profile of unsaturated soil, which would be mobilized during lateral spreading, would exert passive pressure on buried structures and foundations. This loading could be taken by the lower foundation elements and transferred to the pile system or to anchors. The silty peat zones may not completely liquefy but would be too weak to prevent the movement and would load the pile trunks. These additional lateral loads could be resisted from battered piles incorporated into the structure base foundation system, or through very deep anchors fixed into the non-liquefied zone of the Deep Alluvium and stressed into the easterly walls/footings of the structures. Because of the significant length required of such anchors, it would be beneficial to design these as high capacity anchors to reduce the number of anchors. The lateral resistant pile/anchor system would provide restraint for the buildings only and would not offer protection for the general Site. 4.2 Building Support 4.2.1 Static and Seismic Settlement All building foundation designs must incorporate the potential settlement expected over the life of the building. The estimated settlements and sources have been discussed in Section 3. Due to the large settlement estimates, the likely foundation system for the plaimed buildings is a deep pile system. The long-term and seismic settlement of these soils can also produce negative skin friction, or down-drag loads, on deep foundations which should be factored into the capacities of the piles. 4.2.2 Displacement Piles In general, deep foundation options include driven piles and drilled piles. In the Seattle area, the common driven and drilled piles for buildings are steel pipe piles and auger-cast piles, respectively. Steel pipe piles can be filled with concrete after driving, or left empty. They can also be driven close-ended or open-ended. Another system which has been used in Seattle is the driven cast-in-place pile. This type of pile has the benefit over the auger cast pile in that no contaminated material is withdrawn from the ground, and has been documented to have similar capacities. The actual pile type would be subject to approval by EPA. Studies have shown (Boutwell, 2005) that smooth-walled displacement piles are effective at preventing vertical migration of the DNAPL types of contaminants found on-site. Driven steel pipe piles, which are commonly used in the Seattle area, would appear appropriate for these purposes. Other proprietary displacement piles have also been used for these purposes in other areas of the country and could be considered as options as well. Steel pipe piles are driven using a heavy impact hatnmner that is controlled by a lead, which in turn is supported by a crane. The principle advantages of driven steel pipe piles are their relatively high capacity, the speed in which they can be installed and structurally loaded, their capacity can be readily determined, and they create no spoils. Steel pipe piles can be easily spliced and driven open-ended to penetrate or displace obstructions. The principle disadvantages of driven piles are noise and vibrations created during construction, and their relative cost when compared to driven cast-in-place piles. 40 PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 19 ASPECT CONSULTING . 4.2.3 Structural Slabs Slabs-on-grade may be feasible for lightly loaded structures gaining support from shallow foundations. However, with the high likelihood for long-term, site-wide settlement, and the potential for embankment and seismic settlements discussed in Table 4.2.1, the use of standard slab-on-grade floors in combination with pile-supported structures is not recommended. As noted in Section 3, the post construction settlements (secondary and seismic) are estimated to be large and slabs-on-grade would settle differentially from the building foundations. Therefore, ground floors of pile-supported structures need to be structural slabs, tied into the building foundations, to maintain ftmctionality. 4.3 Earthwork 4.3.1 General Site Preparation Special considerations relating to general earthwork and grading at the Site include the shallow water table and the presence of compressible near-surface soil. In general, development plans should minimize excavation depths to avoid the need for construction dewatering and shoring of loose saturated soils. Re-use of on-site fills should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Grading work will need to be coordinated with the approved environmental cleanup plan to maintain cost effectiveness. Removal of existing accumulations of woody debris associated with the former log yard operation prior to placement of any additional fill is recommended under planned building and roadway footprints to avoid long-term settlement resulting from . decomposition of the wood fill. In non sensitive areas, such as open landscaping and surface parking, placement of additional fill over woody material may be acceptable with the understanding that grades will need to be restored in the future. 4.3.2 Shallow Groundwater and Dewatering Deep excavations should be avoided if possible due to the shallow groundwater table. Additionally, in areas where excavation would intersect the silt/peat zones, shoring will probably be needed given the low strength of the peat and the high groundwater table. In areas where relatively deep vaults, pump stations etc. penetrate below the planned fill cap, allowance should be made for dewatering of the excavations. If a deep excavation is required and it is determined that dewatering is necessaiy, the impact of dewatering settlement will need to be evaluated especially if the dewatering is near the property boundaries. Dewatering activities will also need to consider health and safety issues and treatment/disposal of impacted groundwater. 4.3.3 Preloading We understand an approximately 5-foot fill cap is planned for the majority of the Site. This cap should be placed with a grade surcharge to account for predicted settlement. It should also be placed at sevei.al months before any grade sensitive feature such as foundations, roads or utilities are installed, This timeframe can be shortened if the Site is preloaded to a higher fill grade and then the excess fill removed. More detailed analysis is necessary to evaluate the specifics of preloading. Planning should consider that further 20 PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 ASPECT CONSULTING settlement would occur due to the high organic content of the lower sediments, even if a preload is utilized. is 4.14 Infrastructure Development Considerations Underground Utilities The practical depth to which underground utilities can be placed is limited by the relatively shallow groundwater depth. It is desirable to maintain these in the fill cap. Sags resulting from post seismic differential settlement pipe support will result in undesirable sags that can adversely affect the performance of conveyance pipes. Therefore, initial maximum gradients may be desirable where allowed by cover requirements. Flexible connections to buildings will be necessary to allow for the differential settlements from grade load changes and seismic settlements. Low impact stormwater management techniques that rely on infiltration, will also be limited due to the shallow groundwater depth in most areas, and contamination considerations. Pavements and Roadways The wood waste fill should be removed in areas where grade sensitive roadways and utilities are going to be constructed prior to cap fill. As noted previously in non-sensitive areas the wood waste could remain with future maintenance performed where required. The pavements in areas where relatively competent surface fills exist, can likely be designed with standard pavement sections. Soft areas encountered during construction should be overexcavated and replaced with clean, compact sand and gravel prior to placing the standard pavement section. S PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 21 ASPECT CONSULTING 5 References Anchor Environmental, LLC and Aspect Consulting, LLC, 2007a, Task 2— Summaiy of Existing Information and Data Quality Report. Remedial Investigation/Feasibility, Quendall Terminals Site. Report prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, on behalf of Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Company, by Anchor Environmental, LLC and Aspect Consulting, LLC, August 2007. Anchor Environmental, LLC and Aspect Consulting, LLC, 2007b, Task 3— Preliminary conceptual Site Model, Remedial Action Objectives, Remediation Goals, and Data Gaps. Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study, Quendall Terminals. Report prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, on behalf of Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Company, by Anchor Environmental, LLC and Aspect Consulting, LLC, August 2007. Boutwell, 2005, Presentation titled- Installation of Driven Piles in Brownfields Sites, by Dr. Gordon P. Boutwell, PE, Pile Driving Contractors Association 2005 PDCA Winter Roundtable, Charleston, SC, February 19, 2005. CH2M-HILL, 1978, Memorandum to Tim King, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Prot Quendall Development Renton Washington, By Jeff Layton CH2M-HILL, 20 December 1978. CivilTech Software, 2009, Liquef' Pro v5.5j Analysis program. Kramer, S., 2008, Evaluation of Liquefaction Hazards in Washington State, prepared for the Washington State Transportation Commission. Shannon & Wilson, 2006, Geotechnical Report Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility Renton, Washington. Prepared for Football Northwest, LLC. September 13, 2006. U.S. Geological Survey, 2002, United States National Seismic Hazard Maps: http://gldims.cr.usgs.gov/nshmp2008/viewer.htm. Youd, T.L., Hansen, C.M., and Bartlett, S.F., 2002, Revised Multilinear Regression Equations for Prediction of Lateral Spread Displacement, Journal of Geotechnical Geoenvironmental Engineering, 128 (12), pp. 1007-1017. E 22 PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 ASPECT CONSULTING Limitations and Additional Services Work for this project was performed, and this report prepared, in accordance with generally accepted professional practices for the nature and conditions of work completed in the same or similar localities, at the time the work was performed. It is intended for the exclusive use of Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Company and their agents for specific application to the referenced property. This report does not represent a legal opinion. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The conclusions and interpretations presented in this report should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. This report is issued with the understanding that it is preliminary in nature and that additional geotechnical studies will be necessary to support ftiture designs. Additionally pile type selection along with any ground improvement will need to be presented for approval to the EPA. This scope of our work did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic substances in the soil, surface water, or groundwater at this Site. The Site remediation studies are being conducted under a separate scope of work. S [] S PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11,2009 23 ram Pk T: Od $s;; ç t I Subs .op 1 Site 71 ' r Ar 16. -r- LL 1 I H ; I : / I )N I }TJ AspeCtconsuiting Site Vicinity Map Nov2009 PROJECTNO ' earth+waer 020027 ................... QuendaH Terminals PLO FIGURE NO. Renton, Washington AS; ALTERNATIVE SUITES INTERNATIONAL 1.888.900.4050 Parking Agreement for ASI Guest(s) PROPERTY: Alley 24 SPACE # open in common garage APT #536 ($7/day per space) VEHICLE LIC. PLATE # COLOR MAKE / MODEL Kxi4& VEHICLE [IC. PLATE # COLOR MAKE / MODE GARAGE ACCESS CARD(S) YES PARKING PERMIT NO DATES OF STAY From_1/18/2076 To 2/16/2076 RESIDENT (NAME) Izzat Hasa yen AGREES TO THE FOLLOWING: One remote control in acceptable condition shall be issued, if applicable, and will be returned in like condition. Replacement of batteries is the responsibility of resident. * $100 replacement fee will be charged for lost, damaged or unreturned access card(s). purchase/replacement value will be charged for lost or unreturned parking permits (if applicable). Resident finds parking space in acceptable condition and will returned it in like condition. Space should be kept free of trash, litter, cigarette butts, etc. SPACES ARE BY ASSIGNMENT ONLY, VEHICLES MAY NOT PARK IN ANY CIHER SPACE. VIOLATOR'S VEHICLE WILL BE TOWED AT VEHICLE OWNER'S EXPENSE. The garage/carport space(s) is for vehicles only; storage of any other items (including bicycles) is not permitted. Resident will immediately clean fluids leaking from vehicle onto pavement or the cost of removal will be charged to resident. if spills cause damage to pavement, resident will be responsible for repair costs. Car washing, maintenance, or vehicle repair is NOT allowed in the garage/carport. Only vehicles in operable condition and with current license tabs will be permitted to park in the garage/carport. Storage of vehicles is not permitted. Resident shall not allow any other vehicle to park in resident's assigned space without previous consent of ASI. Space is for above registered vehicle only. Subletting of parking spaces is not permitted. Management or ASI agent as deemed necessary may reassign spaces. Vehicles are to be kept with valuables removed while parked in the garage/carport. Remote controls must be kept secure or removed from vehicle while parked in the garage if applicable. ASI assumes no responsibility or liability for any damage or loss to vehicles or their contents. ASI cannot guarantee that parking spaces will never be blocked and assumes no responsibility for vehicles and/or parking violation ticket fees and/or towing fees or if forced to park outside the garage/carport or intentionally parked outside the garage/carport elsewhere on the premises of the rental property or by the rental property. Should you need assistance, please contact AS.!. Management, phone tt(206) 860-1616 or after regular business hours select ,pption 9 I, the undersigne?J \C\"(.-2 C\-- have read and understand the above and should I lend my parking space and/or remote and/or parking permit I assume full responsibility for It. GUEST SIGNA TE/1 . 776 12'! Ave. F, Seattle, W.A 9 IO2-Ph: 206860.16 16-Fix: 2C.9.949ChEmcA: Q:\Quendall\2009-1O\020027-1 12.dwg t.TI.ce HLeO.9&LiJI-. 0 I T rz FL A N I TEMN Ers4roN, WI4II'iON CIO 41URr PACIFIC, LLC ~Wrx IobnO. I I LAHCS UtJALL.•fl $ ASROOIATU$ A 0 0 H I T U 0 5 I - ASA 430 LIJ(EZID( • SEAflL. WA 98122 • 208 325 2553 -'' dal. I no. I rsyl.ion doP. Q:QuendaU2009-08\020027-AADD.dwg I E'evation in Feet (NAVD 88) 0) I -: CI) j (J1 (0 O () ( (0 W \\ BH-1 4 Projected 50 South Projected 50North - - - - 0 - I I 1;11t BH21B Projected l5NortI, 01 CO cOCoI)-'-ICo3I th >(J 10 I H H H II I I H H J III! I SWB-8 Projected 110North a________ A OITT -MC-6 Projected 10 South -. Intersection Cross Section D-D' CD (Q CD 0 ---_- - 0. CD ----------.--- I I-,I -------------- HC7 Projectd3O'SoutJ? C) - - N 0 1 (Q CD - MC-14 Projected 40South MC-3 Profected3oNorth CD (C) - MC-1 Projected 40 South S 0 0 ----------- - U) - MC-1 0 Projected 50'Soutl, ig zz BH-25B Co .4— -----------. 0 ------- aE to (0 .-.. - I CD CD ------------------- Projected ::North _BH-9 - - HC-5 Projeoed20'Sou1h K. B 64M Projected 67 North Elevation in Feet (NAVD 88) CD CD CD -.1 Q:\Quendalt\2009-08\020027-AADD.dwg I -a ()1 C) C)-- - Elevation in Feet (NAVD 88) 6) C) C) CD - BH-17B Projected 5 West -S CO C) C) 0 -4. C) C) - r >( cz 0 0) CO - () o 0) C) C) :3 - CD 0 0 W i 10 C) 01 C) C) 0 (D 2. o CD 3 . (A '-'1 iR C) 0 9 C) CO C) a 0 C) Q:\Quendall\2009-08\020027-AADO.dwg (nferseclior( Cross Section B-Be : I I - Projected 30' West 0 0 0 o rc 0 0 O Projected 120 East zz I ' - BH-27 Projected 15 West I SWB3 Lz: Projocted20East I I I I Intersection Cross Section A-A 3 I I BH_2: I Projoct6d22'East C) 0 0 C) Elevation in Feet (NAVD 88) 0 21 Gi CD CD CL 0 0 C) 0) >c • • (Ji a ) gi J - BH-1 9 Projocted30' East — OP-i Projected 20' East - Intersection Cross Section A-A' I Cl IIS FII I I 1 I Elevation in Feet (NAVD 88) r.,) cc) 0 o o o o o CD .4 I I -i----- BH-1 5 Projected45Eost I — MC-6 Projected 2o' West intersection Cross Section B-B' / I - I I I i i i i 1 I i I I i i i I HThLbI 1 4 — SWB-8 Projected 85' West Cl Cl LI th UI - .l .l IS I II 4IIIIIII p I ................. Projecfed35'East CO I I I II BH-20B Projected 30'East . r, -I -I UIIIjIS I . 01 0) 0 i --QP-5 Projected 15'East - CO 0 0 C) (D o - 0 o • = (n CO —1 U) (In 10 0 9 0 t') 0 0) C) 0 0) Elevation in Feet (NAVD 88) Q:\Quendall\2009-08\020027-AADD.dwg APPENDIX A Existing Site-Wide Geotechnical Data El S 0 ASPECT CONSULTING Al Existing Site-Wide Geotechnical Data The stratigraphic contacts shown on the individual summary logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types; actual transitions may be more gradual. The subsurface conditions depicted are only for the specific date and locations reported, and therefore, are not necessarily representative of other locations and times. A.1.1 Remediation Exploration Data from recent remediation studies (Anchor and Aspect, 2007b) and data just generated by Aspect was also reviewed. Those selected probe and boring logs that were used in this report are included n this appendix. A1.2 Geotechnical Borings by Others Data was reviewed from the previous data summary for the Site (Anchor and Aspect, 2007a) from studies by Woodward—Clyde Consultants, Hart Crowser, Shannon & Wilson and Neil Twelker. Additional reports were provided by KPFF from Shannon & Wilson (2006) and CH2M-HILL (1978). Selected borings were used to develop the geologic sections and allow for extrapolation of soil parameters where possible. Those borings are included in this appendix. PROJECT NO. 020027-010-04 • NOVEMBER 11, 2009 A-I ATTACHMENT A-I Geotechnical Borings by Others E S 0 aIkaRi n IF71N7 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Standard Penetration e - - .0. (140 lb. weight, 3 Ero 2 . A Blows per Surface Elevation: Approx. 27 Feet ° 0 20 60 \Wood chips, (Fill) f 03 25 - • - - \Dark gray SAND, moist, (Fill) SP / t\Wood chips, (FlU) ,f 1\Medium dense, gray, fine SAND; moist; /. 2j... — Flfl) SP II 31 111 2 90 / 10 1\1..00se, gray, fine to medium SAND and j tIC0ALFRAGMENTS. l ..J— Interbedded, very loose and very soft, gray, fine to medium SAND and brown, claycy, organic SILT; moist; sflghtly peaty, .... • :— ::::: - 167.70 81 scattei'ed roots, SR/OH / 20 4. ---- . 638 3 Very soft, dark brown, slightly clayey, peaty, organic SILT; moist; scattered root hairs;untreatedwoodatl7.8feet; 24.0 / 'I occasionalIayersof loose, gray, fine to f 25 -"" \medium SAND, wet at 20 feet, f 101 \(pression Filling) OH j 0 ui 30 ..-::::::::: . Stratified, medium dense, gray, slightly sllty,finetomium SAND, tracegravel; 121 wet;SP-SM. 33.0 13 .::::: :::: Medium stiff, brown, slightly ciayey, peaty, organic SILT; wet; organics; 141 (Depression Filling) OH 15 Loose, gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND, wet, {Depression Filling) SP SM 420 17—r 4° Dense, silty, gravelly SAND, wet, (Coarse JLuvium)SM. :- -- isI Stratified, very loose to medium dense, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium SAND 15r It and SlLT; wet; interbedded organic and —'-- woodlayersat37feet;(Medium 20 50 .l!uv1um/Depresslon Filling) SR-SM 550 Medium dense to dense, gray, clean to slightly silty, fine (o medium SAND, trace [ 55 Interbedded, dense, light brown to gray, \of gravel; wet; (Medium Alluvium) SP-SJ Isandy, fine, roundedGRAVEL;wet; [60.0 . 60::::::::: VCoarseAlluviurn)GP. / CONTINUED NEXT PAGE LEGEND 0 20 40 61 S Sample Not Recovered 6J3 Surface Seal % Water Content . . ________ . quid Limit I 2 O.D. Split Spoon Sample Annular Sealant Plastic Natural Water Content Jt 3 C).D. Shelby Tube Sample I8J Piezometer Screen EM Grout Water Level - JAG Development Renton, Washington NOTES I.The strattlicedon rines represent the approximate boundaries betweon soIl types, and the transition may be gradual. LOG OF BORING. SWB3 2.Tho discussion in the text of this repott is necessary for a proper understanding of the ri,tura of subsurface material;.. - December 1996 W-7443.03 . Water I.val if ondlcst4d above fh date , Referto KEY for explanation of Symbois and dofinitions. SHANNON W,LSoN1Nc: FIG.. A-5 S. USC letter symbol based an visual classification.0.01 &nd Ewenn.,nt.l .Sheetl.ef 2 fASTERLG 2717 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Surface Elevation: Approx. 27 Feet [Medium dense to dense, brown, fine to medium SAND, trace of gravel, scattered layers of rounded fine gravel; wet; (Medium Alluvium) SP. Dense, gray, silty fine SAND, trace gravel; wet; (FisAiiuviurn) SM. 291 ft, gray, silty CLAY, trace sand; ML BOTTOM OF BORING COMPLETED 11/6/96 i2i.°1j4l 311 '121.51 I LEGEND Sample Net Recovered lID Surface Seal 2" O.D. Spfit Spoon Sample KW Annular Sealant JZ 3" 0.0. Shelby Tube Sample .: Pezometer Screen Em Grout Water Level NOTES The stratification tizes represent the approximate boundaries between soil types, end the transition may be gradual. The drecuaslon in the text of this report is necessary for a pioper m understand of the nature of subsurface materials. Water level, if indicated shove. Is for the data specified and may very. Refer to KEY for exptantlon of 'Symbol" and deflnidons. USC tettersyrthol based on visual classification. II ) . •. 75 so .:: ::::::: :::::::: :::: 85 9C 100 Ad 115 120 20 40 60 % Water Content Plastic Umit I-- eH Liquid Umit Natural Water Content JAG Development Renton, Washington LOG OF BORING SWB4 - December1996 W-74430 SHANNON & WiLSON, INC. FIG. A- 01'*fl5fl1$t Cormikom Sheet 2 of 2 Standard Penetration Resistance (140 lb. weight, 30" drop) CL >. 2 '. A Blows per foot Q 23 L : 241 251 ael 271 2e1 95.0 • MAS1t11.0 217107 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 5 1 Standard Penetration Resistance . . . 2 (140 lb. weIght, 301 drop) A Blows per foot SurfaceElevatlon:Approx. 25 Feet 40 Gray,sandyGRAVELmolst;(Fill)GW. - 2.5 '.° •• IT Dense, gray, gravelly, fine tomedium • \SAND; dry;silghtsheen and odor;(Fill) f \SP. / : 21 Loose, gray, slightly clayey, slightly silty to silty SAND; moist; scattered to , Inumerous wood fibers; slight odor; (Fill) 1 9.5 IC : : : :: ....... : ISPSM loose, Soft and very brown, slightly clayey, sandySlLT, slightly clayey, peaty, is : :::: io • • \organ!cSILT, and gray, fine tamedium 1 SAND, moist, numerous wood fibers, I fDepresslon Filling/Medium AlluvIum) 20 :: . : : Very soft, brown, slightly clayey, peaty, f 22.0 • \organlcSlLT;moist;numercuswood I '- HH fibers;(Oepress1onFIlIIng)0H. ioj 25 \ Gray, Interbeddd, soft and very loose, ( ts11W CLAY and silty, fine SAND; wet; 205 :: "1 . . : : scattered organibs; (Lacustrino Deposit) :: l2l 30 :: :. : : . • :: :: tCLJSM 1 320 : ........ \ Medium dense, gray, gravelly, fine and . fine to medium SAND, traceofs1it;wet; l\(CoarseAfluvlum) SW. 35 141 i.Li 39.0 : ILoose, gray, fine to medium SAND, trace 1pf silt; wet; (Medium Alluvium) SR. r . : .. 40 Very loose, brownish-gray, fine sandy SILT with fine to medium SAND lenses, 42,0 .. l'ce of organic silt and fine organics; . .: wat;(FineAfluv1um)ML/Sp. .: ' Medium dense to dense, greenish-gray, fine gravelly, fine to coarse SAND, local ... 17J - pceofsllt(CoarseAlluvium)sP. -,— 50 -......... interbedded, medium dense to dense, greenish-gray, gravelly, fine to medium, 0 fine tocoarse SAND, traceofslItwet; . gravellerisat47 to 48 feet; SR/SW. :.'. ai.o • :::::::: :.: Medium dense, gray-brown, fine to • 1 LEGEND . 0 20 40 6C % Water Content ' Sample Not Recovered EJJ Surface Seal 2' O.D. Split Spoon Sample CM Annular Sealant PlastTolmit 1 Llqud LImit 3: O.D.0.0. Shelby Tube Sample Plezometer Screen Natural Water tent Grout Water Level JAG Development Renton, Washington The stratification lines represent the approximate bounderle, between types, and the tcaflaition may bi gradual. LOG OF BOR!NG SWB-413 • The diacuaston In the text of this report Is necessary for a propsr understanding of the nature of pubeurface material.. I-- Water love!, if indltated above, lifer the date specified and may ecemuer Refer to KEY for explanation of Symbola and definitlona. SHANNON & WILSON, INC. I FIG. A-6 USC latter symbol based on visual classIfication. GiOt5IffiIOJ 54 rev cclii Ccrwllint* Sheet 1 of 3 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Standard Penetration Resistance (140 lb. weight, 801 drop) ABiowsperloot Surface Elevation: Apprax. 25 Feet — 0 - 20 40 sand; wet; (Medium Alluvium) SP BE — 251 -r 7C. 73.0 .• , 271 • Medium dense to dense, gray, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND and sandy GRAVEL, : 29 .. . :..:. trace of slit, wet, (Coarse Alluvium) GP/SV. 221 so —- — — 82.0 • : : Medium dense, gray, fine to medium \SAND, trace otsllt; wet: SP. 84.0 85 Very dense to medium dense, gray, fine to . medium SAND, trace of slit; wet; silt tense at 88 feet and Vattered trace of wood . 800 :' . aoJ so : : ::: .." '.:::: — — — traements. (Me8h4m Alluvium) SP _, Medium dense to dense, gray, slightly silty to silty fine SAND, scattered organics and : / . :: •." silt lenses, wet; (Fine Alluvium) SM 1. -- — Medium dense to dense, gray, trace to slightly silty, tine SAND wet; scattered fine wood and organics; (Fine Alluvium) MI : 00 . SPJSP-SM. / 105 ........ ....... —— — 35 110 .. — — . ....... 1130 : . :-: :4: : Medium dense to dense, gray, slightly silty to silty, firte SAND; wet; scattered fine : .: • organics and 114 inch slit layers, (Fine Alluvium) SP SM/SM H" - — — ________ -:::::: '. 0 2T 40 60 LEGEND S % Water Content Sample Not Rocovaed 1= Surface Seal _____ Sealant Plaatto Limit ___ S_I Liquid Limit I 2 C.D. SpIlt Spoon Sample Mnulnr :' Screen Nature Water Content 3 0.0. Shelby Tube Sample Piezometer Water Level JAG Development - Renton, Washington -. OTS . 1.7be etratifteetion linee reprea ntthepprox1mate boundaries baiweon soft . IOG OF BORING SWB4B .2.The duacuutdn in tIie text of Thieroportla nacesiarVfor a propti Undfratendrne of the nature of aibeiIdaae materials. December 996 __W7443O3 3,Wat.r tsvalj# indicated .ts for the data specified and may 4. Refort ,XEY for rxpleatIOn of &ymbeia" and d.tinitlons.SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG. A-fl 0. USC hnar aVmboi boesd on viacrol alesoifioutton. C.ltofr..l ,M____C,ns,hne. _si-feet i of 3 tEAT4ft ,rn. I MATERLALDESCRIPTIQN 5 St2fldard Penetration Resistance • Surface Elevation: Approx. 25 Feet A Blowsper foot o ff to stiff, gray, silty CLAY, 1235 locally distorted and 1280 12E ::::: : - : .. d fine sandy silt lenses locally; trine Deposit) CL -c-. 130 stiff1 gray, silty CLAY; F tr?ne Deposit) CH. &.: . :... dium 135 1410 01 140 -Dense to very dense, gray, silty fine SAND, trace of organics and gravel and :: silty fine sandy GRAVEL (angular and . ... . partially weatheredi; wet; (Landslide or Mudlbw Deposit) SMIGM. 151 8 421 - I • :. • -- BOrrOM OF BORING COMPLETED 11127/96 ;.: • -: 160 170. .: : 1-75 . .. .: - LEGEND 020 . TO - - . . .. .. Sample Not Reoovered lEl Suf ace Seal • % Water Content X 2' 0.0. Spilt Spoon S5mple IM MnulapSaknt PlaonItI —S Iluid Limit - X 3 0.0. sheIbyrubo Sample M3 Pl*ttttor Screen .••,.- • WetrLeval -.-, ,•-,. • JAG Devetopment . - . Renton, Washington - NOTES . 1.7htrat1flit?cn tnee ropresonttha eppro,dmete bemdortee between LOG OF BORING S B The dlscunton In The text of this report Ia neoea.ay for a pn'pot - Undarstandne of the nature of aubaurface meteIa$.. Water level, If IndloaW ,, December 1995 • -744 sr4NoN&wji.soN inc. 1 FIG -A-6 8. USC letter cymbol based on vIauet ctasilSjeatTe.. I Sheet 8 of 3 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Surface Elevation: Approx. 25 Feet 4.. 0. Brown, slightly silty SAND; moist; SP-SM. 2-0 Medium stiff, light gray, slightly sandy, gravelly, clayey SILT; moist; chalky odor; (Fill - Kiln Dust?) ML 9.0 Very loose to loose, gray, slightly silty, line to medium SAND; wet at 10 feet; lenses and pieces of slightly silty, clayey silt; wood fiber at 12.5 feet; (Fill?) SP-SM. 15.0 Very soft, brown, slightly clayey, peaty, organic SILT, lenses of gray, fine to medium SAND and fine sandy silt; wet; (Depression Filling) OH. tnterbedded, soft to medium stiff, gray, clayey, and fine sandy SILT and loose to very loose, gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND; wet; (Depression Filling/MedIum tuvium) MLISM. Medium dense to dense, gray, slightly silty, sandy, fine to coarse GRAVEL; wet; creosote odor; cobbles at 39 feet; (Coarse Alluvium) GP-(M. Very loose, gray, clean to slightly silty, fine to medium SAND; wet; slightly gravelly at 45 feet; faint creosote odor; oxidized soil at 47.5 feet; (Medium Alluvium) SP-SM. Loose, slightly clayey, silty, fine SAND; oxidized; no creosote odor; (Fine Alluvium) Loose to medium dense, gray, fine to \ medium SAND, trace silt; wet; (Medium \Alluvium) SP. Loose to medium dense, gray, sandy, fine ito coarse GRAVEL; wet; (Coarse Alluvium I corn Nuso wtxr PAGS 28.0 - 35.0 42.0 51.0 :. 52.0 58.0 81.0 Standard Penetration Resistance (140 lb. weight, 30' drop) . A Blows per foot - 41••6O 21 71 2 10 ....... 1 -- 15 198,8 81 20 1344 101 25 111 121 30 4' 151 40 171 181 45 191 201 so 211 221* 55 - 231 241 60 - 0 20 40 % Water Content • • Plastic Limit .1. S I Liquid Limit Natural Water Content Renton, Washington NOTES 1. he afteiricartion line, ,eprea.nt the appro,dmute boundarle, between soil .end the tranertion maybe gradual. LOG OF BORING SWBB The discuttlan in the text of This report Is neceseary for a proper rinderstenng of the nature of eubeurface materials. December 1996 W-7443-03 Water level, If indicated above, in for the date spocifiad and may vary. I 4. Refer to XE? for explanation of "Symbols" end definitions. SHANNON & WILSON. INC. FIG s. usc fetar t symbol baaed on visual claaaiflcstlon. Ceotath rd a EzWOfl4flt Sheet 1 of L L LEEND, Sample Not Recovered EEL Surface Seal :C 2" O.D. Split Spoon Sanple Mnufar Sealant ]t 3" O.D. Shelby Tube Sample II Piezothe'terScroen Em Grout Water Level ... JAG Deveiopment L UATPi.G IM27 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Standard Penetration Resistance CL (140 lb. weIght, 30' drop) a >. 2 a co A Blows per loot Surface Elevation: Approx. 25 Feet 0 20 40 60 \GP. 25 Stratified, medium dense, gray and brown, traceofsilttosflty,fineto medium SANb : ::70 ::::: and silty,sandyGRAVEL;wet;(Medium 2e1 : and CoarseAfluvlurn)SP-SM/GM. 27 7 so :::::::- 83.0 201 ::: ::::: :::::: .. ::::::::. : Stratified, verydense to dense, gray, ••; gravelly, firieto medium SAND, trace of 291 silt, and gray, sandy GRAVEL, wet, (Coarse Alluvium) SPIGP 90-S 62 95 101 0 311 IOC Dense, gray, fine to medium SAND, wet, (Medium Alluvium) SR 105 321 110 ......... 115 1215 BOTTOM OF BORING 331 120 COMPLETED 11/15/96 -— 125 LEGEND 0 20 40 60 Sample Not Recovered EEL Surface Seal I 0/6 Water Content . ________ I 2 O.D. Split Spoon Sample Annular Sealant Plastic LAmit I S I Liquid Limit it 3- O.D. Shelby Tube Sample • Piezometar Screen. Natural Water Content Grout Water Level JAG Development Renton, Washington NOTES lThe Stratification lines represent the epproxlrnàta bota-&daffes between $o es and thetreneitlon may be giedu&. . LOG OF BORING SWB8 2. The discussion In the text of this repqrt is necesseryfor $ proper understanding of the nature of subsurface materials. 3.Weter loyal. it indicated above is for the date specified and may vary. December 1996 W-7443-03 4. Refer to KEY for explanation of Symbols and defaitisns. SHANNON & WILSON, ulc. FIG. A-8 S. usc latter symbol based on visual classification. Gsote1 oreesnui Consilunt. Sheet 2 of 2 BORING 64M LOCATION: Sta. 35438 (201 Li.) ELEVATION 31.7 DATE DRILLED I—IItoI6-63 BROWN. AND GRAY SAND AND SILT WITH GRAVEL AND ORGANIC I..i MATTER - FILL1 SOFT TO MODERATELY FIRM 264°'-IOI • MOTTLED BROWN- GRAY VERY FINE SANDY SILT WITH FINE SAND LENSES - SOFT 29.0%- 96 .1. 8 1 INTERBEDDEO BROWN PEAT, PEATY SILT, SILTY FINE SAND 164.5%- 55 U Vl/fl AND GRAY F1NE-MED. SAND IN LAYERS- SOFT AND LOOSE 26.1 %-IOI 422%- 72 CASINO AT EL.(I, BORING ATEL 7, OVERNIGHT WATER N8 • :.-:.i LEVEL AT EL 19.4 - 22.4%-I05 - GRAY SILTY VERY FINE SAND NI9 9.4%- 131 GRAY SAND AND GRAVEL WITH SOME SILT N4O 16.5%-121 ). GRAY FINE-MED. SAND N7O GRAY GRAVEL WITH COARSE SAND-CLEAN 4.9%-IZI BROWN SAND AND GRAVEL N7O 7.9%-I34 N 18 BROWN FINE-MED. SAND WITH SOME SANDY GRAVEL LAYERS p7_IIe -DENSE CONTAINS TILL AND FIRM CLAY FRAGMENTS 153%-II4 Nz7O N'40 N8O • IZ.3%-I20 N60 — BROWN FINE-VERY FINE SAND WITH SOME SILT AND SANDY 24.6%-IOl SILT LAMINATIONS-DENSE BROWN-GRAY FINE -MED. SAND DENSE, CLEAN 23.0% OVERNIGHT WATER LEVEL AT EL.I6 2I.3%-106 L 2c0%-IO9 —70 HIOO 40r 0I- -50 F Is jproa t oi ec PORT QUENDALL Renton, Washington Log 7 riiie May 17, 1983 Remarks f Boring 4" Iol low Stem Auger arn mer Weght of Boring No. 6141 IJf - --- ( MATERIA•L DESCRIPTION - - - - Surface EIea!ion 23.14 1 0002 FI L L S - _- Woodchips and Aggregate - - • SANDY SILT (ML) Olive-gray, occasional grave11e4ss, distinctive HC odor throughotit ( - 2 56 0.93 /• ' .<...• - > 3 214 4.8 TBecoies less sandy/' - 8 0.002 Water With some organ1c debris ZJ - 04 5 i4 0.001 SILTY SAND (s) •- - - -. Mediur to f.fle.49!silt, frequent 10— peat l enses .sorne;stctive odor = Peatlens • • :—- • :( --•. 6 27 0.004 Peat 1 eis ,J. _. > = = 15- / S ---- - - . - 7 25 0.009 • Peat lens - 20..1 v—BOTTOM OF BORING 19.5' S •: ________ 90029A f_•Woodward.CtydeConsultar,ts S Appendix A1 HCOO47O1 project. PORT QUENDALL Renton, Washington Log of Boring No. 9-2 3 e 0IIIed My 17, 1983 - Remarks. 1y pe of Boring 4" Hollow Stern Auger Nammer Weight: U. • - E - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION I' D in 2 W 'C 0 I — Surface Eevaton 20.8 1 52 <' FILL Silt, Gravel and black organic. debris SILTY SAND (sA) 2 33 0.002 Olive-gray, damp, occasional lentcular gravels and pear • interbEds 0003 Water '7 '! - 10- __•.-..,.. - /\ ('k / - 6 I 10 0.001 U' CL II _ Jeat zz • BOTTOM OFBORING @ 19.5' LPr0j-- Lho.0 90029A J . Woodward-Clyde Consultants • Appendix A-2 HC0047O2 S S S S S 0 1o eCt PORT QUENDALL Rentan, Washington Log of Boring No. 5 Ofilld May 20, 1983 Remarks TyPe Oat 6" Hollow Stern Auner f DO g - - Weight: .9 I MATERIAL DESCRIPTION S - I , 0 I C — I in D 0 o — Surface Eteiior — 1 10 0.73 FILL Silty Sand (SM), brown, dry, some organic debris/rootlets /2 5— 8 T Becomes damp, pitch fagmen.ts and'tlack20 0. 9 W fibres, with notice,p1 HC odor 5 24 0.89 SILTY CLAY (CM-CL) . 01!ve-gray, rnediurto hplast!c,ty, occasional black fib&. brick fragments > 6 34 0.006 -. / ... ... SILTY SAND .:. • 10 Gray, medium\tco7.e. itJi stinctive - - HC odor and idescent sheen .-.:. — • -- - 7 29 0.006 'N K qt centrated cor.tamination iceable HC odor and iridescent 2 en; some rapid corporation 1igter fractions noted 8 281.9 '— Concentrated contamnation :- - - ,ft_ - U - -- C - CLAYEY SILT to SANDY SILT (MM-ilL) 7 Brown, some odor • - 9 12 0.71 .-BOTTOM OF BORING @ 23' S S 90029A 1 Woodward.Clyde Consultants Append ix A5 5 S A of p rIed_________ Type df Boring 6' Hollow Stern Auer r Hammer Weight IILI MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Surface Elevat'cn. 360.86 FILL Sandy Silt (ML), dark brown, damp 2 53 0.054 - 0.013 SILTY SAND (M) / \ Olive-gray, medium grained d'trrcve MC odor and iridescent sh'eIt ... 7. / Je - 4 19 0.94 - CLAY (CM). Light gray, jrihly plastic -. - SAND (SW): Black, HC,ddof aid.sheen 5 44 1.2 CLAY (CM): Light gray CLAY (CH): Brown 6 30 1.1 - - , SILTY SAND (St)-.,. N . 0 --Gray, 30 11 notLeable MC odor and ater 10 abundant br ,' fl'd ari'd iridescent — sheen - \) 1, 7 12 1.8 Lht rown,"highly plastic, some / - o rg cNb r I s (wood) ' 15- SAND - I ' nish gray,. 33 sand - 4SLTY CLAY (CH-CL) - 8 19 1.3 Dark brown, occasional sand lenses . 20- 22- - Become.s gray Si 24 LiI1 27 1 0O42 I BOTTOM OF BORING @ 24.5' P endx A-9 project PORT QUENDALL Log of Boring No. 9 Renton, Washington Drilled, flay 16, 1983 Remarks Type of Boring 4 H011OW Ster, AuQer ErnmerW&gh1___________ I MATERIAL DESCRIPT0N .! a. o W. Surface Elevation: - - 0.005 FILL Silt, with some gravels _;-,----- 2 1 7 - TAR: Black, distinctive tIC odor, with occasional cement frameØ) - - 3 2 2 stain with :doy,>'\, Wood - • . c/ . 4 10 1.3 N - CLAYEY SILT (MN) -- 5 14 0.01 14 ive-gray, damp, soft tinctive . - ...... odor 6 9 1.0 J.Brown peat\ - \ \ \ 1/ /• — - -'. .. 'l ..•- = 7 25 0.03 . SILT AND(SM) '. - -• N Me".4/fine, poorly sorted, 15- - tinctve iridescent sheen - n)odor in sand . 828 < CLAYEY- SILT ('MN) -- - • . . Olive-gray, slIght odor . -= 20- BOTTOM OF BORING @ 19.5 Lpr 0J.No. 90029A J ' Woodward-Ctyde Consultants - Appendix A11 0- 0 0 r L S prQject : PORT QUENDALL Renton, Washington Log of Boring No. 12 rIIed. May17, 1983 Remarks Type of Boring. 4" Hollow Stem Auger mmerWe______________ . 0 - ; I MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 31a 2 C _ - Surface EIeveon. FILL: Silt, dark brown - - FILL: SHt, wth organics 1 29 0.0014 ' SILTY SAND (SM) - 2. 20 < Gray, medium tofine, occk4'jpa4N gravel lenses, and organic '\ N, 7 — 5 3 53 0.001 j jN. - ...'•'.. - Water Li 140 0.003 / . N, CiD \( V SA Y'51 ,V / EY SILT (ML-MH) — 5 19 0.001 Or ~itdhb p, soft, abundant " orga r i s 6 4 0 003 SILTY SAND (SM) Cray, 40* sit, abundant organic = 20- debrs •:•: - • J-T'—BBLTrCoyMwn, (cH-cL) damp, medium to highly plastic \_ - 7 0 2 < J ...—B0TTOM0FBoRrNG23' 0 90029A ( .. Woodward.Clyde Consultants Append i x A-i 4 P n O t o R o T n cI l Re, QU Wa EN s D h A i L n L g ton Log of Boring No. 14 May 18, 1983 Remarks 0ate 4 I$1low Stem Aucer TypC f Boring t4ar ,nrWeght ____ ____________________________________________ —1 C - I E MATERIAL DESCRIPTION = Suráce Etevaion: - ------- -, 1 0.022 FILL Silt and Gravel Aggregate, slight odor, occasional pitch fragments and wood 2 43 0.007 . TPItCh fra gments <.1 --- 3 26 0.007 Water 4 28 < SiLTY SAND (SM) ( Dark gray, medium,.tLfra.ed, occasional thin grave'.ii,\erbeds _... - 20 0.009 - T un Grades t fersd ja CM 10- • ø___ /0k) 6 7 < Tcosfne sand Coarse 7 24 c PEAT With clay, brown,hghly plastic - 20_j I I I I —BOTTOM OF BORING @ 19.5' No. 90029A Woodward.Ciyde Consultants f Appendix A_j A project. PORT QUENDALL I Renton, Washington Log of Boring No. 15 Dale Dr,IIed. May 17, 1963 Remarks yype of Boring: 4" Hollow Ste' Auger kammer Weight: S — ; I MATERIAL DE L. SCRIPTION 9 - 0 S Surface Elevaiion 58 0.004 FILL Silt, dark brown SAND (SW) Medium to fine, occasional gravel, and clay lenses, slight HCod// f '. 2 32 0.008 f ' I ..... C, SANDY SILT (ML) Greenish gray, some clay (co-20) 3 22 0.002 occasional organ ics/pf fragments == — .4 SILTY SAND (SP-SM) 4 30% silt, medium to coreand, 5 3 < wr " Soma - - '•-_,''' - .0 — 10 6 19 0.002 PEAT "44isclay, brown, highly plastic < SAND(SP..sM) I 7 9 0.001 U -. BOTTOM OF BORING @ 19.5' LNo. 90029A Woodward.clycje Consultants . Appendix A-17 1 DRILLING LOG TP ROJECT C&JENDALL PROJ ECT NUMBER I. I SHEET 1 CF t SHEETS LOCATiON Ni 96831 TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES 15 DRILUNG AGENCY IL SAMPUNG SERVICE DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GRD SURFACE HOLE NO. BH-17B DATE j STARTED 1 COMPLETED I 12/22188 NAME OF DRILLER Terry Asberry J12121188 DRIWNG METHOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER _______________________________ TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE so, INSPECTOR WARREN PERKINS ELEV.T.O.C:29.i6 DPI S BIF-T SAMP CLASSIFICATiON OF MATERIALS REMARKS GRND 27.7 (PT) T - NO. REC.j (DESCRIPTION) ELEV: CEMENT N 4 - loose, topsoil. gray-brown, sand, Boundng on ... X 48 000 gravelly SILT. (ML) - / FILL - x 41 015 10 -.3- - - STAINLESS STEEL / / x 18 030 40 ; - Medium dense, damp, brown. - / / '-5-- medium SAND, (10% silt). (SW) BENTO- 60 SLURRY1 x - —7— - 121 wet and gravelly SAND... 30 075 90 .-z_ - / 8.1fton12i22 -10-X35 090 80 -- / - Loose, saturated, gray, silty SAND (3040% silt). (SM) / -12 - / / 13- - Verystiff, saturated, gray SiLT.(MI) ± I Woodward-Clyde Consultants ] LE I DRILUNG LOG (Cont. Sheet) H0N0. BH-178 SHEET 2 I OF 4 SHEETS Dpi S jB/FfAM),% CLASS1FICAT1Qt4 OF MATERiALSREMARKS (FT) T . REC. (DESCRIPTION) I 1 I / V 21 185 90 Very Stiff, saturated, gray SILT / - with trace fine sand (10%). (ML) 20 BENTO- / NITE -21- SLURRY / / 'II 235 70 !iE-I I I I k_26. Gray, dense, saturated GRAVEL wh trace sand. (GW) Woodward-Clyde Consultants 11 171 S DRILLtNG LOG (Cont. Sheet) HOLE NO. BH-178 (SHEET 3 OF 4 SHEETS DPi S B/F SAMI % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS (FT) - T NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) BENTO- / / - -- NITE S 335 10 SLURRY/ x 2 -es- - - SAND : -- .39 385 15 Verydense, saturated, gray __ x L #4 sandy GRAVELS. (GW) SCREEN 'M —40— FL41- - ' -42- -43- - 40- - '\•'- . - 48 - Woodward-Clyde Consultants S S a - Woodward.Czycje Consultants IQ iW DRILLING LOG CUENDALL PRQJEGT NUMBER SHEET 1 - I OF 4 SHFTE LOCATION Ni 97707 TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES 14 129Q1 DRILLING AGENCY SOIL SAMPLING SERVICE DEPTh TO WATER BELOW (3RD SURFACE HOLE NO. BH-18B DATE HOLE STARlEt) I COMPLETED I 12114188 I 12/14/88 NAME OF DRLLER Teny Asberry DRIWNG METhOD STEM AUGER HOLLOW TOTALDEPTHOF HOLE , - - INSPTOR WARREN PERKINS ELEV. T. 0. C. 19.44 OPT S ~SAMP % CLASSLFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS GRND (Fr) I NO. REC (DESCRIPTION) - ELEV:17.9 - 16 000 30 Firm, damp, gray SILT with gravels. FILL CEMENT —I \ X' 1 (ML) - N N N ----- \ \ - -2 - LOOSE RUBBLE - - NO SAMPLES HOLE PLUG - — 4.— TS 0 2" STAINLESS STEEL / / —6.0' - 6 BENTO- / / NIlE / / SLURRØ X j Very soft, saturated, brown SILT with Nepthalerie odor oil sheen and some organi. (ML) OVA> 100 ppm at - sample -- - —8-X I 1 075 30 OVA 2-3 ppm at - - - borehole p 5 090 50 p / / p / / 12550 - I - Woodward-Clyde Consultants DRILUNG LOG (Cont. Sheet) HOLE NO. BH-188 SHEET 2 OF 4 SHEETS DP1 SB/Fl SAMI % CLASSlF1CA11ON OF MATERIALS REMARKS (FT) I NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) I I -16- . - q -17- odor off samples BE 2NIT SLU 18 V8 175 40/ - —18.5 -- Loose to dense, saturated, gray, line to medium sUty SAND (20-40% sift). - (SM) 6 1225 I 70 JVA <1 ppm Breathing 24- Zone (BZ) I a 26 - I 28- I 16 J 275 50 J ... mejm dense I I I Woodwarci -Clyde Consultants S ., DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet) HOLE NO. BH-18B SHEET 3 OF 4 SHEETS DPi S BIF SAMI % CLASS1F1CA11ON OF MATERIALS REMARKS (Fr) T NO. REC. (DESCRIP11ON) 7-r / / -83 38 325 75 Dense, saturated, gray fine SAND -- / / \ and silt with trace gravel (20 - 401% .4- sift). (SM) - BENTO - NITE SLUR / J7 -37 - / '-38- - 34 375 40 - - 0-20 -41- - SAND - -42- —44—x 24 425 40 .. Trace well-rounded gravel ... SCREEN —45 - -4S- - -47- 95 475 25 Very dense, saturated gray, sandy - — GRAVEL. (GW) ft-49--.- 0 Woodward-Clyde Consultants S S DRILLING LOG (Cont. HOLE NO. BH-1 86 Sc SA SHEET 4 4 SHEETS DPi S B/F AMI % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS (Fl) I NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) VeW dense, saturated, gray, sandy GRAVEL ((3W) 51 - gravel bits in spoon 45 525 0 few DEPTh 54 Fl TOTAL -56- -57- -58- -59- -60— Woodward..Clycle Consultants 0- S. I I I '[DFILLING LOG PROJECT - QUENDALL PRGJ ECT NUMBER ISHEET1 86004S I OF 2 SHEETS LOCATION N197639 TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES E1662123 8 DRIWNG N3ENCY SOiL SAMPLiNG SERVICE DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GRD SURFACE NO. BH-19 jiOLE DATE HOLE STARTED COMPLETED INAME OF DRILLER Teny Asbeny. DRILLiNG METHOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER TOTALDEPTh OF HOLE - INSPECTOR KELLY SUSEWIND LEV. T.O.C: GrND 22.6 DPi S B/Fl SAMP % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS ( I - NO. REC (DESCRIP11ON) Medium dense, moist, brown, FILL JJELEJ -:, ICEM - 17 000 75 gravelly, silty SAND. (SM) HOL —i PW_ - VOA = 0-3 ppm in - - —2 - 15 015 100 breathing zone - - 2.0' Medium stiff, moist, gray SILT with 2 PVC . - (8.Z) - 3 - some sand and trace of gravel. (ML) .L - V 030 OVA 0.5pprnin132. SAND -.4-- A Sooppminauger - — FILL I -5-- Coal flke inclusions in - - -V8 05075 Silt • —6—/\ —6.0' I Loose saturated, gray, medium - to coarse SAND. (SP) .6 ppm on sample - • 16 065 75 SCREEN 8 I - 0.5. ppm in 8.1 - .. i 080 100 lOOppm@sample—_ • >1000 ppm in auger - 2— I n.. 18 130 100 - a Woodward-CLyde Consultants w C11 DRT HOLENO. ILLING_LOG (Cont. Sheet) SHEET 2 QF 2SHEETS DPT S 3/Fl SAMFJ % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS (Fl) T NO. AEC. (DESCRIPTION) - - SD Loose, sara(ed, gray, meum (10-20 6 to coarse SAND. (SP) 5411 -17- 4.5 ppm in B.Z. CAVE DragershowsO N 18- 10 175 100 Benzene - —18 wet, tan to brown SILT with A Stiff, organics. (ML) -19- --- - TOTAL DEPTH = 19 FT r - I Woodward-Clyde Consultants 0-- DRILLiNG LOG I OJECT PR QUENDALL PROJ ECT NUMBER 004S 70F SHEET 1 4 SHFFTS LOCATION N197389 - E16€2038 TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES 14 DRiLLING AGENCY SOIL SAMPLING SERVICE DEPTh TO WATER BELOW GAD SURFACE HOLE NO. BH-202 DATE HOLE TARTED S 12/19188 - i COMPLETED I 12/20/88 NAME OF DRILLER TenyAtherry DRILLING METHOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE INSPECTOR KELLY SUSEWIND ELEV. T.O. GRND 21.4 ELEV: J, - 0.22.88 DP1 (Fe) S 1 B/F SAMF NO. % REC CLASSiFICATION OF MATERIALS (DESCRIPTION) REMARKS Very loose , tan brown, fine sand CEM , - X 000 100 with trace of some silt and trace F1LL HOLE PLUG - - : oranics as wo, dry. (SP/SM) - :-: - X 015 100 - ;ThlNLES -3-- —.0.______ - STEEL / Very stiff gray/black, sandy / / / - .._4.. X 36 030 100 SILT. (ML) - BENTO NITE SLURRY / / / / ' - -5- - x 12 050 70 Green/gray,wet, loose medium SAND. (SW) - 12/20 - - / -6 Làose, wet, green, gray medm - / SAND. (SW) / / - 8 065 60 / / / -8--- / / / - _ - a 6 080 100 - —9.0' / Medium stf, wet, brown SILT with io- trace sand (ML) / - -12-- 13 x 125 100 / 1.Sppm 0.5 ppm in Breathing Zone(B.Z.) in auger 13.5' Very loose, wet, gray, medhim SAND - with silt and trace organics. (SW) Woodward-Clyde Consultants 0 S 16 ORILL!NG LOG (Cont. S T heet) HOLE NO. BH208 SHEET 3 OF 4 SHEETS - 3/FTISAMIi % CLASS1F1CATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS I NO. REC. I (DESCRIP11ON) .. SENTO- NIlE SLURRY Medium dense,wet. gray, medium to 25 1 325 1.100 fine SAND with suit (SM) 35. I SAND -'38- -.39- -40- -41- -42 - -43-- -44-. 451 -46 .47 48 28 1:375 1 40 Medium dense,gray, wet,gravelly ub-unded, fine to medium SAND. I(Sw) 25 I 425 I 30 1 ... Increasing gravel size... S S Woodward..Clyde Consultants Ack DRILUNG LOG (Cont. N (fl) I RT] SA .J - -50- I - -51- N CAVE- - IN I N - I I I - I - I I 1 F- - -. HOt.E NO. BH-208 SHEET 4 OF 4 SHEETS AMI % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) Medi.m dense to vesy dense, saturated, gray, gravally, fine to medium SAND. (SW) TOTAL DEPTH =54 FT Woodward-Clyde Consultants S IN DRILLING LOG PROJECT CUENDALL I PROJ ECT NUMBER ~SEHEET I 860045 I F 4 SHFET LOCATiON N197050 E1661792 TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES 16 DRILLING AGENCY SOIL SAMPUNG SERVICE DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GAO SURFACE HOLE BH-21 B DATE Hii STARTED 12/23/88 I COMPLETED I12/27188 NAME OF DRILLER Terry Asberry DRILLING METHOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE r 4.,s It INSPECTOR WARREN PERKINS ELEV T. D.C. GANO ELEV: 20.8 22.28 Dpi (Fr) s T B/F1 - SAMI NC % REC CLASSIFICATION OF.MATERIALS (DESCRIPTION) REMARKS CEMENT \ T X 59 000 60 Loose-dense, wet, brown SILT od gravel with wood chips FILL - BENTO- :: :: 55 015 60 - ) NITE PELLETS/ HOLE PLUG - - :- -: -3-- )( 45 030 50 Very stiff, wet gray-white, silty CLAY - ALL Decomposed gypsum? - 2 STAINLES 5 50 045 70 FILL /• TEEL / x BENTO- ' / 36060 40 NITE / X / E SLURRY _- / / 53 075 0 - —9- 68 090 40 -9.01 - x Very dense, saturated, gray, medium // -iC - -- to fine SAND (1 0-20% silt) -13-- / / 67 130 5 sand and silt, gradational contact from creosote odor and / / x sand above to silt below sheen Woodward-Clyde Consultants le S W DRILLING LOG (Cont. Sheet) HOLE NO. BH-218 SHEET2 OF 4SHEETS DPT1 S B/fl N % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERLALS REMARKS (FT)I I REC. (DESCRIPTION) I BENTO- I NIrE 12 1 180 1 5 1 Stiff, saturated, gray-brown sandy SILT. 24- 16 230 80 24' Very stiff, saturated, gray-brown, peaty SILT. 26 26' .28 - 28 280 70 very stiff, saturated, gray sandy SILT Q9 to sifty SAND (20-306/a silt). I 31 Is Woodward-Cfyde Consultants ew DRILLING LOG (Cont. Sheet) HOLE NO. BH.21B SHEET 3 OF 4 SHEETS Dpi S B/F SAMI % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS (FT) T No. REC. (DESCRIPTION) / 330 1 trace of graveily silt in -63-- x sandtrap - 36 - BENTO/ - NF E SLURR / 37 . - - / _39— 35 380 60 Very stiff, saturated, gray sanc1r SILT - sitygra:! sif at top AQUA 8 SAND • - —42? - -43-- - SCREEN -. - .-4.4._ X 44 430 70 Medium dense, saturatei gray to yellow-brown, silty SAND. - - .47.. - 5. — 848040 _49_ - 14 Woodward-Clyde Consultants S Ii DRILLING LOG (Cont. Sheet) HOt•ENO• BH-21B SHEET 4 OF 4 SHEETS DPI S B/F SAM % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS (FT) T NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) SCREEN F Medium dense, saturated, gray - to yeflow-brown silty SAND. - -61- - SAND I - BENTO- 17 530 45 PEUETIJ F uN sandy GRAVEL NITE I r TOTAL DEPTH = 54.5 Fr .5 60 Woodward-Clyde Consultants U LJj It I I I a I I I $ I 1 I I I I DRILLING LOG PROJECT QUENDALL PROJ ECT NUMBER FOF SHEET 1 6004S 2 SHEETS VATION Ni 97560 TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES P1663171. 11 IWNG AGENCY SOIL SAMPLING SERVICE DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GRD SURFACE NO. BH-22 DATE HOLE STA (COMPLETED 12/06/88 AME OF DRILLER Teriy Asberry DRILUNG METHOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER. IAL DEPTH OF HOLE 28.5' - INSPECTOR KELLY SUSEWIND LEV. T. O.C. 28.09' SAMP % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS It,26.6'fJ, (Fr) T - NO. REC (DESCRIPTION) Soft, brown, moist SlLTwith traee sand OVA at Ba&ground ci j ., - 4 000 100 and oranics as roots in Breathing Zone (B.Z.) 1 - and at borehole - an/brown medium interbedded SAND LE : : -2- - 'DUG : 4 015 100 and SILT. " enerafly interbedded .. -. ray silt and red sand - 1 030 100 PVC OVA at Back Ground / - in Breathing Zone (B.Z) I / and in borehole 4 045 100 0- -6- 6.0 - - Very soft , saturated, gray, SILTwith SLURRY / / 4 060 100 tx•ace sand and organi. 7 2 OVA=Oppmin 6 gray, medium sand tense ... auger. - I - x 1 075 100 —9— _10— x I 095 100 U / -. - I -12 - 13 ...Mediumstiff... - 8 130 100 6 organic (wood chips) layer - OVA= 0 ppm in rHN S S Woodward-Clyde Consultants ad S - I ... 1 foot medium silL wet, gray 14 230 100 clayeySiLTtosiltwithsomeclay lense (washed material is clayey silt 25-30) 45j280J 70 D Li 24- 26- 28- OVA=0 ppm in B.Z. OVA = 0 ppm in B.Z. 1• DRILLING LOG (Cont. Sheet) HOLE NO. SH.22 WI ISHEET2 IOF 2 SHEETS I DFT S B/FT SAMI % CLASSIFICA11ON OF MATERIALS REMARKS (Fl) I NO. REC. (DESCRIPTiON) 1 J01. I SA IL - -17- Medium dense, wet, gray medium -: - SAND with trace silt. Small silt stringersat+latlSft. - - 11 180 100 _19— I T OVA = 0 ppm in B.Z. TOTAL DEPTH = 29.5 FT 11 Woodward-Clyde Consultants 4 U 11 p U Lit DRILLING LOG PROJECT QUENDALL PROJ ECT NUMB~Ell l HEET 1 LOCATION N197551 -..' TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES DRILLING AGENCY SOIL SAMPLING SERVICE DEPTH TO WATER BELV GRD SURFACE HOLE NO. BH-23 DATE HOLE I STARTED I COMPLETED 128/88 NAME OF DRILLER Terry Asberly DRILLING METHOD HOLLOW STEM AUG ER • TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE 24.5' INSPECTOR WARREN PERKINS F.LEV. T.O.C. 24.51' GRND OPT S B/F SAMP % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS • ELEV: (Pt) T - NO. REC (DESCRIPTION) 6 - loose, silt and wood chiDs FILL CEMENT \ rock, gravel FILL - x 38 000 70 -1 - - :-: HOLE -2 -\/ 15 1 0 5 7 5 - PLUG -: stiff to very stiff, gray SILIwith gravel : -s--- - 2___. ;TAIr4LES X 17 030 60 —4.0 ITEEL —4. f' - SAND - Very stiff, black to gray banded silt wood debris and slough - to siItone (no sample) -6- X 21 050 5 WOOd debris 8 068 5 FILL SCREEN —8- —8.0' - \ i Medium dense. sajrated, silty SAiD strong odor, Qil sheen - - 9 V With gravel OVA => 1000 ppm 17 080 70 at borehole -10-- • • 12- • x 130 sarad, brown SILT oil sheen F 14— • k5- Woodward-Clyde Consultants S S I DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet) I HOLE NO. BH-23 1 SHEET 2 -- OF 2 SHEETS AMF % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS. REMARKS NO.! REC. (DESCRIPTION) I 19- 10 1180 1100 1 Stiff, saturated, brown SILT with wood debiis. Sand at tip of spoon Oil sheen Sand Lense? - -22- BENTO- :-:-:- - NITE PELLET aa* -24- Firm, saturated gray SILT Oil sheen 7 230 100 —23.5' Brown silty peat Oil sheen 24' Stiff, saturated, gray SILT Oil Sheen much less TOTAL DEPTH = 24.5 FT 26- .28.- Woodward-Clyde Consultants Ow a N a I I DRLIJNG LOG FRO.)ECT: PROJECT NO. SHEET QUENDALL 86004$ 1 of 2 LOCATION; N 197.848 TOTAL NO. SAMPLES; 8 E 1,662.383 DRIWNG AGENCY: SOIL SAMPLING SERVICE DEPTH TO WATER 8ELOW GRD SURFACE: 35 fl HOLE NO. BH-24 DATE STARTED: 7131/90 (DATE COMPLETED: 7/31/90 NAME OF DRILLER: WAYNE GUY DRIWNG METHOD: HOU..OW STEM AUGER TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE: INSPECTOR: DAVE WALKER T.O.0 - 21.44 opi s &jp % CLASSIRCAflON OF MATERiALS REMARKS T.O.0 + 1.0f1 (PT) T NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) Brown silty gravely sand (SM). OVA = 17 ppm — . .% -2- OVA = 120 ppm — — Chips s". 53 100 — ....,_ Y .5 • - : - - Fibrous organics -5-NH. (probably woodwaste) " A A 7 0 Benonite Pellets OVA = 1000+ppm 25 * -7- - OVA =l2Oppm - 0 25 4Stalriless Sleal .010 Slotted W, - Saeen -10- Colorado -11- 1o. Weflpad — -12- . NH 3 0 - OVA 300 ppm - @Borehole — =0.51n5.Z -13- - -14- - — 4 25 - — Intermixed orgaric silt (01) and peat (PT) -- — — soft, saturated. Woodward-Clyde Consultants@ 11 a S 1E .. SfEET DRILUNG LOG (CON'T) BH-24 2 of 2 api s __ su,p ,I CLSSIFtCATl0N0FMAT&tS Ii (DESCRIPTION) REMARKS Intermixed organic silt (01) and peat (P1) Soft, saturated OVA> l000ppm (in peat) Brown organic nit (01) trace wood fers@ 17.01. 51 1100 Daik brown peat (PT) with fibers @ 19.51.1 OVA = 15Oppm .. _, __ __ 1111 - Bennite 11FF S -21- F1l 5% 55 zON - —22 1### # 1F# - -23-- 'A',',', Fl I F - 0 -24- 5'''. '''S. A 1.1 1 555%. -23-• FFl 5555 - 1111 S •, 55 1Fl ''5' - 11l IAI sssF s S '5% 5''A - '''S., FF1 % 1 '5'. F#i 5%''. -27-- IFFI - lF -28— F 5%'', lull -- Brown organic silt (01) @ 22.0' becomes gray clayey slit (Ml) © 22.5. 19 100 Gray fine sand (SP) medium dense, saturated with trace silt wh seam of organic silt @ 230. II 50 Gray fine sand (SP) and silty sand (SM) with silt layers. Woodwardyde Consultants Woodward-Clyde CønsuItants S -0. DRILLING LOG - PROJECT: T QUENDALL PROJECT NO. 86004S HEET i Of 3 LOCM1ON: N 197,109 TOTAL NO. SAMPLES: 12 E_1,662,265 DRIUJNG AGENCY: SOIL SAMPLING SERVICE DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GRO SURFACE 8 F HOLE NO. BH-25B DATE STARTED: 812190 DATE COMPLETED: 8/3/90 NAME OF DRILLER: WAYNE (3JY DRIWNG METhOD: HOLLOW S'rEM AUGER TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE. INSPECTOR: DAVE WALKER T.O.0 - 28.83 py jap CI..ASSFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS f1 (Fl) T NO, REC. (DESCRIPTK)N) - Silty sand, gravel with wood chs 1 . - I / ,% - I I F 'S F F -1- 1. .5 F .5 Eswkopl ug Bernonite 1 .5 ' , F .5 ' - 70% wood chips OVA '130 ppm Chips ' 5 5 ' 5 X so S - S F S I S - .5 I S I S 5 I ,.% - % Gray silty sand (SM) with seams of clean F S I S F F F .F 5 S I .5 I fine sand and sandy silt, trace organics. OVA 40 ppm F S I .5 .. .5 I .5 I 28 100 - S IS S - .5 I .5 S F .5 F .5 F .5 F .5 F .5 l X 17 75 Gray fine sand (SP), medium dense, wet. OVA = 10 ppm ,I F .5 .1 .5 5 I .5 F 15 F - , OVA=loppm S @ sampler I S 15 F .5 in silt sample - I S F .5 ' -- 24 100 Gray silt layer, soft, saturated, S F .5 I trace organics S 1 .5 I Gray fine sand @ 9.5, saturated. - S IS I .5 F 5 .5 I .5 I -iO- - - OVA = 60 ppm , .5 F - .5 / S F .5 I I .5 F , .5 F .5 I 5 F 5 S 1 I S F I S F S I S S S F .5 / .5 I 5 -is 12 100 Gray sifty sand, saturated, with seams - S F S I .5 F .5 of sandy silt (-40% of sarnp). OVA = 30 ppm .5 .5 F * I .5 F . / ., S -14--- Fine sand (SP), dense, below 14.0'. - 5. F, S I 5 F S - I 4 Lj HOLENO. SHEET DAILUNG LOG (CON'T) BH-258 2 at 3 OPT S — SAMP % CLASSIRCAT1ON OF MATERIALS - - (FT) — T NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) REMARKS 7 S - S — — ___________________________________________ Gray flne sand (SP) I 1 S I S S. S S : S. —17 OVA"l7Oppm - - Brown sift (ML), soft, saturated with @tntarface OVA--100ppm — organic materiaL - In borehole —18-- 4 100 OVA 1 ppm in B.Z s, s, 19 - "I - S I S I S I S. ' —20— S. S. S. I Bentonhe - PeBets - 100 8yorod2.5'seo1flne sand OVA50ppm. ifL 2a_ • 100 Gray silt (ML) with seams of sandy silt. OVA =54 ppm Corado 10-20 Sand 30— I . - 31— ~32—W - Gray sand (SP) @ 32.0. Woodward-Ctyde Con3uItants [TI HOLE NO. SHEET DRiLLING LOG (CON BH-25B 3 of 3 DPT S SAMP T. CLASSIFICA11ON OF MATERIALS REWRKS (Ffl T NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) Brown gray sift (ML) 32.' 33.6. OVA 30 ppm - -33- 10 100 - Brown gray sandy silt with clay and - gravel @ 33.5. -31-- -35-. Gray sandy gravel (GP) vary dense with OVA 20 ppm pockets of silt. Gravel to iJ' dIameter. 10 -38- -39- -40- -41- -42- 41 25 —43- -44— flfl %l 120 1. Woodward.Clyde Consultants DRILLING LOG PROJECT: QUENDALL PROJECT NO. SHEET - LOCATiON: N 196,847 86004S J I of 3 TOTAL NO. SAMPLES; E 1.862,032 11 DR(WNG AGENCY: SOIL SAMPLING SERVICE DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GRO SURFACE: 5 FT HOLE NO. BH-26B DATE STARTED; f DATE COMPLETED: 816190 NAME OF DRILLER: WAYNE GUY DRIWNG METHOD: HOLLOW STEM AUGER TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE: 485 FT INSPECTOR: DAVE WALKER SAMP % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS T.o.c +i.o'. S 7 NO. (DESCRIPTION) IREMARKS - I - Brown sandy gravel (GP). t - S % .• 5 fr 48.5 ft .0 .0 .0 ' .0 -1- bfeQ1e(abandaned) - WeU5odg3ft S S '5 U 4 ft west of - ErMropiuQ I . .0 .5 Benmrnte ' -' - 2--- - CNp ' -.0 1 Gray sandy slit (ML), wet. .5 .0 .5 1 .5 .5 0 .5 1 S 18 100 I S .0 1 4blank stainless S I ' I S ' S .0 .. ' S ..-..4_...._ OVA =45 ppm - steel .0 S S Gray silty line sand (SM), medium dense, - casing .. .. wet • .5 .5 .5 10 75 - seams of sandy silt @ 4.0'4.5'. OVA.9ppm .0 S .0. .0 5 .0 .5 ,. .0 5 - saturated @ 5.01. - I .5 S I S . 5 5 I .0 S I S S .0 -Siltseam@6.5'. 0 5 .0 7 Gray Une to coaroe sand (SP), dense, S .0 S .0 .5 1 .5 1 OVA = 9 ppm(B.a) .5 .0 .5 .0 saturated, trace gravel, some wood - 1 .0 -e- - chunks. - .5 1 S .0 's Fine sand below 8.0. - 1 ,5 .. .. S I .0 S S .0 I 31 100 S 1 S I .. I .5 S 0 .5 I ..S .0 0 .5 -l0 OVA=l2ppm - .0 S .0 O I .0 I ii $ F S .0 S .5 .0 .5 .0 S .5 -12-- .5 .0 .,. .0 - S .0 .0 S -13- OVA 75 ppm - .5 S 1 .5 I Browoanlc sift (OL) soft, saturated - .0 .5 I. 5 .5 .1 5 I 14 7 100 with wood fIbers. .0 -S .. • - . -5 .0 S 'iJ'-i5 - _______ Woodward-Clyde ConsuItaflts@ HOLE NO. SHEET DRI LUNG LOG (CON'T) - BH-26B 2 of 3 oPi S SIFT SAMP S ClJSSLFlCA11ON OF MATERIALS EMAR<S (Fl) T NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) Brown organic silt (OL) - -- - - :-: :- - -- ' - : F ,F , F S S - S F F S S. 4 50 Gray fine sand (SP). k,ose. saturated. OVA = 14 ppm - S.' 5 NQIL - OVA wasoutofluelat completion otdrting- - OVA readings could F F S S -20--- be in error. / F S S F F - Benthnite Pellets . -23--- - - -24-x 53 50 Dense below 23.5. OVA 45 ppm - Silt seam @ 23.5'- 41 Sialess - Steel 010 Slotted Screen -26- - -27-- - Colorado -26-- — 10-20 Wellpack - X 39 50 Peat and silt seams 28.0'-29.0'. OVA = 45 ppm - - Gray fine sand below 29.0' - - silt seam (1 ) •@ 29.5. - -30 -31-- - -:32- - Woodward-Clyde ConsuItants@ .- 0 HOLE NO. SHEET w 9 DRILLING LOG (CON'T) BH-268 3013 OPT S SAMP % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS (FT) T EVFT NO. PEG. (DESCRIPTION) REMARKS Gray silt (ML) 332-33.7 with 2 brown —33— - otgan silt seam. WoodS3.7-342. x Gray silty line sand (SM) with trace 34— gravel becomes fine sand (SP) with gravel33.5. 3 saturated.OVA =5 ppm (B.G.) 36 - x 52 50 OVA5 ppm .--40- --42- 59 50 OVA5 ppm I * 0 . --mmj .1 Woodward..Clyde Consuftants K -] S DRILLING LOG "7 PROJECT: PROJECT NO. I SHEET QIJENDALL 860045 f 1 of 2 LOCATION: N 197:376 TOTAL NO. SAMPLES. 7 E_1662.64 OR! WNG AGENCY: SOIl.. SAMPLING SERVICE DEPTh To WATER BELOW GROSIJRFACE: HOLE NO. B1-I-27 DATE STARTED: 8/1/90 DATE COMPLETED: 8/1/90 NAME OF DRILLER WAYNE GUY DRIWNG METHOD: HOLLOW STEM AUGER TOTAL DEPTh OF HOLE: 25 FT - — — — — — INSPECTOR: DAVE WALKER T.O.0 - 24$1 p y, CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS -. T.O.0 + 0.5',f1 (Fr) I NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) — REMARKS , . ' . — Dark brown cobbles (OP) OVA 17 ppm - I ' I ' 1 wtthsand. - Erivvop1ug 1 1 ., I 1 I ., / .. - - Bentonite , S Chips .. S I .% 1 • I I .% 100 Dark brown silty sand 3.0'-3.5. OVA ppm 1 I .5 I I I .• / -4-- HCodor - - 1 .5 I .5 15 I I 5 I 5 I . - —5— Black sandy Dravel @ 5.0'. - 1 S I I S I (rasembles pieces of coal). 1 S 1 S I S 1 S - 23 75 - OVA 180 ppm Gravely silty sand (SM), medIum dense, I S 1 .1 . 1 - / wet, trace organics. S I S I S S I I .5 ._7__ - 1 S I S I 'S I 1 .5 1 .5 I .5 I —8— 10 100 OVA = 30 ppm S I / S I S .5 I .. .5 - S ;rown peat (PT), urous, some . S I .5 I .5 I .5 I I S I _S 5 I 'S 1 S F S 7 100 S .1 S S 1 . -ii- OVA = 52 ppm - Gray clayey silt (ML), soft, - saturated. Bentonhie :2 2 2 Gray sand@ 11.0'. . Pellets —12— Colorado . 10-20 - 1 - Brown peat (PT). WO!IpaCII - 6 100 OVA = 125ppm 4S,Iess Steel .010' Slotted Scen_ Woodward-Clyde Consultants mr I I I I I '1 E I I a I I 1 II I I _ I crown organic st (ot) with I woodftersatl7.5' -18 4 peat iayer@ 18.0,. - 6 100 -19 lntey0t clayey s (ML), fine sand (SP), and sandy sUt (ML) - Gray clayey silt I 8.5'-I 9.0. -20— Gray fine sand 190-19.6. DriflerthiflkS sand 19.5' to 22.5' OVA m 15 ppm I j Gray sandy silt (ML) soft, saturated, with' I 1 i seams of clayey silt and silty sand, trace 1 I I organics OVA = 30 ppm 100 Woodward-Clyde Consultants SHEET 2 of 2 REMARXS HOLE NO. F DRILUNG LOG (CONT) BH-27 DPI S SAMP % CLASSIFICATtOM OF MATEPLALS RI (Fl) TBIFT NO. REC. (DESCRIPTK)) Bwn peat (PT) I CdO(ado 10-20 - 4 S1Q$* I SeeLO1O Sod Sae_ I I . a U 1 I a' I I I LAS TE S IS & (plo) 0 LCA Ri) CA (dl [A (4 M GS ) CA IA A (21 4 RU r kil Boring L og HC-2 S . STANDARO PENETRATION - RESISTANCE amole 8lows per Foot S-I 5-2 5-3 —a - 5-4 5-5 - S-a - 5-7 - 5-8 - - 5-9 Soil OescriotjonS Ground Surface Elevation in Feet: 23.33 :y uense, damp, gray-brown. silty. very sandy GRAVEL with cobbles. Loose camp, dark brown, silty, very gravelly SAND with rotted wood debris and Coal-like particles with Slight Chemical -like odor. Loose, most, tan-brown, very silty, fine SAND with wood debris. Loose, wet, gray, coarse SAND with Coal-like bits and strong chemical-like odor. uii, wet, dark brown, Slightly sandy - SILT with organic debris. Loose, wet, gray, medium to fine SAND. saturated with yellowish viscoUs product. very Sort, wef, brown, sandy SILT with — wood debris and debris. Loose, wet, gray, coarse SAND. Soft to very soft, wet, brown SILT with wood and Organic debris. very sort, wet, gray SILT. Very loose to loose, wet, gray. Slightly Silty SAND. out tote or boring at 24.0 Feet. Completed 6 /1 4/95. I. Refer to Figure A-I for evplanaron of desc'. and symbols. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are nter'ee and actual changes may be gradual. Ground water level, if indicated, is at time of . (ATO) or for date specified Level may vary jjjr,rnç watef Content in Percent 11 . J-4042-04 8/95 Figure 4-3 LA8 TESTS & P101 0 l<tl 14. C. (<il kA. CA l<;l 1-1<11 LIA <il -Os l<il (<il S-i 6-2 ATO 5-3 5-4 5-5 .j35 0 S Boring Log HC-3 Soil Descriptions STN0ARO PENETRATION Depth F,ESISTANCE Ground Surface Elevation in Feet: 22.72 in Feet Samc.le * 5lows per Foot Medium dense to loose, moist, gray, very silty to silty SAND with some chemical-like odor. -.. Soft, wet. browri SILT. Very soft to soft, wet, gray SILT with a sand stringer. Mecium dense to Yery loose, wet, gray, silty to slightly silty SAND with a chemical-like odor. Very soft, wet, brown, slightly sandy —.SItJ with a slight chemical-like odor. \ Very loose, wet, gray, slightly siliy SAND with chemical-like odor. -.. Very soft to medium stiff, wet, brown \ SILT with organic debris and \ chemical-like odor. wet, gray SILT with chemical-like / Very loose, wet, gray, slightly silty. \\ medium to fine SAND with chemical-like \\ odor . \\ Very soft, wet, brown SILT with organic Very D. loose, wet, gray, slightly silty, fine Bottom of Boring at 25.0 Feet. Completed 6/14/95. S is I. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descniptoris and symbols. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. Ground water level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATO) or for date specified. Level may vary with time. water Content in Percent WN xm HifLRTCROwSB? 1-4042-04 8/95 Figure A-4 Refer to Figure A-I for explanation of descro: and symbols. Soil descriptions and slratum lines are nteo'e: .e and actual changes may be gradual. Ground water level, if indicatec. is at tme of IATO) or for date secifieo. Level may '.'ary C j u ev iu 'vu Water Contet in PCrcSrt VP It HARTCROWS8 J-4042-04 8/95 Figure A-5 Boring Log HC-4 .. STANDARD PENETRATION LAB :=otn RESISTANCE TESTS Samoie £ Blows oer Foot & (P10) 1 2 5 10 20 0 100 Medium dense, damp gray, slightly silty, sligntly gravelly SAND with chemical-like odor. Loose, wet, gray, silty, fine SAND with chemical-like odor. L3ose, wet, brown, silty, fine SAND with staining and chemical odor. Loose, wet, gray SAND saturated with -.,Oroduct. Very soft, wet, brown SILT with organic -'debris and chencal-like odor. Soft, wet, gray, sandy SILT with -.Ncemical-Iike odor, Loose, 'wet, gray to gray-brown. '/ery silty to silty SAND with chemical-like L ocor. Very soft, wet, brown SILT with Organ: coors. Medium dense to loose, wet, gray, sit to slightly silty SAND with slight criemical-like odor. Soft, wet, gray, very sandy SILT with chemical-like odor. Very loose, wet, gray, slightly silty -'.5.AJNO with chemical-like odor. ___________ wet, gray SILT. 3ottom of Boring at 25.0 Feet. Completed 6/14/95. Soil Descriptions GrounO Surface Elevation in Feet: 24.57 1111 1111 N IN II!! 'Ia. 1 C 12 ha' (NM CA ho; -, SI 41 so; 171 1301 (20) 1111 lu - AtU 10 5-4 F I-- —15 4-20 I- F —2E T Boring Log HC-5 STANDARD PENETRATION OePth Sample RESIi:.N.E. II, Mecj,uni dense to loose, damp, gray-brown to dark brown, sligfltly gravelly to gravelly, very silty to silty, fine SAND with organic debris and criemical-like odor. Soft, moist to wet, gray SILT with strong chemca(-like odor and staining/sheen. Loose, wet, black SAND saturated with yellow-black viscous product, with a stringer of soft, wet, brown, slightly sandy SILT. Very soft, wet, brown SILT with organic ,eDris. Medium dense, wet, gray SAND. Soft, wet, brown SILT with organic -'_debris. -\ Loose, wet, gray SAND with wood debris \id chemical-like odor. Bottom of Boring at 19.0 Feet. Completed 6/15/95. S Sod Descriptions Ground Surface Elevation in Feet: 26.47 LAB TESTS & (PID) +30 I- L t. Refer to Figure A-I for explanation of descriptions and symbols. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. Ground water level, if indicated, is at time of driling (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time Water content in Percent -p U HRTCROWs2? J-4042'-04 8/95 Figure A-8 STANDARD PENETRATION Depth RESISTANCE .n Feet £ Blows per Foot LAB TESTS & (PIG) IA. 'I C'S (< TA (NAI t(AN) [A, 35 (<ii LA (tA) INAI +20 +30 5-3 5-4 5-5 S 3 Boring Log HC-7 Sail Descriptions Ground Surlace Elevation in Feet: 20.83 Medium dense, moist, gray, slightly silty, slightly gravelly SAND. Medium aense, wet, dark brown, very silty, gravelly SAND with wood debris and product sheen. Loose, wet, medium to fine SAND saturated with black viscous product. Very soft, wet, brown SILT with organic debris. Bottom of Boring at 6.5 Feet, Completed 6/14/95. I. Refer to Figure A-i for explanation of descripticnS and symbols. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual cnanges may be gradual. Ground water level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (AID) or for date specified. Level may vary with time. water Ccntenr fl Percent zW 11 HIIR7CR0WSLR • J-4042--04 8/95 Figure A-8 ATTACHMENT A-2 S Borings by Aspect 0 fl Boring Log %Aspectconsuifing earth+water Project Number Boring Number Sheet 020027 MC-1 1 of 2 Project Name Terminals _Quendall - Ground Surface EIev Location Renton WA J Driller/Method NW Probe / Push-Probe J jI3g : Depth to Water 5.5' AiD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 7/22/2009 - Elio Bcqehole Completion Sample SHeerVNAPL Steen Product Matmial DCtIPIIO Depth (feet) TypeJto Type Comments itt) - Dry wood debris (FILL); trace gravel - Dry, gray to brown, silty, sandy GRAVEL (GM); Si Moist, dark gray, slightly gravelly SILTY SAND (SM); Hydrated bentonite CHiPS O'-40' 0 .. trace wood NS 5 Z7/22/2009 ... becomes wet S2 Wet, brown SILTY SAND (SM); NS metalic MS Wet PEAT (PD; organic mat and leaves, 10-- blebs -10 cc - :,octed Wet, blue gray SAND (SP): sand fine to medium, oil I MC-1-1 0.5-11.5-f oc . Wet, brown, sandy GRAVEL to gravelly SAND rainbow flouret MS o (SP-GP); oil coated to 11 o oil stained from 11' to 12' os.g blebs 90% HS 0 0 oil coated from 12' to 17.5' S3 blebs 75% HS 15 oc .... 15 - 0 blebs75% HS - S4 Wet, brown gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium, oil rainbow 30% MS stained Wet, brown PEAT (PT); Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level D Continuous Core Approved by: JJP Water Level (ATD) FigureNo. A-2 RspecLconsu(hng A 4 Log %Bori ng Project Number Boring Number Sheet 02 0027 MC-1 2of2 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA L DRAFT. Driller/Method NW Probe I Push-Probe Depth to Water 5.5' ATD L ,J, Start/Finish Date 7/22/2009 Sampling Method Continuous Core - EIevaon (feet) Borehole Compieon Sample TypeilO Sheen/NAPL Comments Sheen Product Matenai Type Description Depth (tt) NS NS Ileat, olive gray ORGANIC SILT (OL); trace wood, ves and roots S5 MS Wet, gray, slightly silty SAND (SP); - metallic 90% MS ::.,.. 1" lense of gravelly sand, heavy oil staining 25 4% SS 25 oil wetted from 25.5' to 27', estimated 90 wt. viscosity blebs >90% HS .. MC-1-26-27-S blebs >90% HS OW : ?-:— Wet, olive gray ORGANIC SILT (OL); S6 MS Wet, brown PEAT (PT); - -' Wet ORGANIC SILT (Oh: Wet, gray, SILTY SAND (SM); sand fine, silty interbeds, heavy oil staining to 30.5' rainbow 75%, fiorets M 0 30 ..... '30 - Wet, gray SILT (ML); • blebs 100% HS OW :'. '-: Wood in a SAND (SP) matrix; oil wetted to 31.5' • S7 metalic4o-50% MS MS - ftj Wet, gray SILT WITH SAND LAMINEA (MUSM); sand fine. OS . '..' Wet, gray and blue SAND (SP); sand fine, oil stained - Wet, olive gray ORGANIC SILT (OL); • MS ~0 • Z4' Wet, pink clayey SILT (VOLCANIC ASH) Wet, olive gray ORGANIC SILT (OL); trace gravel 35 .T-T. Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium NS NS !T Wet, olive gray, sandy SILT (ML-SM); with organics ffl__________ Wet, gray SAND (SP); trace gravel, gravel fine to coarse and well rounded to subrounded Boring terminated 40 ft BGS - Sampler Type: PhD - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery T Static Water Level Approved by: JJP O Continuous Core Water Level (ATD) Figure No. A-2 p I 0- S I Boring Log %Aspedconsutfing earth ~ waler Project Number 020027 Baring Number MC-3 Sheet 1 of 3 Dnfler/Method RA Depth ::::i::e 8/11/2009 Eleatkrn BOrehole Completion Sample She8nINAPL Sheen Product Material Depth (feet) TypeilD Comments Type Dry, brown, sandy SILT (FILL); with wood Wood waste (FILL) S-i NS f111 Slightly moist, gray to dark gray, silty , gravelly SAND (SM); slight creosote odor Wood waste (FILL) a 5 Moist, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium --_ Moist, olive gray, ORGANIC SILT (OL) Wet, gray, SAND (SP); sand fine to medium 8/11I2OO9 Moist, olive gray, ORGANIC SILT (OL) S-2 ' Wet, gray clayey SILT with silty SAND laminea (CL-ML) .. Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to coarse, predominantly medium 10 NS 10 - Wet, brown to gray, slightly silty SAND (SP); with PEAT laminae S-3 NS Wet, brown PEAT (PT) 15 15 Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium; trace wood NS S-4 Wet, dark brown, slightly sandy ORGANIC SILT (OL); with few SAND Iaminae NS = ctti Wet, brown PEAT (PT) - Sampler Type: PlO - Photolonization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH - No Recovery TStatic Water Level fl Continuous Core Water Level (AID) Approved by: JJP Figure No. A - 2 MspecLconsuLng A - Log %Bori ng Project Number Boring Number Sheet eaiTh+water 020027 MC-3 2 of 3 Project Name Quendati Terminats Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe I PushProbe DRAF-T-Depth to Water 7' ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 8/11/2009 - oeplh/ Elevaon (feet) Borehole Compleon Sample Type)tD SheenINAPL Comments teOn - ProUct Material Description Depth S-5 • NS -_- Wet, olive gray ORGANIC SILT (OL) • PEAT layer 25 25 Wet, dark brown PEAT (PT) Wet, olive gray ORGANIC SILT (OL) S-6 Pink, clayey SILT (VOLCANIC ASH) Wet, gray SAND to slightly silty SAND (SP); sand fine to medium, silt laminea 30 -.: '30 • NS 0 Wet, gray, clayey SILT with SAND laminea (CH) ____ .•. - S-7 Wet, gray SAND with clayey SILT laminea (SP): sand fine to coarse, predominantly medium; 35 NS 35 Wet, olive gray, slightly sandy SILT (ML) Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to coarse, s-a Y-.- predominantly medium to coarse - - NS 10202 0 000 gogo 0000 Wet, gray, sandy GRAVEL (GP); moderate creosote odor ________ Sampler Type: PID - Photojontzation Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery T Static Water Level U .Approved by: JJP Cont tnuous Core Water Level (ATD) Figure No. A - 2 p b p S %Aspectconsuiting Boring Log Project Number Boring Number Sheet eatlh + watec 020027 MC-3 3 of 3 Project Name Quendall Terminals :.:... Ground Surface 8ev, Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe / Push-Probe DRAFT Depth to Water 7' ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core StartiFinish Date 8111/2009 En (feet) Bocehote Cornp1eon Sanip)e TypeilD SheenINAPL Sheen Product Material Te Desaiption Depth Coniments (ft) Boring terminated at 40 ft BGS 45 .45 50 50 55 55 Sampler Type: PID - Photoionizatjon Detector (l-Ieadspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH - No Recovery T Static Water Level 0 Continuous Core SZ Approved by: JJP Water Level (ATD) Figure No. A - 2 l . pecLconsultlng Boring Log V Project Number Boring Number Sheet eatth+watec 020027 MC-6 1 of 3 Project Name Quendall Terminals .- Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe I Push-Probe D.: -. Depth to Water 8' ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core .. Start/Finish Date 8/11/2009 - Depth / EaUon (fefl ecreholecomptebon Saniple TypeflD Sheeri/NAPL Sheen Product Matenal Description Depth - Dry, red brown, sandy SILT (ML-SM) with wood waste WOOD WASTE S-i a 5. .5 Moist, dark brown silty gravelly SAND Boulder S-2 • 8/11/2009 Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium • NS Dark brown WOOD WASTE 10' 10 . Wet, gray to brown, slightly gravelly, silty SAND (S S-3 Wet, gray, gravelly, sandy, SILT (ML - TILL FILL); slight • creosote odor 15 NS '15 Wet, brown, PEAT (PT): amorphous peat NS S-4 Samp'er Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level fl Continuous Core - Water Level (AID) Approved by: JJP Figure No. A - 2 b b I S Boring Log %Aspedconsuftg ewth+water Project Number 020027 Boring Number MC-6 Sheet 2of3 Project Name Quendall Terrninas Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA F Driller/Method NW Probe / Push-Probe I DRAFTj Depth to Water 8' AID Sampling Method Continuous Core ,.. Start/Finish Date 8/11/2009 Elevation (leet) BoehoeComptjon Samp4e TypejlD SheerVNAPL Comments Sheen Protuct Matena Type Des Depth sand laminae from 21 to 22.5 NS S-5 25 NS gray SAND layer 25 Wet, gray, slightly silty SAND with silty SAND laminae (SM/SP) NS Wet, brown PEAT (PT) 30 - 30 . Wet, gray SAND (SP): sand fine to medium NS S-7 Wet, brown PEAT (PT) Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium Wet, gray, gravelly SAND (SP); sand fine to Coarse, predominantly medium 35 NS ::• .35 - Wet, gray, sandy, clayey SILT (ML) Pink, clayey SILT (VOLCANIC ASH) S-8 Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium Wet, gray, very gravelly SAND (SP) NS Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery T Static Water Level D Approved by: JJP Continuous Core Water Level (AID) Figure No. A - 2 Boring Log Project Numbe Boring Number I Sheet %Aspectconsulting earth + water 020027 MC-6 3of3 Ground Surface Elev Project Name Quendall Terminals Location Renton, WA _T DRAFT Driller/Method NW Probe / Push-Probe Depth to Water 8ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core - - Start/Finish Date 8/11/2009 - Depth I Elevation Borehole Completion Sample TypeIlD She8rVNAPL Sheen Produ Matedal 1•tive Desedption Depth (ft) - Comments - Boring terminated 40 ft BGS 45 45 50 50 55 .55 Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level Approved by: JJP O Continuous Core Water Level (ATD) Figure No. A-2 %ASpedconsulung earth + water Project Name Quendafi TerminaI Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe / Push-Probe Sampling Method Continuous Core Oepth I T EIevaon J Bocehote Compteon Sampte (feet) I TypeflD Boring Log Project Number Boring Number Sheet 020027 MC-8 1 of 2 Ground Surface Elev DRAF.-T. - Depth to Water 4 ATD Start/Finish Date 8/11/2009 SheenfttAPL Sheen Product Mate Type Desaiption Comments Dry, red brown, sandy SILT (ML); with wood and rootlets dark brown PEAT (PT) Wet, dark brown to gray SAND (SP); with trace wood Becomes gray, fine to medium sheen dissipates ss quickly Os multicolored MS metallic Becomes fine motor oil-like HS OW Viscosity - -. Wet, brown, slightly silty SAND (SF) Oc -. brown blebs HS :•.: - Wet, brown PEAT (PT) 5 S-3 10 15 0 0, ci) (Li 01 0 0, S-4 Ui -NS Wet gray SAND (SP) fine to medium sand Sampler Type: PID - Photolonization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level El Continuous Core SZ Water Level (ATD) Approved by: JJP LU FigureNo. A - 2 pecLconsuLng Boting Log Project Number Boring Number Sheet '. YS earth+water 020027 MC-8 7_2 of2 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface EIev DRAFT' Driller/Method NW Probe/Push-Probe Depth to Water 4 ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 8/11/2009 EIetion Borehe Competon Sampie TypeflD SheenINAPL Sheen Product Mateital Dasaipton Depth (feet) cets Wet, brown PEAT (PT) - Wet, gray SAND (SP); fine to medium sand Wet, olive-gray, organic SILT (OL) S-5 Silty sand EtEA :::•:. Wet, gray, gravelly SAND (SW); fine to coarse sand 25 :.:• Wet, gray SAND (SP); fine to medium sand 25 0606 0000 Wet, gray, sandy GRAVEL (GP) o g o 0 0 0 0 00 00 S-6 00 oo o 0 o 0 00° I H Wet, gray SAND (SP); fine to medium sand 30 30 ----- Bottom of boring at 30' 35 .35 Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery YL Static Water Level fl Approved by: JJP Continuous Core Water Level (ATD) Figure No. A - 2 p p p S S Boring Log %ASpedconsuwng Project Number 020027 Boring Number MC-10 Sheet 1 of 2 Project Name QuendaH Terminals Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe / Push-Probe Depth to Water 8' ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 8/10/2009 EUon eet) Borehole Cm$t$on Sample TypolTD SheenlN.4PL Commers Sheen Pcoduct - Matmial Type ipon - DPIt1 (li) Dry, brown, gravelly, silty SAND (SM): abundant wood S••1 Wood debris dark brown 2.0 - 2.5' .. . :. Moist, brown, SAND (SP); trace gravel, predominantly fine sand, fine to medium sand 5 4 22 Baiedwimgrout NS Wood 4.5-4.7' 5 .. -.'- '.. Moist, gray SAND (SP); predominantly fine sand, coarsens with depth, fine to medium sand NS Moist, olive gray, organic SILT (OL); with rootlets • Vationoog S-2 NS : Wet, gray SAND (S interlaminated with silty SAND ° NS -10 NS Wet, dark brown PEAT (PT) 4 S-3 NS Wet, olive gray, organic SILT Wet, gray, SAND (SP); fine to medium sand -UIIT: Wet, gray silty SAND (SM); fine sand 4 NS ..:.:: Wet, gray, SAND (SP); fine to medium sand 15 15 NS ..-,.--. Wood 16' 7' S-4 Wet, brown PEAT (PT) Wet, olive gray, organic SILT (OL) - - Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH - No Recovery I Static Water Level n Conti - nuous Core SZ Water Level (AID) Approved by: JJP Figure No. A - 2 Aspectconsumng Boring Log I Sheet Project Number Boring Number ewth+water 020027 MC-10 2of2 Project Name Quendafl Terminals Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe / Push-Probe Depth to Water 8' ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core StartlFinish Date 8/10/2009 - Depth! Elevation Borehole Completion Sample TypaJiD SheenINAPL Sheen Product Material Type Depu (It) (feet) comments Nb MS Wet, gray, slightly silty SAND (SP); predominantly fine sand Wet, brown PEAT (PT) S-5 NS Wet. gray SAND (SP): fine to medium sand Wet, brown PEAT (PT) :•::•: Wet, gray SAND (SW); trace gravel, fine to coarse NS ::.::. sand 25 25 Wet, gray, silty SAND (SM); trace gravel, fine to coarse sand :. Wet, gray SAND (SP); medium to coarse sand S-6 NS , Fine to coarse sand Wet, olive gray, organic SILT to PEAT (PT-OL) NS . Wet, gray, silty SAND (SM); trace wood, trace gravel, : fine sand 30' 30 0 • S-7 NS --- Wet, olive gray, organic silt (OL); with laminae of silty sand Wet, brown PEAT (PT) - Wet, olive gray, organic silt (OL); with laminae of silty sand Wet, olive gray, sandy silt (ML); trace gravel cal:35 -35 o 0000 Wet, gray, slightly sandy to sandy GRAVEL (GP) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 00 0 0 000 0 000 00 S-8 0000 000 0000 0 000 0000 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bottom of boring at 40' Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH L:JNo Recovery Static Water Level Approved by: JJP Continuous Core Water Level (ATD) Figure No. A - 2 I p S %Aspectconsufting earth+water I Boring Log Project Number 020027 Boring Number MC-14 Sheet 1 of 2 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface EIev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe I Push-Probe Depth to Water 5' ATD Sampng Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 8/10/2009 - e 'a 1 E o, Borehole Completion Sample Sheen/NAPL Comments Sheen Product Matenal Type Description Depth p 0/ s-i Moist, gray SAND (SP); fine to medium sand Borehole bacidilled with . bentonite grout 0- 40 Olive gray SILT (ML) 22 o :: . Moist, brown, silty SAND (SM); abundant organics and wood NS 5, Ziioioo ..•.. .5 Wet, gray, gravelly SAND (SW); fine to coarse sand NS 0/ S-2 NS 10 10 Wet, gray SAND (SW); trace gravel, trace wood, 0/ predominantly medium sand, fine to coarse sand S-3 • 7/ NS Wet, dark brown, fiberous PEAT (PT) 15 15 Wet, brown SAND (SP); fine to medium sand NS Wet, dark brown, sandy PEAT (PT) Wet, dark brown PEAT (PT) - Sampler Type: PID - Photolonization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH - No Recovery - Static Water Level Approved by: JJP Continuous Core Water Level (AID) Figure No. A - 2 %Aspect consulfing earth+water Boring Log Project Number 020027 I Boring Number I I MC-14 I I Sheet 2o12 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe / Push-Probe Depth to Water 5' ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 8/1 0/2009 - - - - Depth / Elevation (feet) Borehole Completion Sample Type/ID SheenJNAPL Comments Sheen - Product - Matetial Type Desthption Depth (It) - Wet, brown PEAT (PT); few sand laminae - / S5 NS . Wet, brown to gray slightly silty SAND (SP): trace wood 0 NS -25 Wet, olive gray organic SILT interlaminated with PEAT (OL/PT) 5-6 Thin bed volcanic ash(?) NS ::•.• Wet, gray, slightly silty, slightly gravelly SAND (S\N); fine to coarse sand - Wet, olive gray organic SILT (OL) 30 30 Wet, gray, silty SAND (SM); fine sand NS Peat Wet, gray. silty SAND (SM); fine sand Wet, gray SAND (SP); fine to medium sand Wet, gray, slightly sandy SILT (ML); fine sand Wet, pink clayey silt (Cl_); volcanic ash Wet, gray, slightly sandy SILT (ML); fine sand Moderate -:-. Wet, gray, slightly gravelly SAND (SP); predominantly creosote-like 0(10 S'.. medium sand S-8 NS .fl3'.i. Wet, gray, silty SAND (SM); fine sand - .• Wet, gray, gravelly SAND (SP) Slight creosote : odor NS I Bottom of boring, 40' BGS - Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level o Continuous Core Water Level (ATD) Approved by: JJP Figure No. A-2 I. b I S Boring Log %ASpedconsuftg Project Number I Boring Number Sheet eagth+Water I 020027 BH-20-C 1 of 8 und 8ev D FT ::S::: Driller/Method 13 Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/FinishDate 8/312009-8/5/2009 _____________ _________ - - EUon (feet) Borehole Completon San,ple TeIID SheerMAPL Sheen Product Matenai Depth Comments Type Ift) Dry, brown, silty, very sandy GRAVEL (FILL): abundant asphalt and concrete debris, trace wood 1 1 2 '2 Dry, brown slightly silty SAND (SM); trace gravel 3 .3 4. .4 Dry, Dark gray gravelly SAND (SW); trace asphalt and wood - Dry, brown SAND (SP); fine to medium 6' 6 7 7 8 Temporary steel - : 8 casing o' No Recovery from 6 to 10 10 steel F.' 10 Slightly moist, brown, slightly silty, gveIly SAND (SM); 11 NS -11 12 Very moist, brown SAND (SP); trace silt -13 Wet, gray SAND (SP) 14 Creosote-like NS ' 14 -- Wet, brown, slightly sandy ORGANIC SILT (OL) odor 15 Vet-yslightodor NS -15 16 - 16 Wet, brown PEAT (PT); moderately fiberous 17 NS '17 18 18 19- 1/8" sand laminea 19 Sampler Type: PID - Photolonization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level m w Continuous Core Approved by: JJP - Water Level (AID) N Figure No. A- 2 MspeL.LConsuLtlng earth+watec A ..s Log %Bori ng Project Number 020027 Boring Number BH-20-C Sheet 2of8 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface Elev Driller/M Depth to Water 13'ATD DRAFT._ StartlFinish 813120098/512009 - Eieatioi BoretoIe Cornpiebon Sample Typeill) SheenINAPL Cot Sheen Product Mateilal Type Description Depth (C) mes dark brown 21 21 22 the -22 NS brown, slightly gravelly SILTY SAND (SM); 23 nic silt laminea -23 Wet, gray SAND (SP); 24 25 Slight odor NS NS 24 25 :•::•:- Wet gray, very gravelly SAND (SV; sand fine to coarse predominately medium, gravels fine and sub rounded, decrease in gravel with depth Yellow to yellow brown blebs HS - Wet, brown PEAT (PT) 26 26 L Wet, olive gray, slightly sandy ORGANIC SILT (OL); 27 --- 27 Slight odor NS Wet, olive gray, slightly silty SAND (SP); sand fine to 28 -•• -.- medium, trace organics 28 29 Tempom,y 8' steel casing 0-57' Wet, brown PEAT (PT); trace gravel 30 Slight odor NS 30 .. Wet, gray SAND to SILTY SAND (SM); 31 31 Wet, gray SAND (SP) Slight odor NS Wet, gray SILTY SAND (SM); sand fine 32 Temporary 6 steel 32 casing 0-99 NS - ense of volcanic ash 33 Wet, olive gray ORGANIC SILT (OL) Wet, olive gray, sandy SILT (ML); trace gravel, trace organics NS 34 35 -35 36 36 -. Wet, gray, gravelly SAND (SP); sand fine to medium 37 38 Slight creosote odor NS -. -38 39 -__ Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level Approved by: JJP W Continuous Core - Water Level (ATD) IN FigureNo. A-2 I p S. j S g Boring Lo %ASpedconsuifing earth+water Project Number Boring Number Sheet 020027 BH-20-C 3 of 8 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface Elev Dnfler/Method Cascade / Rotary Sonic Depth to Water 13 AID ECDARAk Sampling Method Continuous Core " ' Start/Finish Date 813/2009-8/5/2009 Depth I Elevation Borehole Completion Sample ShCerVNAPL Sheen Prducl Matenal DesaipfiGn Depth (feet) TypeñD T. ype - - - Comments becomes slightly gravelly 41' :i - NS 41 42 Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium .....: 42 43. Tenrporaiyrsteel NS 43 Wet, brown, slightly gravelly SAND (SP); 44 —44 45 Tempoayssteel Slight odor NS 7.7 Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium 45 46 S.:. •:•.. 46 .47 48 NS .. Wet, gray, slightly gravelly to gravelly SAND (SP); .-: increasing gravel with depth 48 49. :••. .I.: —49 50 6 lense of gray sandy GRAVEL, sand fine to medium, Slight odor US 'Y.. gradational contact 50 51 .-•.......' 51 52 NS :••I...: 52 53 Very slight odor NS F 53 Wet, gray, slightly silty to silty, very gravelly SAND (SM) 54. bento,te seal 557 : 54 55. .. 55 56 ,,t'O Wet, gray, gravelly SAND (GW); sand fine to medium 9090 56 INS C) C -57 ;t;i 59 Wet, gray, silty, very sandy GRAVEL to very gravelly Tempoaty6"ste Slight odor NS SAND (GW); sand well graded fine to coarse -59 casfngO-99' 0000 0. - Sampier Type: PlO - Photolonization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level fi Continuous Core Approved by: JJP Water Level (ATD) N Figure No. A- 2 MspecLconsuLbng A 4 . Log %Bori ng Project Number Boring Number Sheet earth + water 020027 BH-20-C 4 of 8 Project Name QuendaU Terminals - Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA . Depth to Water 13' ATD Driller/Method Cascade I Rotary Sonic RAFl- Sampling Method Continuous Core ' Start/Finish Date 8/3/2009-8/5 12009 - Oepthl Elevation B0(eh01eCompltion 5emp TypeilD SI,eecVNAPL s sen uct - Material rpe oeu DePth YQ _i!ee.!L_ - - - Comments - - Wet, brown, SAND (SP); sand fine to medium 61 NS .-. :1-: -61 62 -62 .-fl]. Wet, brown, SILTY SAND (SM); sand fine NS .-- - -_ -:. Wet, brown SAND (SP); sand fine to coarse 63 water sample .. predominately medium, trace gravel -63 H20C-63.5-64-W taken with hydro :. - punch -:•-. -: - 64 65 NS ::.i...1.: -65 66 -66 67 :-. --I.E 67 68 ::.i: 68 69 Temporary 6 steei ... :-.- 69 casing 09' 70 :-. .j.: 70 71 NS ::.I:..I..F 71 72 water sample NS -:- '72 H20C-72.5-73-W taken with hydro -. 73 punch .: -73 .flTfl Wet, brown, slightly silty to silty, gravelly SAND (SM); NS ]ftl-lj: sand fine to coarse 74 Wet, brown SAND (SP) sand fine to medium, trace fine 75 .-: gravel -75 76 :--1. •:. 76 Wet, brown SAND (SP); sand fine to medium NS :.....:.: '77 78 NS :-.i:-.i.: 78 79, -1-.: 79 - Sampler Type; PID - Photolonization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level m Approved by: JJP w Continuous Core Sz Water Level (ATD) N Figure No. A-2 W 0 0 S S Boring Log %AspedconsuWng eacth+water Project Number Boring Number Sheet 020027 BH-20-C 5c18 Project Name Quendall Terminais Ground Surface Elev Location Renton,WA Driller/Method Cascade / Rotary Sonic ' - Depth to Water 13 ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core '" StartiFinish Date 8/3 /2009-8/512009 Eieatjon (feet) 8oreiieCoarpleon Sample TypMD ShSVPL Sheen Prootuct Material Description Depth Comments Slight odor water sample : sand is predominately fine 1-120C-80.5-81-W 81 taken with hydro NS .''T '81 Wet, brown SAND (SP); sand fine to medium punch predominately medium 82' NS . 82 Wet, brown SAND (SP); sand fine to medium 83 :: :•i'.: 83 NS 84 Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium 85' 85 86 NS :.'. 86 87 " .'.•... Wet, gray, gravelly SAND (SW); gravel fine to coarse 87 88 NS ::•:• '88 Wet, gray, slightly gravelly SAND (SP); sand fine to 89 Temporary steel . •. medium, gravels fine '89 asing 0.99' Water sample collected 90 :•'•: •.'•: 90 .. grades to predominately medium sand, trace gravels, '91 gravels fine to coarse, subangular to subrounded 92 i Increase n gravels 93. — :•:•::• '93 Wet, gray, slightly gravelly to gravelly SAND (SW); sand fine to coarse predominately medium, gravels fine :•:•:•: to coarse, subrounded to subangular .94 .95 96 97 Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium predominately fine 98 silt laminea between 98 and 98.5 '98 99' Water sample collected No soil sample collected between 99' and 100' Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH tQ No Recovery Static Water Level EU Continuous Core Approved by: JJP Water Level (ATD) IN Figure No. A- 2 MspeI.LconsuuIng Log Project Number %Bori ng Boring Number Sheet A e1J1+watef 020027 T BH-20-C S of 8 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface Elev Depth to Water 13'AiD DriflerlMethod Cascade/Rotary Sonic DRAFT'..- SamplingMethod Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 8/3/2009-8/5/2009 - Wlh Depth Eon Bocehole Completion Sample SheerVNAPL Sheen Produ Matenal Descripbon Type (It) (feet} TypeJlD Comments - Wet, gray SAND (SP); trace silt laminae 10* 101 Hydropunch sample BH-20C-101.5-102-W6 collected 102 ::•- at 15:15 102 103 104 -104 30 heave at 100 los ç :...: 106 107 4. 10 08 110 : Wet, gray SAND thverythinbedsofSlLT(SPIML); -110 :--.. sand fine to medium 111 : -111 --2 Wet, gray SAND (SP); fine to medium sand 112 -112 -113 11 :--..-.:: -114 - - 22 heave -115 116 i-i; 117 Hydropunch sample BH-20C-117.5-118-W9 collected 118 ------: at 16:45 118 119 -.-.--:-: 119 Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery T Static Water Level m Approved by: JJP w Continuous Core Water Level (ATD) N Figure No. A- 2 S Aspectnsuwng $ elhwater Project Number Boring irnbe Sheet 020027 BH-20-C 7 of 8 Project Name Quendall Terminals (1.. Ground Surface EIev Location Renton, WA DRA Fill.:; Dnhler/Method Cascade / Rotary Sonic 7- Depth to Water 13 ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 813/2009-81512009 DepUiI Elevation (feet) Sorehote Completion sample TypeflO SheenjNft.PL Sheen Product Matenal Type Descripbon DePe comments 12* : :.i -121 12 122 Wet, gray, silty SAND with clayey SILT and SILT laminae (SM/ML) 12 123 124 124 Wet, gray, slightly silty SAND (SP-SM); fine sand 125 126 126 127 12 - 128 129 :: : 129 130 - Clayey SILT (ML): in shape of sampler barrel 130 heave at 130' 131 - -. Wet, gray SAND (SP): trace gravel, fine to medium .. sand 131 132 c -132 Wet, gray, gravelly SAND (SW); gravel to 3" diameter 133 Hydropunch sample BH-20C-132.5-133-V collected -133 Wet, gray SAND (SP); trace gravel, trace silt, fine to medium sand 134 134 .T-:. Wet, gray, gravelly SAND (SP); trace silt, fine to medium sand 135 135 36 1 137 Wet, gray, silty CLAY (C H); laminated (glaciolacustrine) 13 138 139 139 Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery - Static Water Level Continuous Core V Approved by: JJP Water Level (AiD) Figure No. A- 2 Aspectconsuuing Boring Log I I Sheet Project Number Boring Number earth + water 020027 I BH-20-C I 8 of 8 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface EIev Location Renton, WA [' 1 DnilerlMethod Cascade / Rotary Sonic D ______ Depth to Water 13' ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core StaWFinish Date 81312009-815/2009 Depth I EIevaon Borehote CompteUon Samp'e Type/iD ShOUNAPL Sheen PYOdUCt - Materi re Depth (ti) ((eat) Coimients Bottom of boring at 140' 141 141 142 -142 14 143 144 -144 14E 145 14e 146 14 147 14 148 14 15( 150 15 151 152 -152 153 -153 154 155 155 156 156 157 157 158 158 159 159 Sampler Type: P1D - Photolonization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery T Static Water Level Approved by: JJP Continuous Core Water Level (ATD) IN Figure No. A- 2 I: 0 fl Bonn Lo %Aspectconsuftg eath+Water Project Number Boring Number Sheet 020027 QP-1 1 of 2 Project Name Quendafl TerminaJs Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe / Push-Probe Depth to Water 6.5' ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 7/21/2009 Eevation Screhole Completion Sample Tests (pp PID B1s/ Mal DTypeesctlption 0 epth A. Loose, dry, brown, sUghtly;iy to sandy SILT (ML); sand fine, trace graveisré organics Si iurn dense, slightly moist, sIightl lightly ândy GRAVEL (GM); 4" lense of coke 5 Hydrated bentonite ' • .. 5 thpp -::-:•: Slightiy ' bfbrown, gravelly, silty SAND (SW); trace concreteebrjs Wet, olive gray, slightly silty SAND (SM); - 7121/2009 ST/7 shee (no shee e, :• -. -.-: . Wet, grar SAND (SP); sand fine to medium, trace gravel S2 ST/7.5 sheen (no sheen) '. ..i S ST/8.5 sheen tes Wet, brown PEAT (PT); non fiborous (no sheen) 10 / 10 / . .. -.. Wet, brown silty SAND (SM); sand fine to medium S3 . .' %predominantly fine abundant oroanics Wet, gray SAND (SP); 11 4.5 sheen test (no sheen, 20% fiorets, semi 1/2' peat lens and 14.5 15 ': circle blebs) .'....• becomes gray to brown banded fine to medium sand 15 - (SP) ST/lB sheen test .' .-',; Staining from 14.5' to 16.5 (moderate sheen, 35-40% fiorets, . .. - 16 5-18.5 heavy Wet, gray to brown SAND (SP); fine to medium, sheen, oil wett '-.--: --.- abundant organic fiberous organics, oil wetted from S4 QP-1-17-18.5 .:.•••. ° - Soil sample collected from 17' to 18' BGS'. (Sample ID: OP-I-i 7-1 8-S ST/19 sheen test Wet, brown, sandy ORGANIC SILT (OL): wet, brown, PEAT (PT); non fiberous (moderate sheen) Sampler Type: PlO - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery T Static Water Level 0 Continuous Core SZ Approved by: JJP Water Level (ATD) FiureNo. A-2 MspecLconsuLtlng Log Project Number %Bori ng Boring Number Sheet A 020027 QP-1 2 of 2 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface EIev Location Renton. WA DriVer/Method NW Probe / Push-Probe Depth to Water 65' ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 7/21/2009 - - EaUon 8orehole Cometon Tests (p) Bl;sI Mateflal Type Descipon Dt • Wet, brown, silty SAND ($M;bundant organics, trace • wood ST/21 sheen test Wet, brown PEA ysome fiber, trace wood (slight sheen, 3% Wet, olive gray ORGANIC SILT (OL); - ST/24.5 sheen Wet, brow 'fbus PEAT (PT); test (no sheen) 25 25 , il Wet, oj9, slightly sandy to sandy SILT (ML); ne1'epth ST/27sheeritest S6 t Wet, browiiPEAT (PT); abundant wood r w Wet, gray SAND (SP); fine to medium ST/29.5 sheen - Wet, brown ORGANIC SILT (OL); ' test ( no sheen) 30 • 30 Boring terminated at 30 ft BGS / 35 .,.: 35 Sampler Type: PID - Photolonization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level fl . Approved by: JJP on nuous .ore Water Level (ATD) Figure No. A - 2 I .. I . I S Boring Log %Aspectconsuftg Project Number Boring Number Sheet 1 of 2 020027 Q P- 2 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe I Push-Probe Depth to Water 7.5' ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 7/21/2009 Depth E 'atiOn 8ohoie Completion Sanipie TypeilD Tests plo COPM) s' Sr Mat&ial Type - (II) Dry, light brown SILT to JJ v0tsandy SILT (ML); trace gravel Si ST/i 3.5 sheen test (no sheen) slight odor Moist, brow (PT); 5 de Hydrated benton - dips (Y-30 ST/5.5 sheen test . 5 (no sheen) SAND (SP); fine to medium Wet,ray, slightly sility to silty SAND (SM); sand fine to thdiUrii Zi12112oc9 Grades toy SAND (SP) fine to medium sheen test o sheen) , Wet, PEAT (PT); jeen Wet, brown, silty SAND (SM); sand fine, abundant 10 :{[: test ee Wet, gray SAND (SP); fine to medium, wood 2 lense of wet gray silty SAND (SM) 415- -. . Wet, gray, slightly silty SAND (SM); sand is fine -15 ST/16 sheen test (no sheen) ST/17.5 sheen test (no sheen) : Sampler Type: PID - Photolonizatlon Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level D Continuous core Approved by: JJP - Water Level (AID) Figure No. A - 2 Mspe%..LconsuLthg Log Sheet A %Bori ng Project Number Boring Number earth+water 020027 QP-2 2 of 2 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe I Push-Probe Depth to Water 7.5 AID Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 7/21/2009 Een BoreldeCometion iTypeADests (pp Si DeScflplion Depth Wet, brown to dark brow 'F (PT); with gray to olive gray, organic silt lamin ST/21 sheen test (no sheen) S5 ST/23 sheen test Wetitry to very silty SAND (SM) 'sa is fine (no sheen) 0';0 6 'ilet, slightly shdy GRAVEL (GP): 9' 1 Wet gray SANE(SP) sand fine to medium trace 25 ST/25 sheen test "., . gravel •1' 25 (no sheen) .. ST/26 sheen test .. .. .n. (no sheen) :- Wet olive gray to brown PEAT (PT); abundant ST/27 thee orgariic; organic silt interbeds, trace wood S6 (noshee ST/28 sheen t •••'.• (no sheen) sheen test .ST129 :. Wet, gray SAND (SP); sand fine to medium, co sheen) .9 :• predominately medium 30 30 Boring terminated 30 ft. BGS .1: Z( Sampler Type: PID - Photolonization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery T Static Water Level Approved by: JJP U Continuous Core Water Level (AID) Figure No. A - 2 I. b b S %ASpectconsulting Boring Log Project Number I Boring Number Sheet eaTh+water I Project Name Quendall 020027 QP-3 I of 2 Terminals Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe I Push-Probe Depth to Water 14 ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 7/21/2009 Depth! i EIevaoo BofehOte CompleUon Sante i PlO I BlowS! MateoalI [ TypeIlD Tests 6 i Type Deslptton I I I I 1:1.111.1:1 (SM); SAND trace Medium dense, dry, browto slightly silty, gravelly Si I t ME Hydrated bentooite chips O3O Stiff slightly moist, brown, sandy SILT (ML): trace gravels 1-5 I S2 ST/S sheen to (no sheen) gravel j gray to brown, sand lense of moist brown peat at 9.5 ST/12.5 sheen test (no sheen) sheen tes o sheen) - ST/i 5sheen tesi (no sheen) STII6.5 sheen test (no sheen) S4 ST/18sheen test (no sheen) Wet, brown, sandy ORGANIC SILT (OL); Wood from 14'-14.5' Wet, olive gray, slighty silty SAND (SM); sand fine PEAT (PT); with wood aim .rrrn. Wet,dark, gray SAND (SM); abundant organics and 11.I•I.1 peat, organic silt laminea 15 I z - - - - Wet, brown, to dark brown PEAT (PT); fiberous to non I ST/20 sheen testj fiberous Sampler Type: PID - Photolonization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level 0 Continuous Core Water Level (AID) Approved by: JJP Figure No. A - 2 M spect 4COnsuwng Boring Log Project Number Boring Number Sheet 'A earth+wat& 020027 QP-3 2 of 2 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe I Push-Probe Depth to Water 14 ATD Sampling Method Conilnuous Core Start/Finish Date 7/21/2009 - - Depth! Elevatjo4, Sore4e Compon Tests PD (ppm) BIs/ Matenat Desaipitoil Depth (slight sheen, Very moist, brown to dark.öh, PEAT (PT); dissapates quickly 4V .\ wet, gray,SAliflY(SP): firi'etb:ñiedium ORGANI!LT (CL); S5 Wfit6wn PEAT (PT); > /blive gray, organic SILT Wet, olive grsilty CLAY (CH); - ST/25 sheen test -25 Wet, gra S,'9',4D(SP); fine to medium 25 slight odor) ST/28 sheet S6 'SandY GRAVEL (GP) gravel fine ORGANIC SILT (OH); (no sheen) , ST/29 sheen test i Grades to non fiberous PEAT (PT); sheen) '. . '. Wet, gray SAND (SP): fine to medium 30' ST/3D sheen test 30 P Boring terminated 30 ft BGS (no speen) 00 , 3: ,. 35 Sampler Type: PID - Photoionization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery T Static Water Level Approved by: JJP fl Continuous Core Water Level (ATD) Figure No. A - 2 I-- I S 0, w I Boring Log %Aspectconsulfing Project Number Boring Number Sheet I 020027 QP-5 lof 2 Project Name Quendall Terminals Ground Surface Elev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe I Push-Probe Depth to Water 7.5 ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 7/21/2009 Depth / Depth Elevation BoreieCompietioci SaThpie Tess (ppm) M Type Desaiption - - .. .. Medium dense, slightly own, slightly silty to silty SAND (SM); trace , few roots ST/2 sheen test (no sheen) Slightiyrrard, : 5 Hydrateben(onjte - ST/5 sheen test ciiipsoo' (no sheen) 5 19 Soft moist dark brown ORGANIC SILT (OL) trace wood and plant fragments 7/21/2009 S2 ST17.5 shee Mediuie et, dark gray to brown SAND (SP); to medju , trace silt, silty fine sand laminea, inter i coated medium sand with trace organics :10 10 (h sheen) wood bark in a fine to medium sand matthc Soil sample collected from 11' to 12' BGS'. (Sample ID: QP-5-11-12-S) Wet, dark brown PEAT (PT); very thin silt laminea 15 - ST/15 sheen test (heavy sheen) 15-15.5 Interbed of wet SAND (SP); fine to medium, 15 oil stained Peat becomes slightly fiberous Wet, alternating beds of S4 grey, slightly silty SAND (SM); fine to medium; and :- brown SAND (SP); fine to medium, oil stained ST/19 sheen test (heavy sheen) Sampler Type: PID - Photolonization Detector (t-Ieadspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery - Static Water Level fl Conti .nuous Core Approved by: JJP Water Level (ATD) Figure No. A - 2 Mspe..LconsuLbng A . Log %Bori ng Project Number 020027 Boring Number QP-5 Sheet 2 of 2 Project Name Quendafi Terminals Ground Surface EIev Location Renton, WA Driller/Method NW Probe / Push-Probe Depth to Water 7.5' ATD Sampling Method Continuous Core Start/Finish Date 7/21/2009 Depth/ E1evathn Boermie Comp{ebon Sample Type'l Tes PID Biows/ Matenal Desaipiior Depth 5T/20 sheen test (heasy sheen) (no sheen, trace) ST/21 sheen test flTT ' Wet, brown, PEAT (PT)' .jJJj Wet, gray, silty ND(SM); fine • 85 ST122.5 sheen test (no sheen) Wet. brown,&.(Pfl;. . Wet, gra; si. SAND (SM); fine., peat laminea Wetgrày, SAND (SP); fine to mediuni.coarsens with .deth . •. Wet. brown. PEAT (PT): Wet, gray, sy silty SAND (SM); flnetqrriedium 25 ST/25.01 sheen test (no sheen) . 25 . :. Wet, gr9!'jj'huy sandy to sandy SILT (ML); thin fine sand. lmlpea Vv't, fay SAND (SF); fine to medium ST128.5 sheen test (no sheen) .4. O0 0.0 Wet,GreIly SAND (GP): Wet, gray, silty SAND (SM); fine 3 4 Ii 30 Boring terminated 30 ft BGS, 9' below DNAPL product 435- —35 Sampler Type: PID - Photolonization Detector (Headspace Measurement) Logged by: RRH No Recovery Static Water Level U .Approved by: JJP Continuous Core Water Level (ATD) Figure No. A - 2 D-- b b 0 WETLAND ASSESSMENT, STANDARD LAKE STUDY, HABITAT DATA REPORT, AND CONCEPTUAL RESTORATION PLAN QUENDALL TERMINALS Prepared for Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Company Prepared by Anchor QEA, LLC 1423 Third Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98101 0 November2009 S WETLAND ASSESSMENT, STANDARD LAKE STUDY, HABITAT DATA REPORT, AND CONCEPTUAL RESTORATION PLAN QUENDALL TERMINALS Prepared for Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Company Prepared by Anchor QEA, LLC 1423 Third Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98101 November 2009 S TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Review of Existing Information......................................................................................2 2 STUDY AREA DESCRJPFION .............................................................................................. 3 2.1 Topography.......................................................................................................................3 2.2 Soils...................................................................................................................................4 2.3 Hydrology.........................................................................................................................5 2.4 Plant Communities and Habitat Types...........................................................................5 3 WETLAND DELINEATION..................................................................................................7 3.1 Wetland Delineation Methods........................................................................................ 7 3.1.1 Vegetation................................................................................................................... 8 3.1.2 Soils ............................................................................................................................. 9 3.1.3 Hydrology................................................................................................................... 9 3.1.4 Other Data Sources ................................................................................................ 10 3.1.5 Wetland Classifications............................................................................................ 10 is 3.1.6 State Wetland Ratings System................................................................................. 10 3.1.7 City of Renton Wetland Rating System and Buffer Requirements....................... 12 3.1.7.1 Wetland Rating System and Buffer Requirements........................................ 12 3.1.8 Wetland Functions Assessment............................................................................... 14 3.2 Wetland Delineation Results......................................................................................... 14 3.2.1 Wetland A................................................................................................................. 14 3.2.2 Wetland B................................................................................................................. 16 3.2.3 Wetland C................................................................................................................. 17 3.2.4 Wetland D ................................................................................................................. 18 3.2.5 WetlandE ................................................................................................................. 20 3.2.6 Wetland F................................................................................................................. 21 3.2.7 Wetland G.................................................................................................................22 3.2.8 WetlandH ................................................................................................................24 3.2.9 Wetland I..................................................................................................................25 3.2.10 Wetland J..................................................................................................................26 3.3 Regulatory Framework..................................................................................................28 3.3.1 USFWS Classification...............................................................................................28 Wetland Assessm eat, Stan dard Lake Swdy, and Ha bitat Data Report November2009 Quendaii Terminals 1 060059-01 3.3.2 Ecology Rating, Classification, and Functions and Values Scores .28 3.3.3 City of Renton Wetland Classification Guidance...................................................31 3.4 Wetland Functions and Values Summary....................................................................31 3.4.1 Water Quality Functions .........................................................................................33 3.4.2 Hydrologic Functions...............................................................................................33 3.4.3 Habitat Functions.....................................................................................................34 3.5 Exempt Wetlands...........................................................................................................35 3.6 Constructed Stormwater Features.................................................................................35 3.6.1 Excavated Features from the 1970s.........................................................................35 3.6.2 Best Management Practices Implementation - 2006.............................................36 3.6.3 Anticipated Regulatory Status.................................................................................36 3.7 Wetland Delineation and Typing Limitations..............................................................37 4 LAKE WASHINGTON OHWM DELINEATION AND LAKE STUDY.............................38 4.1 Lake Washington OHWM Delineation Methods........................................................38 4.2 Lake Washington OHWM Delineation Results...........................................................39 4.3 Lake Study ......................................................................................................................39 V 4.3.1 Fish Species Presence...............................................................................................40 5 SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN..................................................................................41 5.1 Introduction and Purpose..............................................................................................41 5.2 Goals and Objectives......................................................................................................42 5.3 Elements of the Plan......................................................................................................43 5.3.1 Riparian Buffer Habitat............................................................................................43 5.3.2 Wetland Restoration................................................................................................44 6 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................47 S Wetland and Ordinary Hzh Water Mark Delineation Repon Nov'ein her 2009 Quendall Terminals ii 060059-01 S List of Tables Table 1 Wetland Plant Indicator Definitions...................................................................9 Table 2 City of Renton Wetland Regulations.................................................................14 Table 3 USFWS Wetland Classifications and Connections to Surface Water..............28 Table 4 Summary of Wetland Classes and Rating Scores Using Ecology Wetlands RatingSystem.......................................................................................................29 Table 5 Summary of Functions and Values Wetland Rating Scores.............................30 Table 6 City of Renton Wetland Ratings and Standard Buffer Distance......................31 Table 7 Riparian Buffer Plant List...................................................................................44 Table8 Wetland Plant List..............................................................................................46 List of Figures Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Project Site and Aerial Photo Figure 3 Site Topography Figure 4 Soil Series Figure 5 NWI Mapped Wetlands Figure 6 Vegetative Cover Figure 7 Wetlands and OHWM De]ineation Results Figure 8 Shoreline Restoration Conceptual Design List of Appendices Appendix A Plan View and Cross Sections of Wetlands A through H Appendix B Ordinary High Water Mark Flag Locations Appendix C Sample Plot Summary Data Appendix D Field Data Sheets Appendix E Ecology Wetland Rating Forms Appendix F Site Photographs Appendix G Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, Qjiendall and Baxter Properties Appendix H 1990 Aerial Photograph S S Weth,id and OrdtharyIhh WaterMark Deilneation Report - November2009 Quenda]] Ternzinais by 060059-01 Introduction 1 INTRODUCTION From April to June 2009, Anchor QEA, LLC (Anchor QEA) performed wetland delineation, is lake ordinary high water mark (OHWM) delineation, and habitat assessments of the approximately 21-acre Quendall Terminals Site (Site) in Renton, Washington (Parcel No. 2924059002; Township 24 North, Range 5 East, Section 29). A vicinity map is provided on Figure 1, and a recent aerial photograph of the project area is provided on Figure 2. The survey included an approximately 1.15-acre adjoining portion on the east side of Lake Washington Boulevard (Figure 2). This report is intended to support City of Renton (City) entitlement processing for Master Siteplan Approval, Shoreline Substantial Development, Environmental Review, and a Binding Siteplan, for the Quendall Terminals property. The redevelopment project anticipates submittal of a checklist with the intent of securing a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS) under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). The proposed project includes a mix of 5-story residential units above two levels of above-grade parking and at-grade surface street parking along with retaillrestaurant space. The redevelopment project anticipates entitlement of approximately 800 residential units, 260,000± square feet of office space, and 30,000± square feet (sf) of retaillrestaurant space with associated parking. Under the direction of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Quendall Terminals owners (Altino Properties, Inc., and J.H. Baxter & Company) are concurrently conducting a remedial investigation (RI) and feasibffity study (FS) at the Site. The work is being conducted under an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent, as amended (AOC), with EPA under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA; i.e., "Superfund"). Detailed information on existing lake and upland conditions will be included in the RI, anticipated to be completed in summer 2010. CERCLA cleanup actions along the shoreline will likely include remediation of hazardous substances in lake sediments and/or in the upland portions of the Site. While this report was prepared in accordance with City criteria, as defined in the City of Renton Municipal Code (RMC) Section 4-3-050 (City of Renton 2009), some elements required by the code will not be available until selection of a cleanup remedy for the Site by EPA, which is currently anticipated in early 2011. As required by CERCLA, all substantive provisions of City regulatory requirements will be met by the cleanup remedy selected by EPA. Wetland and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Terminals 1 060059-01 Introduction Land use within the study area is currently zoned for commercial use and consists of abandoned log storage facilities, modified dirt roads, and fragmented patches of forest and shrub habitat. Ten wetlands (Wetlands A through D were identified within the study area. This report describes the methods used in the field investigation and Anchor QEA's findings. A description of the study area is included in Section 2. Summaries of the findings of the wetland delineation are included in Section 3. Summaries of the findings of the lake OHWM delineation are included in Section 4. Drawings showing plan view and cross sections of each wetland are provided in Appendix A. Flag locations from the OHWM survey are provided in drawings in Appendix B. A summary of data collected at each sample plot during the wetland delineation is presented in tables in Appendix C and in the field data forms in Appendix D. Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) wetland rating forms are included in Appendix E. Site photographs are provided in Appendix F. Previous wetland delineations performed in 1997 are included in the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum provided in Appendix G. A 1990 aerial photograph of the site is provided in Appendix H. 1.1 Review of Existing Information As part of the analysis to identify natural resources and critical areas in the study area, Anchor QEA ecologists reviewed the following sources of information to support field observations: Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (USDA 2009) Soil Survey ofKing County, Washington (USDA 1973) Hydric Soil List forKing County, Washington (USDA 2001) United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Wetlands Mapper for National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map Information (USFWS 2009) RMC (City of Renton 2009) Aerial photographs Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) Maps (WDFW 2009) WDFS Non-game Data System Special Animal Species, as identified in Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 232-12-011 Wetland and Ordinary Hi-b Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Terminals 2 060059-01 E Study Area Description S . 2 STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION The study area consists of one parcel with two parts. The larger portion is rectangular- shaped and is approximately 20.08 acres located adjacent to Lake Washington. The smaller portion is located just across Lake Washington Boulevard and is approximately 1.15 acres. The study area is located in the City of Renton, King County Washington (Township 24 North, Range 5 East, Section 29; see Figures 1 and 2). Shortly after the lowering of Lake Washington in 1916 to construct the Lake Washington Ship Canal, the Site, including newly exposed portions of the former May Creek delta, was developed into a creosote manufacturing facility. Up until 1969, creosote was manufactured on the Site by refining and processing coal tar and oil-gas tar residues. From 1969 to approximately 1977, some of the aboveground tanks at the Site were used intermittently for crude oil, waste oil, and diesel storage. From 1977 to 2008, the Site was used primarily for log sorting and storage, with tree, shrub, and herbaceous vegetation associated with upland, wetland, and riparian habitats. The Site is currently vacant. Aquatic lands adjacent to the facility managed by the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) were historically leased for log rafting and vessel storage uses, but those leases terminated in the 1990s. Immediately adjacent properties include Conner Homes to the south (former Barbee Mill property) and Port Quendall Company/Football Northwest to the north (former J.H. Baxter property). Lake Washington borders the western boundary of the study area. BNSF railroad and Lake Washington Boulevard separate the two portions of the parcel, with Interstate 405 (1-405) located along the east side of the eastern portion. May Creek currently discharges into Lake Washington approximately 400 yards south of the Site, just south of the Conner Homes development. An aerial photograph of the study area shortly after redevelopment of the Port Quendall Company/Football Northwest property, but prior to more recent redevelopment of the Conner Homes property, is depicted on Figure 2. 2.1 Topography Overall, the topography of the Site is relatively level with a gradual slope west down to Lake Washington (Figure 3). Site topography has been modified over the past 90 years by filling and grading activities. Site elevations are based on the North American Vertical Datum 1988 Wetland and OrdinaryIhh WaterMark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Terminals 3 060059-01 Study Area Description (NAVD 88) and range from approximately 35 feet on the east side of the property to about 20 feet at the lake shore. The exposed Site soils are relatively fine-grained, which slows infiltration during rainy periods causing ponding in many areas. The Site has been heavily manipulated through the placement of fill, which is found across the entire Site. Fifi thickness ranges from 1 to 2 feet along the southern and eastern boundaries up to 6 and 10 feet in northern portions. Most commonly, the fill is a mix of silt, sand, and gravel with wood debris. Wood chips and bark from the log sorting operations are typical in the upper few feet. 'Where creosote and pitch-like material has been encountered, it generally occurred at depths greater than 2 feet below ground surface. The surface of the Site is currently covered by either wood debris or by a 0.25- to 1-foot- thick layer of rock and organic muck generated from imported gravel and wood debris mixed together by operation of log sorting equipment in wet areas. There is also a network of roads at the Site that were previously used for log sorting and storage, resulting in relatively compacted soil on much of the Site. Additionally, several stormwater features have been constructed on the Site that appear to have historically collected and conveyed much of the site's stormwater into Lake Washington. During the rainy season, most runoff flows into stormwater collection ponds on the west side of the Site or a drainage ditch along the southern property boundary (Figure 3). Stormwater also accumulates in low-lying areas. During field surveys it was apparent that these features still function by conveying and storing seasonal stormwater. Several features were excavated, constructed, or improved in 2006 to limit stormwater runoff into Lake Washington (Phoinix 2006). These areas have developed wetland characteristics supporting riparian tree species like willows (Salixsp.) and black cottonwoods (Pop ulus balsamifera). 2.2 Soils The NRCS Web Soil Survey (USDA 2009) identifies two soil series in the location of the study area: "Norma sandy loam (No)" and "Bellingham silt loam (Bh)." The Norma sandy loam series is mapped within the majority of the study area, and the Bellingham silt loam series is mapped along the northern portion. Figure 4 shows soil series in the study area. Wetland and OrdinaryThh Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Terminals 4 060059-01 Area Description Both soil series identified in the study area are described as having poorly drained soils that S formed in alluvium, under sedges, grass, conifers, and hardwoods. The Norma series are in basins on the glaciated uplands and in areas along the stream bottoms. The Bellingham series are nearly level and are mostly in depressions on the upland glacial till plain (USDA 1973). According to the Hydric Soil List for King County, Washington, both the Norma sandy loam and Befflngham series are classified as hydric soils (USDA 2009). Sample plot soil proliles are described in Section 3.2. A summary of soils data collected at each sample plot is presented in tables in Appendix C and in the field data forms in Appendix D. 2.3 Hydrology The study area is located in the Lake WashingtonlSammamish River Basin Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 8 (Ecology 2009a). Hydrologic characteristics in the study area are influenced by regional groundwater, direct precipitation, surface water runoff, and Lake Washington. The OHWM of Lake Washington was delineated as part of this investigation and is described in Section 4 of this report. 5 Sample plot hydrology is described in Section 3.2. A summary of hydrology data collected at each sample plot is presented in tables in Appendix C and in the field data forms in Appendix D. 2.4 Plant Communities and Habitat Types The USFWS Wetlands Mapper for JVWI Map Infonnation identifies palustrine scrub-shrub (PSS) habitat on the western border of the study area adjoining Lake Washington (USFWS 2009; Figure 5). Wetland vegetation community types identified during the delineation include palustrine and lacustrine emergent (PEM and LEM), palustrine and lacustrine scrub shrub (PSS and LSS), palustrine and lacustrine forested (PFO and LFO), and palustrine open water (POW) wetland systems. Vegetation within the study area includes tree, shrub, grass, and herbaceous species associated with upland, wetland, and riparian habitat associated with Lake Washington and the constructed stormwater features. Vegetative cover by community (forested, scrub/shrub, and herbaceous/disturbed) and trees more than 10 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) within 100 feet of the shoreline are shown on Figure 6. Wetland and Wetland and Ordinary Hih Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendali Tem,inais 5 060059-01 Study Area Description upland vegetation in the study area is described in Section 3.2. A summary of vegetation data collected in the study area and at each sample plot is presented in the tables in Appendix C and in the field data forms in Appendix D. The WDFW PHS database does not identify any priority habitats within the study area (WDFW 2009). Priority wetland habitat occurs approximately 0.25-mile south and east of the study area and Consists of scrub-shrub, forested, and emergent marsh wetlands along May Creek, its tributaries, and Lake Boren. Priority fish presence documented in May Creek includes coho salmon (Oncorhynchuskisutch), fall Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), resident cutthroat (Oncorhynchus clarki), sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka), and winter steelhead (Oncorhynchusmykiss). Priority fish presence within the study area includes species documented in Lake Washington, including coho salmon, fall Chinook, resident cutthroat, sockeye salmon, winter steelhead, and Dolly Varden/bull trout (Saivelthus confluentus). Wetland and Ordinary Bih Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 QuendaL! Tenninals 6 060059-01 Wetland Delineation 3 WETLAND DELINEATION 0 On April 23 and 30, May 6, and June 19 2009, Anchor QEA ecologists performed wetland delineations and a wetland ratings analysis of wetland habitats in the study area. Ten wetlands, Wetlands A and J, were found in the study area. Complete descriptions of Wetlands A through J are provided in the following sections. Wetland delineation results are shown on Figure 6— Wetland and OHWM Delineation Results. A summary of vegetation, soils, and hydrology data collected at each sampling plot is presented in the tables in Appendix C and in the field data forms in Appendix D. Site photographs are provided in Appendix F. 3.1 Wetland Delineation Methods This section describes the methodology used to perform the wetland delineation, including - the review of existing information and field investigation procedures. These methods are consistent with current federal and state agency requirements, as well as local jurisdiction - requirements, for performing wetland delineations and identifying protective wetland buffer widths. As specified by the RMC (City of Renton 2009), this wetland delineation was conducted according to the methods defined in the US. Army Corps ofEngineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Corps 2008), and Ecology's Washington State Wetland Identification and Delia eation Manual (Ecology 1997). Soil colors were classified by their numerical description, as identified on a Munsell Soil Color Chart (Munsell 1994). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps; Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (SMA; Ecology 2009b), the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA; Access Washington 2007), and the RMC all define wetlands 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. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas." S Wetland and Ordinary Hih Water Mark Delineation Repo.zD November2009 QuendaLl Terminals 7 06005901 Wetland Delineation S The method for delineating wetlands is based on the presence of three parameters: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. Hydrophytic vegetation is. "the macrophytic plant life that occurs in areas where the frequency and duration of inundation or soil saturation produce permanently or periodically saturated soils of sufficient duration to exert a controffing influence on the plant species present." Hydric soils are "formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part." Wetland hydrology "encompasses all hydrologic characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the surface for a sufficient duration during the growing season" (Ecology 1997). Data collection methods for each of these parameters are described below. A total of 21 data plots were sampled at the approximately 21.23-acre study area. Sample plots are identified numerically as wetland or upland plots (for example, SP1Wet, SP2Wet, SP3Up, etc). Vegetation, soils, and hydrology information were collected at each of the plots, recorded on field data sheets, and photographed. Locations of wetland delineation boundary flags and data plots are provided in Appendix A. A summary of sample plot data is S presented in Appendix C. The field data sheets are provided in Appendix D. Site photographs are provided in Appendix F. Wetland boundaries were determined based upon sample plot data and visual observations of each wetland. Wetland locations and boundaries were flagged and subsequently surveyed by a professional surveyor to establish and verify the location and size. 3.1.1 Vegetation Plant species occurring in each plot were recorded on field data sheets, one data sheet per plot (Appendix D). Percent cover was estimated in the plot for each plant species and dominant species were determined. At each plot, trees within a 30-foot radius, shrubs within a 15-foot radius, and emergents within a 3-foot radius from the center of the plot were identified and recorded on a data sheet. A plant indicator status, designated by the USFWS (Reed 1988 and 1993), was assigned to each species and a determination was made as to whether the vegetation in the plot was hydrophytic. To meet the hydrophytic parameter, more than 50 percent of the dominant species, with 20 percent or greater cover, must have an indicator of obligate wetland (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), or facultative (FAC or FAC+). Table 1 shows the wetland indicator status categories. Wetland and OrdinaryHiqh WaterMark Delineation Report - November2009 Quendail Termthals 8 060059-01 Wetland Delineation Table 1 Wetland Plant Indicator Definitions Indicator Status Description Obligate wetland (OBL) Plant species occur almost always in wetlands (estimated probability greater than 99 percent) under natural conditions. Facultative wetland Plant species usually occur in wetlands (estimated probability 67 (FACW) percent to 99 percent), but occasionally found in non-wetlands. Facultative (FAC) Plant species equally likely to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands (estimated probability 34 percent to 66 percent). Facultative upland Plant species usually occur in non-wetlands (estimated probability (FACU) 67 percent to 99 percent), but occasionally found in wetlands. Obligate upland (UPL) Plant species occur almost always in non-wetlands (estimated probability greater than 99 percent) under natural conditions. 3.1.2 Soils Soils were sampled in each plot and evaluated for hydric soil indicators. Soil pits were dug to a depth of 16 inches or greater, and all profiles were photographed. Hydric soil indicators include low soil matrix chroma, gleying, and redoximorphic features (such as mottles), and are formed predominantly by the accumulation or loss of iron, manganese, sulfur, or carbon compounds in a saturated and anaerobic environment. Mottles are spots of contrasting color occurring within the soil matrix (the predominant soil color). Gleyed soils are predominantly bluish, greenish, or grayish in color. For example, a depleted dark soil surface (F7), a matrix value of 3 or less, a chroma of 2 or less, and 20 percent or more redox depletions are positive indicators of hydric soils (Corps 2008). Due to the presence of known soil and groundwater contamination at the Site, soil pits were not excavated at many wetland sample plots located in the upland area. This includes the - constructed stormwater features located throughout the project site and most upland plot locations. 3.1.3 Hydrology Wetland hydrology was evaluated at each plot to determine whether it "encompasses all hydrologic characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to Wetland and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Repon November2009 Quendafi Tenninals 9 060059-01 Wetland Delineation the surface for a sufficient duration during the growing season" (Ecology 1997). The mesic growing season in western Washington is generally March through October. Field observations of saturation and inundation, and other indicators of wetland hydrology, such as water-stained leaves and drainage patterns in wetlands, were recorded. 3.1.4 Other Data Sources Reviews of existing information were conducted to identify potential wetlands or site characteristics indicative of wetlands in the study area. The sources of information reviewed to support field observations are identified in Section 1.1. 3.1.5 Wetland Classifications Wetland community types are discussed below according to the USFWS classification developed by Cowardin, et al. (1979). This system, published in 1979 by a team of USFWS scientists led by L.M. Cowardin, bases the classification of wetlands on their physical characteristics, such as the general type of vegetation in the wetland (trees, shrubs, grass, etc.) and prevalence and location of water in the wetland. The Cowardin classification system provides a classification for every known wetland type that occurs throughout the United States, and, under this system, a wetland can be classified as having one or more wetland classification types. The community types found during this investigation were: Palustrine and Lacustrine forested (PFO and LFO) - These wetlands have at least 30 percent cover of woody vegetation that is more than 20 feet high. Palustrine and Lacustrine scrub-shrub (PSS and LSS) - These wetlands have at least 30 percent cover of woody vegetation that is less than 20 feet high. Palustrine and Lacustrine emergent (PEM and LEM) - These wetlands have erect, rooted, herbaceous vegetation present for most of the growing season in most years. Palustrine open water (POW) - These wetlands are characterized by open water, such as ponds. 3.1.6 State Wetland Ratings System At the state level, wetlands are categorized by applying the most current version of the rating system developed by Ecology: Washington State Wetlands Rating System - Western Washington: Revised (Ecology 2004), and Washington State Wetland Rating Form - Wetland and Ordinary High WaterMark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Termirials 10 060059-01 Wetland Delineation Western Washington, version 2 (Ecology 2006). Ecology developed this system to differentiate wetlands based on their sensitivity to disturbance, their significance in the watershed, their rarity, the ability to replace them, and the beneficial functions they provide to society. To determine an accurate assessment of a wetland's rating and functional values, function scores were calculated based on entire wetland systems, not just the delineated portion of wetlands within the study area. The Ecology rating system requires the user to collect specific information about the wetland in a step-by-step process. As part of the rating system, the hydrogeomorphic classification of the wetland was determined and three major functions were analyzed: flood and erosion control, water quality improvement, and wildlife habitat. Each hydrogeomorphic wetland class has specific rating criteria for water quality and hydrologic functions. Habitat functions rating criteria were the same for each of the hydrogeomorphic wetland classes. Ratings were based on a point system where points are given if a wetland meets specific criteria related to the wetland's potential and opportunity to provide certain benefits. If a wetland provides the opportunity to improve water quality or hydrologic functions, a multiplier of two was applied to the points for the wetland's potential functions. If a wetland does not provide the opportunity to improve water quality or hydrologic functions, a multiplier of one was applied. Per Ecology's rating system, wetlands were categorized according to the following criteria and on points given: Category I wetlands (70 to 100 points) represent a unique or rare wetland type, or are more sensitive to disturbance, or are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime. Category II wetlands (51 to 69 points) are difficult, though not impossible, to replace, and provide high levels of some functions. Category III (30 to 50 points) wetlands have a moderate level of function. They have been disturbed in some ways, and are often less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands. Category IV wetlands (0 to 29 points) have the lowest levels of functions and are often heavily disturbed. Wetland and Ordinary Hi'h Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendail Terminals 11 060059-01 Wetland Delineation 41 3.1.7 City of Renton Wetland Rating System and Buffer Requirements Wetlands in the study area were also rated according to the City of Renton Critical Area Regulations that establish local regulatory requirements for wetlands and their associated buffers (City of Renton 2009). Wetlands in the study area were assigned a local rating category based on the applicable City and King County (County) critical areas regulations and the associated regulatory wetland buffer widths. Section 3.3.3 provides wetland information contained in the RMC (City of Renton 2009). The full text of the city's critical areas regulations was consulted during this analysis. 3.1.7.1 Wetland Rating System and Buffer Requirements Category 1 wetlands meet any of the following criteria: Contain species listed by federal or state government as endangered or threatened, or the presence of essential habitat for those species Have 40 to 60 percent permanent open water (in dispersed patches or otherwise) with two or more vegetation classes Are equal to or greater than 10 acres in size and have three or more vegetation classes, one of which is open water Contain plant associations of infrequent occurrence, or at the geographical limits of their occurrence Category 2 wetlands meet any of the following criteria: Are wetlands that are not Category 1 or 3 wetlands Have heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees, but are not Category 1 wetlands Are wetlands of any size located at the headwaters of a watercourse, i.e., a wetland with a perennial or seasonal outflow channel, but with no defined influent channel, but are not Category 1 wetlands Have minimum existing evidence of human related physical alteration such as diking, ditching, or channelization Category 3 wetlands meet any of the following criteria: Are severely disturbed wetlands; severely disturbed wetlands are wetlands that meet Wetland and Ordinary Ihqh WaterMark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Tenninals 12 060059-01 Wetland Delineation the following criteria: 0 - Are characterized by hydrologic isolation, human-related hydrologic alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization, and/or outlet modification - Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or compaction of soil - May have altered vegetation Are newly emerging wetlands; newly emerging wetlands are wetlands occurring on top of fill materials, and characterized by emergent vegetation, low plant species richness, and used minimally by wildlife. Include all other wetlands not classified as Category 1 or 2, such as smaller, high quality wetlands. According to the RMC, Category 3 wetlands less than 2,200 sf in area are exempt from the regulations if they meet the following exemption criteria[4-3-050 C5(f)]: Standing water is not present in sufficient amounts, i.e., approximately 12 inches to 18 inches in depth from approximately December through May, to support breeding amphibians Species listed by Federal or State government as endangered or threatened, or the presence of essential habitat for those species, are not present Some form of mitigation is provided for hydrologic and water quality functions; for example, stormwater treatment or landscaping or other mitigation A wetland assessment is prepared by a qualified professional demonstrating the criteria of the exemption are met According to the RMC Title 4, Chapter 3, Section 5, wetland buffers are measured from the wetland edge as delineated in the field and are sized depending on the wetland category. Building or activity setback from a critical area or buffer may be required to ensure adequate protection of the critical area/buffer during construction and ongoing maintenance of the activity. Section 5 also states that alterations to wetlands shall be mitigated through creation, restoration, and/or enhancement. Mitigation actions must re-create as nearly as possible the wetland being replaced, and result in no net loss of wetland acreage and/or function. Table 2 provides a summary of the City's wetland buffer requirements. Wetland and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendail Tetminak 13 060059-01 S S Wetland Delineation Table 2 City of Renton Wetland Regulations Wetland Classification Buffer Requirement Category 1 100 feet Category 2 50 feet Category 3 25 feet 3.1.8 Wetland Functions Assessment The functional values of wetlands were rated according to Washington State Wetland Rating System - Western Washington: Revised (Ecology 2004) and Wetland Rating Form - Western Washington, Version 2(Ecology 2006). Using Ecology's system, wetlands were rated based on a point system where points are awarded to three functional value categories: water quality, hydrologic, and wildlife habitat. Detailed scoring, based on Ecology wetland rating forms, is provided in Appendix E. 3.2 Wetland Delineation Results Ten wetlands, Wetlands A though J, were found in the study area. A complete description of each wetland is provided in the following sections. Wetland delineation results are shown on Figure 5 and for each individual wetland in Appendix A. A summary of vegetation, soils, and hydrology data collected at each sample plot is presented in the tables in Appendix C and in the field data forms in Appendix D. 3.2.1 Wetland A Wetland A is a 0.08-acre (3,433-sf) lake-fringe and slope wetland that contains LFO, LSS, and LEM habitat (Figure 7; Appendix A). The entire boundary of Wetland A was delineated within the study area. Wetland A is located in the southwest corner of the study area and is associated with Lake Washington (Photographs 1 and 2 in Appendix F). A compacted dirt access road abuts the eastern edge. Wetland A vegetation is dominated primarily by young (less than 10 inches dbh) red alder (A/n us rubra) , red-osier dogwood ( Corn us sericea), and black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata) (Photograph 2 in Appendix F). The dominant buffer vegetation of Wetland A is Wetland and Ordinazy Hih Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Terminals 14 060059-01 Wetland Delineation also young red alder with some Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis) and dense Himalayan is blackberry (Rubus aniue.niacus) where the vegetated buffer transitions into a compacted soil road. Much (75 percent) of the buffer is disturbed compacted soils with sparse native and non-native invasive plants. The northwest perimeter of Wetland A is Lake Washington with extensive open and deep water habitats. Wildlife use of the wetland and its buffer was evident through several physical indicators such as woodpecker cavities, forage snags, beaver forage marks, and mammal tunnels in the dense vegetation. There was evidence of turtle and waterfowl use on the partially submerged woody debris at the edge of the wetland bordering the lake. Wildlife observed in the wetland and its buffer includes black-capped chickadee (Poedile atricapiulus), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), Bushtit (PsaItiparus min.iznus), and Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna). The transition from an open water habitat to wetland to maintained upland offers both soft and hard edges between habitats. Movement of wildlife from the wetland habitat to the lake or from the lake to the wetland appears healthy and may offer migration, forage, shelter, and breeding opportunities for specific species of amphibians, waterfowl, and mammals. The transition from the upland buffer habitats to the wetland habitat offers a more abrupt transition to wildlife. Hard edges tend to benefit some species while creating a less beneficial habitat for others. Migration, forage, shelter, and breeding near or in these areas may be limited for many species. Soils in the wetland plot included very dark gray (10YR 3/1) to very dark grayish-brown (10YR 3/2) clay loam to 18 inches deep. Below about 18 inches, very dark gray (2.5Y 3/1) clay loam with dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/4) mottles was observed in the matrix. Soils in the upland plot were very dark gray (10YR 3/1) to 18+ inches with brown (10YR 4/3) mottles observed around 8+ inches. Soil saturation was at the surface in the majority of Wetland A and the upland plot, with free-standing water in the sample piots within about 10 inches of the surface. Two sample plots were established as part of Wetland A: SP1 Wet and SP1Up (Appendices A and B). SP1Wet contained indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, wetland hydrology, and hydric soils. The upland plot, SP1Up, had indicators of wetland hydrology and hydric soils, Wetland and OrdinaryHih WaterMark Delineation Report No vein ber 2009 Quenda]] Terminals 15 060059-01 Wetland Delineation but lacked hydrophytic vegetation. Twenty flags were used to identify the Wetland A boundary (Appendix A). 3.2.2 Wetland B Wetland B is an approximately 0.14-acre (6,051-sf) depressional wetland and is one of the largest constructed stormwater features in the study area displaying wetland characteristics (Figure 7; Appendix A). Wetland B was excavated in the 1970s as a retention pond to control tar from flowing into the lake (King County Metro 1972). The wetland is triangle-shaped and representative of a settling pond with standing water observed during the survey. The eastern boundary of Wetland B narrows to a ditch-like feature that possibly used to convey water west from Wetland G during large rain events through either a culvert or a shallow ditch (now abandoned). Wetland B is positioned in the landscape approximately 6 to 8 feet below Wetland C. Wetland B contains PSS and POW habitats (Photograph 2 in Appendix F). As part of an effort to prevent silt and wood debris from entering Lake Washington in 2006, an outfall was excavated along the north side of Wetland B to create a stable outlet for stormwater into Lake Washington. Wetland vegetation is dominated by Japanese knotweed (Polygornun cuspidatum), Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra) , soft rush (Juncus effusus), and purple-leaved willowherb (Epiobiwn ciliaturn). Dominant buffer vegetation of Wetland B includes monotypic stands of Japanese knotweed and Himalayan blackberry. Most (90 percent) of the buffer apparently was maintained until recently. These maintained areas have now become fully vegetated, with Japanese knotweed dominating the western buffer and Himalayan blackberry dominating the eastern buffer. The remaining buffer (10 percent) on the north and south ends of the wetland has a few large native trees (greater than 16 inches dbh), but the understory is a shrub layer dominated by non-native invasive plants. The western buffer extends to Lake Washington with extensive open and deep water habitats. Wildlife use of Wetland B and its buffer was not very evident, but there were a few physical indicators such as a beaver slide to the west from the wetland toward the lake, and other small mammal tunnels in the dense vegetation. There was evidence of turtle use on the partially submerged woody debris within the standing water of the wetland. No aquatic organisms were seen in the water other than the purple-leaved wiflowherb. Wildlife observed in the wetland and its buffer includes spotted towhee (Pipilo maculatus), song Wedarid and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Repozt November2009 Quendall Tenizinals 16 060059-01 Wetland Ddineation sparrow, and American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis). The open water habitat within the wetland quickly transitions to a scrub-shrub buffer habitat. Movement of wildlife from the wetland habitat to the buffer or from the buffer to the wetland appears to offer migration, forage, shelter, and breeding opportunities for specific species of amphibians, waterfowl, and mammals. Similarly, the transition from the wetland to the buffer to the lake offers a greater migration route with the dense shrub cover between the two open water habitats. Wetland B (denoted as Quendall Pond in the CERCLA RI/FS documents) is known to contain relatively high concentrations of contaminants in soil and groundwater, which limit the quality, use, and function of these habitats and corridors. Because contaminants are known to be in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in Wetland B. Wetland B is the largest of the constructed stormwater features in the study area. As described above, during large rain events, Wetland G may convey stormwater through a relic connection or by surface flow. The depth of water in Wetland B was not discernable because of opaque water coloration and the presence of contamination preventing further investigation; however, the volume and depth did appear to exceed several feet. Two sample plots were established as part of Wetland B: SP1Wet and SP1Up (Appendices A, C, and D). The wetland plot contained indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology. The upland plot lacked indicators of wetland hydrology and hydrophytic vegetation. Eleven flags were used to identify the Wetland B boundary (Appendix A). 3.2.3 Wetland C Wetland C is an approximately 0.03-acre (1,200 sf) depressional wetland and is another constructed stormwater feature in the study area displaying wetland characteristics (Figure 7; Appendix A). The wetland is located in the center of the parcel with the western boundary approximately 38 feet from Lake Washington. Like Wetland B, the wetland is representative of a stormwater pond with standing water observed during the survey. Wetland C is positioned in the landscape approximately 6 to 8 feet above Wetland B. The entirety of Wetland C was constructed in 2006 as part of an effort to prevent silt and wood debris from entering Lake Washington (Phoinix 2006). An earthen berm was constructed along the 0 Wetland and OrdinaryHigh WaterMark Delineation Repoit November2009 QuendaJl Terminals 17 060059-01 Wetland Delineation southwest edge of Wetlands B and C, and check dams were installed to control turbid water and floating debris. Wetland C likely flows directly into Wetland B during high flow events via sheetfiow (Figure 7; Photograph 3 in Appendix F). Wetland C was constructed in an upland area that did not contain wetland indicators, based on the fact that Wetland C was not identified during a wetland de]ineation conducted by David Evans and Associates in 1997 (Appendix G). Wetland C contains PFO, PSS, PEM, and POW habitats. At the time of the survey, Pacific willow and black cottonwood saplings were the only vegetation observed in Wetland B and distributed along the wetland's edge. The saplings were all 3 to 5 feet in height with a dbh of approximately 1 to 3 inches. Because of the recent construction and maintenance of this feature, the wetland habitat and buffer habitat are heavily degraded and offer little or no opportunity for wildlife use. Because contaminants are known to be in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in Wetland C. The wetland is oval-shaped and, as described above, resembles a small settling pond. The wetland primarily receives stormwater runoff from the study area and direct precipitation. During the survey, based only on visual approximations, the depth of standing water was about 10 to 12 inches in the deepest parts. Two sample plots were established as part of Wetland C: SP1 Wet and SP1Up (Appendices A, C, and D). The wetland plot contained indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology. The upland plot lacked indicators of wetland hydrology and hydrophytic vegetation. Soil pits were not excavated. Ten flags were used to identify the Wetland C boundary (Appendix A). 3.2.4 WetlandD Wetland D is a 0.38-acre (16,686-sf) lake-fringe and slope wetland that contains LFO, LSS, and LEM habitats (Figure 7; Appendix A). Wetland D is associated with Lake Washington (Photograph 4 in Appendix F) and extends approximately 170 feet into the study area. Wetland D is the only wetland in the study area included in the USFWS Wetlands Mapper Wetland and Ordi.naiy High Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Tenninals 18 060059-01 Wetland Delineation for NWJ Map Information (Figure 5), which identifies this as PSS habitat. Wetland vegetation is dominated by large black cottonwood, Pacific willow, red alder, and red-osier dogwood. The dominant buffer vegetation includes black cottonwood and Himalayan blackberry and is the most diverse in vegetative strata layers (canopy, sub-canopy, scrub- shrub, and herbaceous) and the most intact of all the project site wetland buffers. Approximately 40 percent of the wetland buffer is Lake Washington to the northwest. Wildlife use of Wetland D is very similar to but more diverse than Wetland A. Several physical wildlife indicators within the wetland and the buffer were observed: woodpecker cavities, stick nests, basket nests, mole mounds, soil burrows, forage snags, beaver forage marks, matted vegetation, and mammal tunnels in the dense vegetation. There was also evidence of turtle and waterfowl use on partially submerged woody debris and vegetative mats at the edge of the lake and within the wetland. Wildlife observed in the wetland and its buffer includes Black-capped chickadee, song sparrow, bushtit, spotted towhee, downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens) , brown creeper (Certhia americana), American robin (Turdusnn'ratrious), and northwest crow (Corvus caurinus). The transition from the open water habitat to the wetland to an intact upland buffer offers soft edges between all habitats. Movement of wildlife from the buffer to the wetland to the lake, or back, may offer healthy migration, forage, shelter, and breeding opportunities for specific species of amphibians, waterfowl, and mammals. This wetland, along with its buffer, appears to offer the best habitat opportunity for the most species due to its size, vegetative structure, hydrology regimes, and position in the landscape. Three soil pits were excavated in Wetland D (Appendix A); one near the lake's edge (SF1 Wet), one in the upland (SP1Up), and one in the uppermost extent of the wetland (SF2 Wet). The soils in SF1 Wet included very dark grayish-brown (1OYR 3/2) sandy loam to 6 inches deep and then gray (10YR 5/1) silt loam with dark yellowish brown (1OYR 4/6) mottles through 18+ inches. Soils in SP2Wet included black (10YR 2/1) loamy sand through 10 inches and then dark gray (2.5Y 4/1) loamy sand through 18+ inches. At approximately 10 to 12 inches, a narrow band of dark gray (2.5YR 4/1) silt loam with dark yellowish-brown (10YR 4/6) mottles was observed with interspersed coarse angular rock. SP1Up included grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) loamy clay through 18+ inches. S S Wetland and Ordinary Hih WaterMark Delineation Report November2009 Quendali Tenninafr 19 060059-01 Wetland Delineation Soil saturation was observed at the surface in the majority of Wetland D with standing water near the lake's edge. The primary hydrologic indicator in the upper extent of Wetland D included sparsely vegetated concave surface and water-stained leaves. In the upland plot, saturation was observed at the surface. Three sample plots were established as part of Wetland D: SP1 Wet, SP2 Wet, and SP1Up (Appendices A, D, and D). SPlWet and SP2Wet contained indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, wetland hydrology, and hydric soils. The upland plot, SP1Up, had indicators of wetland hydrology and hydric soils, but lacked hydrophytic vegetation. Twenty-two flags were used to identify the Wetland D boundary (Appendix A). 3.2.5 Wetland E Wetland E is a 0.11-acre (4,556- sf) depressional wetland that contains PFO and PSS habitat located in the southwest corner of the study area (Figure 7; Appendix A). Like Wetlands B, C, and G, Wetland E is a constructed stormwater feature in the study area, but it contains a more developed and mature forested component than the others (Photographs 1 and 2 in Appendix F). Wetland vegetation is dominated by young black cottonwood, Pacific willow, red alder, and red-osier dogwood. Dominant buffer vegetation includes Japanese knotweed and Himalayan blackberry, and a few mature black cottonwoods and young red alders (Photograph 5 in Appendix F). The entire wetland buffer apparently was maintained as transportation routes (roads) or staging areas (log storage) up until the facility closed in the past few years. These areas, other than the roads, have now become overgrown with upland invasive species, such as Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius) and Himalayan blackberry. The dirt roads remain and are heavily compacted, supporting very little vegetation. Wildlife use of Wetland E and its buffer was not evident other than a few stick and leaf nests. There were some physical indicators of beaver foraging, but the teeth marks were very old and not very common. There was no evidence of aquatic organisms within the standing water of the wetland other than plants. Wildlife observed in the wetland and its buffer includes spotted towhee, Anna's hummingbird, northwest crow, American robin, song sparrow, and Wilson's snipe (Gallinago delicata). The open water habitat within the wetland quickly transitions to a scrub-shrub, young forest buffer habitat. This transition of an open water habitat to a wetland to a disturbed upland offers both soft and hard edges between Wetland and Ordinary IIIgh Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Tenniiials 20 060059-01 Wetland Delineation habitats. Movement of wildlife from the wetland habitat to the upland or from the upland to the wetland appears healthy and may offer migration, forage, shelter, and breeding opportunities for some species of amphibians, waterfowl, and mammals. The transition from the disturbed maintained upland habitats to the wetland habitat offers a more abrupt transition to wildlife. Hard edges tend to benefit some species while creating a less beneficial habitat for others. Migration, forage, shelter, and breeding near or in these areas may be limited for many species. Contaminated soil and sediments in this wetland may limit the quality, use, and function of these habitats and corridors. Because of the presence of contamination in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in Wetland E. The wetland determination for each plot was based on hydrology and vegetation data. The majority of Wetland E had standing water at the surface with some areas appearing in excess of 2-feet deep. A staff gauge was installed in 1995 to monitor water levels in 1995 and 1996 (Aspect 2009). At the time of the survey, the water level was around 0 foot; however, there were indications that the high water line on the gauge exceeded 3.5 feet. It is not known if this device was installed relative to any fixed position, but it does provide details on the storage capacity of the wetland. Wetland hydrology was not observed in the upland plot. Two sample plots were established as part of Wetland E: SP1Wet and SP1Up (Appendices A, C, and D). SP1Wet contained indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology. The upland plot lacked any indications of hydrophytic vegetation or wetland hydrology. Nineteen flags were used to identify the Wetland li boundary (Appendix A). 3.2.6 Wetland F Wetland F is a small 0.11-acre (546-sf) lake-fringe and slope wetland that contains LSS and LEM habitat (Figure 7; Appendix A). The entire boundary of Wetland F was delineated within the study area. Wetland F is associated with Lake Washington (Photographs 1 and 2 in Appendix F) and is located in the center of the study area, immediately west of Wetland C. Wetland vegetation is dominated by red alder, Pacific willow, soft rush, and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arunclinacea). Dominant buffer vegetation includes Japanese knotweed and Himalayan blackberry (Photograph 3 in Appendix F). is Wet/and and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Terzzzina/s 21 060059-01 Wetland Delineation is Although Wetland F is a very small wetland, wildlife use in the wetland and buffer was evident through several physical indicators such as shell and crustacean middens, forage snags, waterfowl droppings, beaver forage marks, and mammal tunnels in the dense vegetation. There was also evidence of recent turtle use (wet log) of a partially submerged log at the edge of the wetland bordering the lake. No wildlife was observed in the wetland or its buffer during field investigations. Half of the wetland perimeter is along Lake Washington, offering a transition from an open water habitat to a wetland to a vegetated upland. Movement of wildlife from the upland habitat to the wetland to the lake appears unobstructed and may offer migration, forage, shelter, and breeding opportunities for specific species of amphibians, waterfowl, and mammals. The actual wetland is so small that habitat function associated with the wetland may be reduced as an area for migration, forage, shelter, and breeding. Soils in the wetland plot included dark grayish-brown (2.5Y 4/2) sand with yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) mottles to 6 inches deep (Appendix D). Below about 6 inches, dark gray (2.5Y 4/1) sand with dark yellowish-brown (10YR 4/6) mottles was observed in the matrix. Soil pits in the upland plot were not excavated in Wetland F because of the presence of contamination. Wetland hydrology was evident with free-standing water in the sample plot within about 10 inches of the surface. Wetland hydrology was not observed in the upland plot. Two sample plots were established as part of Wetland F: SP1 Wet and SP1Up (Appendices A, C, and D). SP1Wet contained indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, wetland hydrology, and hydric soils. The upland plot lacked hydrophytic vegetation and any indication of wetland hydrology. Soils were not examined in the upland plot. Four flags were used to identify the Wetland F boundary (Appendix A). 3.2.7 Wetland G Wetland G is a small, approximately 0.05-acre (2,198-sf) depressional wetland (Figure 7; Appendix A). It is thought that Wetland G was excavated as part of construction of berms to direct tar on the site into Wetland B (Aspect 2009). The wetland is narrow and ditch-like Wetland and Ordinary Thqh Water Mark Delineation Repo.zr November2009 Quendall Terminals 22 060059-01 Wetland Delineation and at one time conveyed stormwater to Wetland B, but has since been separated by a compacted dirt road separating the two (no culverts were found) (Figure 7). During prolonged rain events, Wetland G likely fills to capacity and sheetfiows into Wetland B. Wetland G is positioned in the landscape approximately 2 to 4 feet below the rest of the study area. Wetland G contains PSS and PFO habitat. Wetland vegetation is dominated by black cottonwood, Pacific willow, and Himalayan blackberry, with an isolated patch of emergent vegetation. Dominant wetland buffer vegetation includes black cottonwood, black twinberry, and Himalayan blackberry (Figure 4; Photographs 7 and 8 in Appendix F). Based on aerial photography, it appears that more than half of the current areas adjacent to Wetland G are or have been maintained as transportation routes (roads) or staging areas (log storage). Appendix H provides a historic aerial photo from 1990 that shows log storage and roads present in the current location of Wetland G. These areas, aside from one existing road to the west, have now become overgrown with upland invasive plants such as Scot's broom, Japanese knotweed, and Himalayan blackberry. Physical evidence of wildlife use in Wetland G was limited possibly due to the wetland's long and narrow shape. Wildlife observed in the wetland and its buffer includes northwest crow, song sparrow, and black-capped chickadee. The narrow scrub-shrub habitat and small patches of young forest buffer habitat offer wildlife a possible corridor of cover/shelter along or through the wetland. This wetland and buffer habitat extends further east than any other wetland at the project site and overlaps with the buffer from Wetland B, creating a corridor to Lake Washington. Due to the narrow shape of the wetland, migration, forage, shelter, and breeding near or in these areas may be limited for many species. Contaminated soil and sediments in this wetland may limit the quality, use, and function of these habitats and corridors. Because of the presence of contamination in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in Wetland G. The wetland determination for each plot was based on hydrology and vegetation data. Wetland G is a narrow, ditch-like wetland that primarily receives stormwater runoff from the study area and direct precipitation. Standing water was present in much of the wetland. The upland plot did not display any wetland hydrology indicators. Wetland and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Terminals 23 060059-01 Wetland Delineation Two sample plots were established as part of Wetland G: SP1 Wet and SP1Up (Appendices A, C, and D). SP1Wet contained indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology. The upland plot contained indicators of hydrophytic vegetation but lacked wetland hydrology. Eighteen flags were used to identify the Wetland G boundary (Appendix A). 3.2.8 Wetland H Wetland H is an approximately 0.01-acre (511-sf) slope and depressional wetland located on the southern edge of the study area along the property boundary (Figure 7; Appendix A). Like many of the other features described in this report, Wetland H was constructed as a stormwater feature to control stormwater. Work was conducted in January 2006 to control silt and wood debris from flowing into Lake Washington. Wetland H was excavated in January 2006 to clean out the ditch along the southern portion of the site. Four rock check dams were placed in the cleared ditch at approximately 25-foot intervals to allow for sediment and wood debris control. Although Wetland H contains wetland indicators, it is located in an area that was excavated to function as stormwater conveyance off the site and into Lake Washington. Wetland H is positioned in the landscape approximately 2 to 4 feet below the rest of the study area and contains PFO, PSS, and PEM habitats (Figure 2; Photographs 9 and 10 in Appendix F). It is adjacent to a 15-foot-tall engineered concrete block wall, which is the boundary line between the project site and the newly developed parcel to the south. The low area extends along the concrete block wall and develops more ditch-like characteristics near Wetland H and Lake Washington. Wetland vegetation is dominated by mature black cottonwood, red alder, Pacific wifiow, and Himalayan blackberry. Dominant wetland buffer vegetation includes reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry. Effectively, the wetland only has two-thirds of its buffer. Wildlife use of Wetland H and its buffer may be increased by the presence of an adjacent concrete wall south of the wetland. Species traveling south or north may follow the wall until they reach the shoreline, effectively routing them through Wetland H or its buffer. Several physical indicators of wildlife presence within the wetland and the buffer were observed: woodpecker cavities, stick nests, forage snags, and beaver forage marks. Wildlife observed in the wetland and its buffer includes black-capped chickadee, song sparrow, Wet/arid and Ordinary High WaterMark Delineation Report November2009 QuendailTerininals 24 060059-01 Wetland Delineation spotted towhee, Downy woodpecker, and northwest crow. The entire area from the open water habitat of Lake Washington to the west, through the wetland, to the upland buffer is fully vegetated and may provide good shelter as well as a migration path for wildlife. Movement of wildlife from the buffer to the wetland to the lake, or back, may offer healthy migration, forage, shelter, and breeding opportunities for specific species of amphibians, waterfowl, and mammals. A single soil pit in the wetland was excavated and photographed in Wetland H; however, because of the presence of contamination in the study area, the soils were not handled and no information was recorded. The wetland determination for each plot was based on hydrology and vegetation data. Wetland H is a narrow ditch-like wetland that primarily receives stormwater runoff from the study area and direct precipitation. Adjacent to the wetland is another, smaller constructed stormwater feature that also collects stormwater from portions of the site. This feature sits at a higher elevation than Wetland H and conveys stormwater from an adjacent ditch through a culvert to the eastern extent of the wetland. Flowing water was present during the survey. The upland plot did not display indications of wetland hydrology. Two sample piots were established as part of Wetland H: SP1 Wet and SP1Up (Appendices A, C, and D). SP1Wet contained indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology. The upland sample plot lacked indicators of wetland vegetation and hydrology. 3.2.9 Wetland I Wetland I is an approximately 0.05-acre (2,358-sf) depressional wetland located on the small portion of the property across Lake Washington Boulevard (Figure 7; Appendix A). Like many of the other features described in this report, Wetland I is a result of land surface manipulation and road construction. Wetland I is positioned in the landscape between 1-405 and Lake Washington Boulevard where it receives stormwater runoff from adjacent impervious surfaces. The wetland contains PSS and PEM habitats (Figure 2; Photograph 15 in Appendix F) and all habitats are dominated by Japanese knotweed. Wetland vegetation is either stunted or dying adjacent to or under the thick canopy of Japanese knotweed. Dominant wetland buffer vegetation includes Himalayan blackbeny and Pacific willow. Wetland and Ordinary Thh WaterMark Delineation Report November2009 Quendail TeiminaIs 25 060059-01 Wetland Delineation 41 Physical evidence of wildlife use in Wetland I was limited possibly because of its location between 1-405 and Lake Washington Boulevard or because there is a Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) right-of-way fence bordering the wetland to the east. Also, the wetland is dominated by Japanese knotweed, which has created a monoculture habitat with no herbaceous layer and limited species diversity. Due to the narrow shape of the wetland, the presence of the fence and roads, and the abundance of Japanese knotweed, migration, forage, shelter, and breeding near or in these areas may be limited for many species. Soils in the wetland plot included very dark brown loam (10YR 3/1) in the top 6 inches (Appendix D). Between 6 and 12 inches, a dark gray (10YR 3/2) loam with brownish-red (2.5YR 4/6) mottles was observed in the matrix. Below 12 inches was a dark red (5YR 4/2) sandy loam matrix with two distinct mottles (10YR 6/9 and 2.5y 4/2). Soil pits in the upland plot were dark brown silty loam (10YR 3/3) to 8 inches. From 8 to 18 inches, the same matrix (1OYR 3/3) was present with strong brown (7.5YR 5/8) mottles. Wetland I is a narrow ditch-like wetland that primarily receives stormwater runoff from the adjacent roads and direct precipitation. The western edge of the wetland appears to undergo seasonal mowing or cutting to maintain the roadway and clearance for overhead powerlines. A WSDOT fence bisects the southeastern edge of the wetland so the full extent of the wetland is unknown, but it appears that the only a small portion remained imdelineated. Two sample plots were established as part of Wetland I: SP1 Wet and SP1Up (Appendices A, C, and D). The wetland plot contained indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, soils, and hydrology. The upland sample plot lacked indicators of wetland vegetation, soils, and hydrology. 3.2.10 Wet!andf The full size of Wetland J is undetermined but may be approximately 0.05 acre (Figure 7; Appendix A). The wetland is a slope and depressional wetland located on the eastern edge of the portion of the study area on the east side of Lake Washington Boulevard. Only a small portion of the wetland extends onto the parcel, with the majority of the wetland extending Wet/arid and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Repozt November2009 Quendal] Tennjna/s 26 060059-01 Wetland Delineation off the parcel into the WSDOT 1-405 right-of-way. Like many of the other features described in this report, Wetland J was partially constructed and manipulated to convey stormwater from a WSDOT stormwater pond to another waterbody (Gypsy Creek). Wetland J is positioned in the landscape running north to south along the parcel boundary. The wetland contains PSS and PEM habitats (Figure 2; Photograph 14 in Appendix F). Wetland vegetation is dominated by red alder, reed canarygrass, and Himalayan blackberry. Dominant wetland buffer vegetation includes Himalayan blackberry. Physical evidence of wildlife use in Wetland J was limited possibly because its proximity to 1-405, Lake Washington Boulevard, and a WSDOT right-of-way fence bordering the wetland on most of its eastern boundary. Like Wetland I, Wetland J is dominated by two invasive plant species, Himalayan blackberry and reed canarygrass, which have created a monoculture habitat with no native herbaceous layer and no possibffity for tree saplings to grow. Because of the proximity of the fence and roads, as well as dense invasive plants, migration, forage, shelter, and breeding near or in these areas may be limited. Soils in the wetland plot have a dense 3-inch-thick layer of root mat from reed canarygrass. Below the root mat to 18 inches is a very dark silty loam (10YR 3/1). The upland soil plot was similarly consistent with a dark brownish-red (10YR 4/2) silty loam. Wetland J has both slope and depressional characteristics throughout. The wetland primarily receives stormwater runoff from the WSDOT right-of-way. Approximately 50 feet to the north of the delineated portion of the wetland is Gypsy Creek. Because of recent stream improvements and culverts on Gypsy Creek, Wetland J does not appear to receive any flood waters from Gypsy Creek. Two sample plots were established as part of Wetland J: SP1Wet and SP1Up (Appendices A, C, and D). The wetland plot contained indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology. The upland sample plot lacked indicators of wetland vegetation and hydrology. S Wetland and Ordinary Hih Water Mark Delineation Repoit November2009 Quendall Tenninais 27 060059-01 S S Wetland Delineation 3.3 Regulatory Framework Guidance from USFWS, Ecology, and the City was used to determine the wetland classifications. Information and excerpts from the specific guidance language are provided below. 3.3.1 USFWS Classification The wetlands identified in the study area have been classified using the system developed by Cowardin et al. (1979) for use in the NWI. Table 3 lists the USFWS classifications for the wetlands and their connections to surface waters. Table 3 USFWS Wetland Classifications and Connections to Surface Water Wetland USFWS Classification Connection to Surface Water A LFO, LSS, & LEM Associated with Lake Washington B PSS, POW, PEM, and PFO Not associated to surface water C PSS & POW Not associated to surface water D LFO, LSS, & LEM Associated with Lake Washington E PSS & PFO Not associated to surface water F LSS & LEM Associated with Lake Washington G PSS & POW Not associated to surface water H PFO, PSS, & PEM Associated with Lake Washington PSS Not associated to surface water J PSS & PEM Flows to adjacent stream Notes: PFO - Palustrine forested LFO - Lacustrine forested PSS - Palustrine scrub-shrub LSS - Lacustrine scrub-shrub PEM - Palustrine emergent LEM - Lacustrine emergent POW - Palustrine open water 3.3.2 Ecology Rating, Classification, and Functions and Values Scores The wetlands identified in the study area have been rated using Ecology's Washington State Wetland Rating System - Western Washington: Revised (Ecology 2004) and Wetland Rating Form - Western Washington: Revised (Ecology 2006). As part of the rating process, an examination of the soil is required for depressional wetlands to determine if "2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic." Although soil plots were not collected in all Wetland and Ordinary Thgh Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Teiminals 28 060059-01 Wetland Delineation upland depressional wetlands (constructed stormwater features) due to the presence of contamination, observations from other soil plots throughout the site and soil series maps suggest no soils were clay or organic. Table 4 lists the wetland ratings and classifications. Water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functional values are shown in Table 5. A summary of the wetland rating scores and the Ecology Wetland Rating forms are included in Appendix E. Table 4 Summary of Wetland Classes and Rating Scores Using Ecology Wetlands Rating System Wetland Area (acres) Hydrogeomorphic Classification State Rating (Ecology) Wetland A 0.08 Slope/Lake Fringe Ill Wetland B 0.14 Depressional Ill Wetland C 0.03 Depressional IV Wetland D 0.38 Slope/Lake Fringe II Wetland E 0.11 Depressional Ill Wetland F 0.01 Slope/Lake Fringe Ill Wetland G 0.05 Depressional Ill Wetland H 0.01 Slope IV Wetland I 0.05 Depressional Ill Wetland J 0.05* Depressional/Slope Ill Note: *F u ll extent of Wetland J is undetermined due to right-of-way crossing. S fl Wet/and and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendali Teiwinals 29 060059-01 Wetland Delineation S Table 5 Summary of Functions and Values Wetland Rating Scores Water Quality Water Hydrologic Hydrologic Habitat Habitat Functions Quality Functions Functions Functions Functions Total Potential Opportunity Potential Opportunity Potential Opportunity Functions Wetland Score (Yes/No) Score (Yes/No) Score Score Score1 Total No=1 No1 Maximum 16 16 18 18 72 Score Yes=2 Yes=2 A 6 2 4 2 9 11 40 B 2 2 12 2 6 8 42 C 2 2 8 2 0 6 26 D 9 2 6 2 12 12 54 E 7 2 12 2 7 5 50 F 6 2 4 2 6 9 35 G 9 2 8 2 4 7 45 H 3 2 3 2 7 6 25 9 2 8 2 3 6 43 J 7 2 5 2 8 6 38 Note: 1 - Calculated as (Water Quality Functions Potential Score times Water Quality Opportunity Score) plus (Hydrologic Functions Potential Score times Hydrologic Functions Opportunity Score) plus Habitat Functions Potential Score plus Habitat Functions Opportunity Score Wetland and Ordinary uhgh Water Mark Ddineation Report November2009 Quendail Terminals 30 060059-01 Wetland Delineation 3.3.3 City of Renton Wetland Classification Guidance is Wetlands were also rated according to City wetland rating criteria in the RMC (City of Renton 2009). The City classifies wetlands into three categories (Category 1, Category 2, and Category 3) based on the City critical areas regulations. Appropriate wetland buffers have been identified according to the current RMC (City of Renton 2009). City ratings and buffer widths are provided in Table 6. - Table 6 City of Renton Wetland Ratings and Standard Buffer Distance Study Area Wetlands Size (acres) State Rating (Ecology) Local Rating (City of Renton) Buffer Width (feet) Wetland A 0.08 III 2 50 feet Wetland B 0.14 Ill 1 100 feet Wetland C 0.03 IV 3 25 feet Wetland D 0.38 II 2 50 feet Wetland E 0.11 III 1 100 feet Wetland F 0.01 III 2 50 feet Wetland G 0.05 Ill 3 25 feet' Wetland H 0.01 IV 3 25 feet Wetland I 0.05 III 3 25 feet Wetland J 0.052 III 3 25 feet Total 0.89 S. Notes: 1—Wetland G is exempt from City of Renton critical area requirements based on the criteria in RMC 4-3-050 C5(f), as discussed in Section 3.5. 2— Full extent of Wetland J is undetermined due to right-of-way crossing. 3.4 Wetland Functions and Values Summary In general, wetlands in the study area provide many functions including water quality improvements, floodwater storage, groundwater recharge, and wildlife habitat. The wetlands in the study area can be divided into two categories: wetlands that are constructed stormwater features and wetlands that are naturally occurring. The constructed stormwater features generally display a higher opportunity to provide hydrologic function than naturally occurring wetlands, given their storage capacities to control flow during large storm events. 5 Wet/and and Ordinary Fhgh Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Tenithiais 31 060059-01 Wetland Delineation 5 However, the constructed stormwater features also display generally low to moderate opportunity and potential to provide habitat value and opportunity to provide water quality value. The naturally occurring wetlands on the main parcel (Wetlands A, D, and F) are all slope and lake-fringe wetlands and provide moderate potential and opportunity to provide habitat function; however, given the nature of lake-fringe wetlands, they provide only low to moderate potential to provide water quality and hydrologic functions. The functional values of wetlands in the study area were rated according to the most current version of the Ecology Washington State Wetlands Rating System - Western Washington: Revised (Ecology 2004). Based on the rating scores, the overall functions of each of the three wetland rating categories of water quality, hydrologic, and wildlife habitat are rated as low (less than 34 percent of the maximum possible score), moderate (34 percent to 67 percent of the maximum possible score), or high (greater than 68 percent of the maximum possible score). Overall, the majority of wetlands in the study area have low to moderate water quality, hydrologic, and wildlife habitat function scores. Few of the wetlands have high hydrologic function scores and none of the wetlands have high water quality or habitat S function scores. Of the ten wetlands in the study area, six were identified as depressional wetlands, three were identified as lake fringe wetlands, and one was identified as a slope wetland. Ecology wetland rating forms are provided in Appendix E. A summary of the wetland classes and functions and values rating scores is provided in Table 5. Wetland acreage also affects function. No wetland in the study area is larger than 1 acre. Because large wetlands have more capacity for capturing stormwater flows, improving water quality, and providing a variety of habitats for wildlife, they are more likely to provide beneficial functions than smaller wetlands. Water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functional values for wetlands in the study area are described below. For each function category, the wetlands' opportunity to provide that function is described first and the wetlands' potential to provide that function is described thereafter. Wetland buffers are areas of land surrounding a wetland boundary that protect wetlands from the effects of adjacent land use. Buffers help wetlands function by filtering storm runoff from surrounding developments, trapping sediment, absorbing nutrients, attenuating S high flows, and providing wildlife habitat. Buffers also physically separate wetlands from developed areas in order to lessen noise, light, chemical pollution, and other associated Wetland and Ordinary Thqh WaterMark Delineation Report - - November2009 Quendall Terminals 32 060059-01 Wetland Delineation human-related disturbances. Most of the wetlands in the study area are adjacent to some disturbed habitat, roadway, or compacted dirt roads. With the exception of the three lake- fringe wetlands in the study area, wetland buffer habitat is generally of low quality and typically includes compacted dirt and roads, and is nearly devoid of vegetation. The buffers associated with each wetland, per local codes, are detailed in Table 6. 3.4.1 Water Quality Functions All of the wetlands in the study area provide opportunities to improve water quality, to varying degrees, primarily because their location in an urban environment allows the opportunity for water quality improvement. Three of the ten wetlands in the study area have a low potential (less than 34 percent of the maximum possible score) to improve water quality. This low score was observed in three of the five constructed stormwater features, which have characteristics of intermittent flowing or highly constricted surface outlets, and contain permanently ponded water, precluding cyclic changes between oxic and anoxic conditions. The remaining seven wetlands have moderate potential (34 to 67 percent of the maximum possible score) to improve water quality. None of the wetlands has a high potential to improve water quality (greater than 68 percent of the maximum possible score). Additionally, the moderate score is also due to the nature of lake-fringe wetlands (Wetlands A, D, F), which have a maximum score of only 12 for water quality function instead of the maximum of 16 that other wetland types have. This is because lake-fringe wetlands typically do not improve water quality to the same extent that riverine or depressional wetlands do, because of lower denitrification rates, and because of the fact that any pollutants taken up in plant material will be more easily released into the water column when the plants die off (Ecology 2006). Wetlands with moderate or high scores typically have characteristics such as organic soils, a high proportion of wetland area with seasonal ponding, or dense vegetation to restrict flow through the wetland. 3.4.2 Hydrologic Functions All of the wetlands in the study area provide opportunities to reduce flooding and erosion to varying degrees. Four of the ten wetlands in the study area have a low potential (less than 34 percent of the maximum possible score) to reduce flooding and erosion. The low scores for potential hydrologic functions are due to a lack of natural surface water outlets, ponding features, and the types of vegetation necessary to reduce surface flows. Four of the wetlands Wetland and Ordinary ffigb Water Mark Delineation Report - November2009 Qpendail Tenninals 33 060059-01 Wetland Delineation S have moderate potential (34 percent to 67 percent of the maximum possible score) to improve hydrologic functions. The remaining two wetlands, Wetlands C and E, have high potential to improve hydrologic functions (greater than 68 percent of the maximum possible score). Wetlands with moderate or high scores typically have characteristics such as a highly constricted outlets or significant water storage depths during wet periods. 3.4.3Habitat Functions Habitat function of the study area wetlands is further defined by their Cowardin classifications (forested, scrub-shrub, emergent, and aquatic bed). Two wetlands are classified as scrub-shrub and open water system; one wetland includes scrub-shrub and forested systems; two wetlands include scrub-shrub and emergent systems; three wetlands include forested, scrub-shrub, and emergent systems (see Table 2); and three wetlands include forested, scrub-shrub, emergent, and open water systems (see Table 3). Wetlands with mixed classifications are generally of higher value than wetlands with a single classification. Three of the ten wetlands have a low opportunity (less than 34 percent of the maximum possible score) to provide habitat for many species. The low score for habitat opportunity is due to the characteristics of the wetland buffers and the overall lack of quality habitat conditions near or adjacent to the wetlands. The remaining seven wetlands have a moderate score (34 to 67 percent of the maximum possible score), and none of the wetlands has a high score (greater than 68 percent of the maximum possible score). Wetlands with moderate or high scores typically have characteristics such as a several Cowardin vegetation classes, several hydroperiods, high habitat interspersion, or the presence of special habitat features. Six of the ten wetlands have a low potential (less than 34 percent of the maximum possible score) to provide habitat for many species. The low score for habitat functions is due to the general lack of vegetative structure, hydroperiods, plant richness, habitat diversity, and special habitat features, especially characteristic of Wetland C, which received a score of 0. The remaining four wetlands have a moderate potential score (34 to 67 percent of the maximum possible score). E Wetland and Ordinary Thgh Water Mark Deimneation Report No venther 2009 Quendall Terminals 34 060059-01 Wetland Delineation 3.5 Exempt Wetlands 0 Wetland G is exempt from any activity affecting these wetlands, as described in RMC 4-3- 050 C5(f). It is a hydrologically isolated Category 3 wetland smaller than 2,200 sf. Standing water does not appear to be present in sufficient amounts to support breeding amphibians (i.e., less than approximately 12 inches in water depth from approximately December through May). No species are listed by federal or state government agencies as endangered or threatened, and the presence of essential habitat for those species is not present. Any impacts to Wetland G for cleanup activities will be mitigated for hydrologic and water quality functions. As shown in Table 5, hydrologic and water quality function is provided at a moderate level for Wetland G. Although Wetlands C, F, and H are smaller than 2,200 sf, they do not meet the exemption criteria in RMC. Wetlands F and H are not hydrologically isolated due to their proximity to Lake Washington. Wetland C has sufficient water depths in the winter to potentially provide amphibian breeding habitat, but the presence of contamination in Wetland C limits the habitat quality. However, Wetland C was constructed for stormwater treatment in 2006, as described in Section 3.6.1, and is not expected to be regulated by the City of Renton. 3.6 Constructed Stormwater Features Five wetlands in the study area were apparently constructed as part of historic site activities in an attempt to control stormwater on the site during large storm events, and to avoid disruption to the log storage operation that has since been abandoned. Based on recent aerial photographs (Appendix H), site history, and other references, Wetlands B, C, G, and H were constructed to manage stormwater or control spills associated with site activities. Historic construction of each of these features influences the regulatory status as determined by the City and EPA. Wetland E is thought to have developed from changes to recent stormwater drainage on the site based on the fact that it did not qualify as a wetland during the 1997 David Evans and Associates wetland delineation conducted on the site (Appendix G). 3.6.1 Excavated Features from the 1970s Wetland B was excavated in the early 1970s as a retention pond to control tar from flowing into the lake (King County Metro 1972). It is thought that Wetland G was also excavated at Wetland and OrdinaryHigh WaterMark Delineation Repon November2009 Quendall Terminals 35 060059-01 Wetland Delineation the same time as part of construction of berms to direct tar on the site into Wetland B (Aspect 2009). Wetland B continues to provide stormwater retention for the Site. 3.6.2 Best Management Practices Implementation - 2006 Work was conducted in January 2006 to implement best management practices to control silt and wood debris from flowing into Lake Washington. Work was conducted in the ditch along the southern property boundary (Wetland H) and in the area of Wetlands B and C. The work was conducted as recommended by Ecology to control potential sources of contamination from entering Lake Washington (Phoinix 2006). The entirety of Wetland C was constructed in January 2006 to prevent stormwater from flowing into Lake Washington (Phoinix 2006). An earthen berm was also constructed along the southern portion of Wetland C. Check dams were installed to control turbid water and floating debris. Wetland C was constructed in an upland area that did not contain wetland indicators, based on the fact that Wetland C was not identified during a wetland delineation conducted by David Evans and Associates in 1997 (Appendix G). S Work was also completed on Wetland B to improve stormwater flow conditions in 2006. Along the north side of Wetland B, an outfall was excavated to create a stable outlet for stormwater into Lake Washington (Phoinix 2006). Wetland H was excavated in January 2006 as part of best management practices to clean out the ditch along the southern portion of the site. Four rock check dams were placed in the cleared ditch at approximately 25-foot intervals to allow for sediment and wood debris control. Although Wetland H contains wetland indicators, it is located in an area that was excavated to function as stormwater conveyance off the site and into Lake Washington. Wetland H also was not identified during the 1997 wetland delineation (Appendix G). 3.6.3 Anticipated Regulatory Status Wetlands B, C, G, and H may not be subject to City of Renton Critical Area regulations based on the history of their construction. According to RMC 4-11-230, "wetlands do not include S those artificial wetlands intentionally created for purposes other than wetland mitigation, including, but not limited to ... drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention Wetland and Ordinary Thh WaterMark Delineation Report November2009 Quenda]] Terminals 36 060059-01 Wetland Delineation facilities, wastewater treatment facifities." Wetlands B, C, G, and H all were excavated from upland areas to manage spills or stormwater runoff. Excavation of Wetlands B and G occurred in the 1970s. Excavation and construction of Wetlands C and H occurred in 2006. At that time, nearly the entire Site was being used for log storage and associated activities, as documented in the 1990 aerial photo (Appendix H). In addition, Wetland G is exempt from City of Renton Critical Area regulations, provided that mitigation for hydrologic and water quality functions is provided for any impacts to the wetland. EPA may not choose to regulate Wetlands B, C, E, G, H, I, and J as waters of the U.S. based on their proximity to known waters of the U.S. (e.g., Lake Washington or Gypsy Creek). They may be determined to be isolated from waters of the U.S. and therefore not regulated, pending EPA's evaluation. Although wetland jurisdictional determinations are generally conducted by the Corps, impacts to these wetlands will occur as a result of a cleanup action under Superfund and are therefore regulated by EPA. Other wetlands along the shoreline, including Wetlands A, F, and D, are expected to be regulated as waters of the U.S. because they abut Lake Washington. 3.7 Wetland Delineation and Typing Limitations S. Wetland identification is an inexact science and differences of professional opinion often occur between trained individuals. Final determinations for wetland boundaries and typing concurrence or adjustment needs are the responsibility of the regulating resource agency. Wetlands are, by definition, transitional areas; their boundaries can be altered by changes in hydrology or land use. In addition, the definition of jurisdictional wetlands may change. If a physical change occurs in the basin or 5 years pass before the proposed project is undertaken, another wetland survey should be conducted. The results and conclusions expressed herein represent Anchor QEA's professional judgment based on the information available. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. S Wetland and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Repait November2009 Quendali Terminals 37 060059-01 Lake Washington OHWM Delineation and Lake Study 4 LAKE WASHINGTON OHWM DELINEATION AND LAKE STUDY Anchor QEA ecologists identified and delineated the OHWM of approximately 1,400 feet of Lake Washington within the study area between the neighboring parcels to the north and south. Habitat features of these two channels are described in the following sections. The result of the OHWM delineation is shown on Figure 7 and in Appendix B. 4.1 Lake Washington OHWM Delineation Methods To document the Lake Washington OHWM within the study area, Anchor QEA ecologists reviewed existing information (described in Section 1.1), performed an aerial photograph analysis, and conducted site visits on April 23 and 30, and May 6, 2009. The OHWM delineation was completed by walking the lake shoreline beginning at the south end of the study area and moving north. Photographs were also taken to document OHWM conditions (Photographs 11, 12, and 13 in Appendix F). During the site visits, the OHWM of the entire length within the study area was identified and flagged. The OHWM boundary was marked with pin flags and later surveyed by a professional surveyor. Anchor QEA ecologists identified the stream OHWM boundary consistent with Chapter 90.58 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) and Chapter 173-22 of the WAC. The WAC defines the OHWM as: 11 'Ordinary high water line' means the mark on the shores of all waters that will be found by expmining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual and so long continued in ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil or vegetation a character distinct from that of thabutting upland: Provided, that in any area where the ordinary high water line cannot be found the ordinary high water line adjoining saltwater shall be the line of mean higher high water and the ordinary high water line adjoining freshwater shall be the elevation of the mean annual flood." S Wedarzd and Ordinary High WaterMark Delineation Report November2009 Qizendall Terminals 38 060059-01 S S Lake Washington OHWM Delineation and Lake Study 4.2 Lake Washington OHWM Delineation Results Anchor QEA ecologists identified and delineated the OHWM of approximately 1,400 feet of Lake Washington within the study area between the neighboring parcels to the north and south. This included the placement of 43 pin flags installed at all meandering locations of the shoreline. Additionally, the OHWM was coincident with Wetlands A, D, and F and formed the western boundary of each of those wetlands. The OHWM is shown on Figure 7. Detailed flag locations are shown on drawings in Appendix B. Overall, the southern half of the study area contained an OHWM that was clearly defined by an armored shoreline consisting of large boulders. The northern half was not as clearly defIned, with a gradual transition from the upland to the water as well as former pier structures and large floating logs along the lake's edge. This half of the property was delineated using the investigators' best professional judgment and based on parameters set forth in Chapter 90.58 of the RCW and Chapter 173-22 of the WAC (Photographs 12 through 14 in Appendix F). Water depth during the investigation adjacent to the OHWM ranged from about 4 inches to more than 3 feet deep. 4.3 Lake Study According to RMC 4-3-090, and consistent with Washington State Administrative Code (WAC 173-26-25 1 and RCW 90.58.030(2)(e))), Lake Washington is classified as a Shoreline of Statewide Significance, meaning "lakes, whether natural, artificial, or a combination thereof, with a surface acreage of one thousand acres or more measured at the ordinary high water mark," and thus subject to the local jurisdiction's SMA. The SMA governs the use and development of shorelines in Washington State for responsible shoreline development with environmental protection and public access. Subsequent activities along the shoreline will include remediation of hazardous substances in lake sediments and/or in the upland portions of the Site, as directed by EPA. The sediment and upland cleanup is being performed under Superfund. All substantive provisions of City regulatory requirements will be met by the cleanup remedy selected by EPA. Additional information on the existing lake conditions will be included in the RI. Details on each of the remedial alternatives considered will be included in the FS. Previous information on the S S Wet/arid and OrdinaryHih Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendail ThmiILZaLc 39 060059-01 Lake Washington OHWM Delineation and Lake Study aquatic habitat conditions is included in Appendix G. A summary of known fish species present is described below. 4.3.1 Fish Species Presence During the surveys, no fish were observed along the lakeshore of the study area; however, the Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors Report for WRIA 8 identifies five salmonid species that use Lake Washington, and could reasonably be expected to occur along the property: sockeye, coho, Chinook, coastal cutthroat, and rainbow/steelhead trout (Kerwin 2001). Anadromous forms of each of these species are present, so individuals are present in the lake both as adults during migrations to spawning grounds and as juveniles. Sockeye are known to spawn along some beaches of the lake while there are unconfirmed reports of Chinook spawning in littoral areas of the lake. Non-anadromous forms of winter steelhead (rainbow trout), sockeye (kokanee), and cutthroat also occur in the lake. Resident rainbow trout spend their entire life in Lake Washington. Non-anadromous coastal cutthroat trout also occur in Lake Washington and are much more abundant than the anadromous form (Nowak 2000). Other non-anadromous species expected to occur near the study area include: longfin smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys), sticklebacks (Gasterosteus spp.), and dace (Leuciscus spp.). Non- native freshwater species known to occur in Lake Washington, and likely found near the study area include: black crappie (Pomoxis n.zgromacuiatus) , bluegifi (Lepomis macrocheilus), common carp ( Cyprinus carpio) , largemouth bass (Micropterus sainioides), pumpkinseed sunfish (Lepomis gibbosus), smailmouth bass (Micropterus dolomiew), tench (Tinca tinca), and yellow perch (Perca Jiavescens). Wetlazidazid Ordinary Ihh Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Tetwjnals 40 060059-01 Shoreline Restoration Plan 5 SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN S 5.1 Introduction and Purpose This section presents a conceptual shoreline restoration plan to create significant net ecological functional improvement to the Lake Washington shoreline, riparian buffer, and wetlands and associated buffers. Subject to EPA approval under their CERCLA authorities, the plan would offset impacts resulting from prospective Site remediation efforts (e.g., capping) related to hazardous substances as may be present in lake sediments and in the upland portions of the Site. All wetland impacts at the Site are anticipated to occur as a result of CERCLA remediation. Because the sediment and upland cleanup is being performed under CERCLA, all substantive provisions of City regulatory requirements will be met by the cleanup remedy selected by EPA. Although specific details on remedial alternatives have not yet been developed, they will be included in the FS following additional testing and discussions with EPA. Once Site remediation is completed under CERCLA, the remaining wetlands will not be impacted by the planned redevelopment. This conceptual shoreline restoration plan provides the City with information on the wetlands to be impacted as part of the cleanup and some general information on the types of mitigation that will occur, all subject to EPA approval. There are no anticipated wetland impacts from the planned redevelopment and therefore no mitigation is required as part of Site redevelopment. It is generally assumed that any cleanup decision by EPA will result in impacts to Wetlands B, C, E, F, and G, and portions of Wetlands A and D. In general, projects with wetland impacts can only occur after it can be demonstrated that impacts to wetlands cannot be avoided, that impacts have been minimized to the greatest extent possible, and finally after adequate mitigation is provided. However, the cleanup will likely be ordered by EPA to address hazardous substance contamination on the Site that will result in unavoidable wetland impacts. Based on existing information on Site contamination, Wetlands H, I, and J, and portions of Wetlands A and D are not anticipated to be impacted by remediation actions. This conceptual shoreline restoration plan is intended to update the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum completed for the Quendall and Baxter properties in 2000 (AESI 2000). That memorandum was prepared to address cleanup-related impacts to wetlands and the lake - 0 Wetland and OrdinaryHzh WaterMark Delineation Report November2009 Quendail Tenninals 41 060059-01 Shoreline Restoration Plan ID shoreline when investigation and cleanup of the site were being conducted under Washington's Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA). That document was prepared for the City of Renton and Vulcan Northwest, and was developed with input from WDFW, Ecology, WDNR, the Corps, and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, among others. Mitigation as a result of cleanup and development activities was completed on the Baxter site (located immediately north of the Quendall site) in 2007 according to the requirements in the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum. 5.2 Goals and Objectives The conceptual shoreline restoration plan would provide significant ecological functional gains for the Lake Washington shoreline including wetlands, buffers, and lake riparian areas. The conceptual plan would provide compensation necessary to mitigate impacts resulting from the prospective cleanup action (to be selected by EPA). Following cleanup, it is anticipated that the property would be redeveloped. A conceptual development plan is presented in Figure 8 to show how wetland creation/restoration ratios and buffer widths could potentially be applied to the site, subject to EPA's cleanup decisions. EPA has also included the resource agencies in its process and those agencies may be involved in future mitigation discussions, including changes to Site shoreline areas to further improve ecological functions (see Figure 8). Subject to EPA approval, impacts to wetlands will likely be mitigated at a 1.5:1 replacement ratio to offset functional losses resulting from Site remediation. This ratio is consistent with the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum (AESI 2000). Because Wetland G is exempt from critical area regulations, it will likely be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio. If additional impacted wetlands are not regulated by the City and EPA (as discussed in Section 3.6), the total wetland restoration area may be smaller than what is presented in Figure 8. The conceptual shoreline restoration plan could also improve habitat for aquatic species within Lake Washington such as migrating juvenile salmon. Subject to EPA approval, shoreline habitat and complexity could be restored with appropriate habitat mix gravel, large woody debris, and overhanging vegetation. The large woody debris could be collected and stockpiled during remediation activities and reused along the shoreline to the extent practicable. Wetland and Ordinary High WaterMark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Terminals 42 060059-01 Shoreline Restoration Plan The conceptual shoreline restoration plan depicted in Figure 8 includes a 100-foot average S width riparian buffer from the lake OHWM. This buffer is consistent with the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum (AESI 2000). The proposed riparian area could also provide a buffer for existing wetlands, and prospective wetland expansions in addition to providing a shoreline buffer. The new development adjacent to the shoreline following cleanup could provide a 100-foot average setback. The setback may fluctuate in width, depending on the proposed development plan. This setback is significantly greater than the 50-foot minimum setback required by the City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090). 5.3 Elements of the Plan 5.3.1 Riparian Buffer Habitat Subject to EPA approval, the 100-foot average width riparian buffer would revegetate the area adjacent to Lake Washington (see Figure 8). The revegetation would focus on species diversity, species density allowing for varied light penetration, and the creation of different successional stages along the lake. A preliminary plant list for riparian buffer enhancement is presented in Table 7. Wifiow and water-tolerant shrub vegetation along the shoreline would provide shade for aquatic species. Deciduous-dominated forests would include open areas where sunlight can penetrate to the forest floor. Coniferous-dominated forests would provide important habitat for upland species. Long-term function of riparian areas would provide detritus inputs, insect drop, and woody debris inputs for aquatic species to support prey resources and provide cover for juvenile salmon. In addition, woody debris and substrate enhancement of the shoreline would support these aquatic ecological functions in the short term. S Wetland and Ordinary Hi'-h WaterMark Delineation Report No vein ber 2009 Quendali Terminals 43 060059-01 E S Shoreline Restoration Plan Table 7 Riparian Buffer Plant List Common Name Scientific Name Groundcovers Lady Fern Ath yr/urn fihix-fernina Salal Gaultherio shallon Sword Fern Polystichum munitum Willows/Shrubs Vine Maple Acer Circinaturn Red-osier Dogwood Cornus sericea Black Twinberry Lonicera involucrata Oregon Grape Mahonia nervosa Nootka Rose Rosa nutkana Hooker's Willow Salix hookeriana Scouler's Willow Salix scouleriana Sitka Willow Salix sitchensis Douglas Spirea Spiraea douglasll Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus Trees Big Leaf Maple Acer macrophyllum Pacific Dogwood Corn us nuttaill Red Alder Alnus rubra Hazelnut Corylus corn uta Oregon Ash Fraxinus lot/folio Sitka Spruce Picea sitchensis Douglas Fir Psuedotsuga menziesii Black Cottonwood Populus tremuloides Western Crabapple Pyrusfusca Western Hemlock Tsuga heterophylla 5.3.2 Wetland Restoration Subject to EPA approval, it is anticipated that wetland creation/restoration along the Lake Washington shoreline would expand existing Wetlands A, D, and I (see Figure 8). Impacts to existing lakeshore wetlands from cleanup activities (Wetlands A, D, and F) could be mitigated along the lakeshore, adjacent to Wetlands A and D. Impacts to existing wetlands Wedand and OrdinazyRIgh Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Terminals 44 060059-01 Shoreline Restoration Plan that are not connected to the lakeshore (Wetlands B, C, E, and G) could be mitigated adjacent to Wetland J. In all areas, the creation/restoration would diversify the existing range of wetland habitat and will include emergent, scrub-shrub, and forested habitat areas. This includes restoration adjacent to Wetlands A and D for impacts to LFO, LSS, and LEM components of lakeshore Wetlands A, D, and F. In addition, the prospective wetland creation/restoration area adjacent to Wetland A could include a low swale (see Figure 8). This swale would connect to Lake Washington and diversify the marsh habitat by adding open water and emergent habitat. The creation of this swale could also offset impacts to POW habitats in Wetlands B and C. The swale could be designed to encourage seasonal use by juvenile salmonids with the placement of large woody debris (LWD). LWD provides habitat complexity and areas for cover for juvenile salmonids. Water quality and hydrologic functional improvements would also result from improved stormwater retention and capabifity to trap sediments through wetland, riparian, and associated buffer replanting. A preliminary plant list for wetland creation/restoration is presented in Table 8. Restoration adjacent to Wetland J would offset impacts to PSS, PEM, and PFO components S of Wetlands B, C, E, and G. POW habitat would be replaced as part of restoration adjacent to Wetland A. The restoration/creation would replace current wetland areas with a wider range of wetland function and value. New wetland areas adjacent to Wetland J would provide an improvement to habitat quality and overall function from that provided by existing wetlands, which are compromised by the presence of soil and water contamination. Habitat function would also benefit from improved structure and diversity. Wetlands B, C, E, and G currently provide a moderate level of water quality and hydrologic function through stormwater retention. These wetlands currently have a higher opportunity to provide these functions due to the presence of contaminated stormwater on the site. Water quality and hydrologic functions provided by existing Wetlands B, C, E, and G would be replaced with improved on-site stormwater control and treatment as well as an increased abifity to trap sediments as part of riparian and shoreline wetland buffer improvements. Wet/and and Ordinary Thh Water Mark Delineation Report - November2009 Quendali Terminals 45 060059-01 S Shoreline Restoration Plan Table 8 Wetland Plant List Common Name Scientific Name Emergents Slough Sedge Carexobnupta Hardstem Bulrush Scirpus acutus Small-fruited Bulrush Scirpus microcarpus Willows/Shrubs Red-osier Dogwood Cornus sericea Black Hawthorne Crataegus doug/as!! Black Twinberry Lonicera involucrate Pacific Ninebark Physocarpus capitatus Hooker's Willow Salix hookeriana Pacific Willow Salix lasiandra Scouler's Willow Salix scouleriana Douglas Spirea Spiraea doug/ash Trees Red Alder Alnus rubra Sitka Spruce Picea sitchensis Wetland and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Temthals 46 060059-01 References S 6 REFERENCES AESI. 2000. Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, Quendall and Baxter Properties, Renton, Washington. Prepared for Vulcan Northwest and City of Renton. February 17. Access Washington. 2009. Washington State Growth Management Act. Accessed online at http://www.gmhb.wa.gov/gma/index.html on February 23, 2009. Aspect Consulting, LLC (Aspect). 2009. Personal communication with Jeremy Porter regarding current understanding of historic property use and excavation of Wetland G. August 27. City of Renton. 1992. Renton's Critical Areas Inventory. Prepared by Jones and Stokes. City of Renton. 2009. Renton Municipal Code. Accessed online at http://w-ww.codepublishing.corpJwajrentopj on June 11, 2009. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington D.C. Ecology. See Washington State Department of Ecology. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Kerwin. 2001. Salmon and Steelliead Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the CEDAR - SAMMAMISH BASIN (Water Resource Inventory Area 8). Washington Conservation Commission. Olympia, WA. King County Metro. Memorandum from Larry Peterson to Glen D. Harris regarding Quendall Terminals Co. Industrial Waste. March 29, 1972. Wetland and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Quendall Terminals 47 060059-01 S . E References Munsell. 1994. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kolhnorgen Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland. Nowak, G.M. 2000. Movement patterns and feeding ecology of cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki clarki) in Lake Washington. M.S. Thesis, University of Washington, Seattle. Phoinix. 2006. Memorandum to Mr. John J. Tortorelli, Western Wood Lumber Company, regarding Best Management Practices (BMP) Implementation Project. January 19. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Biological Report 88 (26.9). Reed, P., Jr. 1993. Supplement to List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Supplement to Biological Report 88 (26.9). . U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2008. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, ed J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-08-13. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1973. Soil Survey of King County, Washington. USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS). USDA. 2001. Hydric Soil List for King County, Washington. USDA Soil Conservation Service. Accessed online at http://www.wa.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/soils/countyhydjjcjists.html on May 8, 2009. USDA. 2009. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey. Accessed online at http://soils.usda.gov/use/hydric/lists/state.html on June 11, 2009. E Wet/and and Ordinary Hih Water Mark Delineation Report November2009 Queidall Teiminais 48 060059-01 References United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009. USFWS Wetlands Mapper for National Wetlands Inventory Map Information. Accessed online at http://wetlandsfws.er.usgs.gov on May 8, 2009 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2009. Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Maps in the Vicinity of T24, R05E, Section 29. Report Date August 282009. Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 1997. Washington State Wetlands IdentifIcation and Delineation Manual. Publication No. 96-94. Olympia, Washington. Ecology. 2004. Washington State Wetlands Rating System - Western Washington: Revised. Publication No. 04-06-15. Olympia, Washington. Ecology. 2006. Washington State Wetland Rating Form - Western Washington, version 2. Olympia, Washington. Ecology. 2009a. Environmental Information; Watersheds; WRIA 9 DuwamishlGreen Basin. Accessed online at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/services/gis/maps/wria/number/wria9.htm on February 23, 2009 Ecology. 2009b. Washington State Shoreline Management Act. Accessed online at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sma/laws_rules/index.html on September 5, 2009. Wet/arid and Ordinary Hih WaterMark Delineation Report November2009 Qjzenda/J Terminals 49 060059-01 .. FIGURES E 0 Seattle WASHINGTON Park WL Not Scale Pt' Sr -II ,PONEE iF,! ' IIINjJJ I ttcOri ., I , 4 •l r I • / !_ t \Il I: Shp1r r / J ( I uod Cc,itcr Project Locat!on Sch - sch vi Lo UL 14 sr D I , I ( r : TJII / I p 1 WASHINGTON 0 0 CIS r cTN±'TT P Nator Pro S7 Scale in Feet 2000 Figure 1 kz ANCHOR DRAFT Vincinity Map QEA Port Quendall Terminal Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Report S Aug 03, 2009 1213u cd3vidsoa K Jobs\00059-OUENOALL060059O1\O6OO59O1-RP.003 d2 S z CD C') 0 C C) CD 0. -D I - 0- CD > C/) jC) CD CD 3 :3 0. 0. CD = CD H -' jg CD 0 =3 0 CD to 0) -' 0) CD (I) 0 C C, CD 0) a mcUo rn ( m r,Z I iT0 co 2 CD (DII cc 1L U, " co 2: = CD 0 0 U, CD - 'S — S Sep 08.2009 10:09am cdavidson K:\Jobs\060059-QUENDALL\06005901\06005901-Rp-020.dwg FIG 3 i!j S S Sep 08, 2009 10:1 1am cdavidson K:\Jobs\060059.QUENDALLIO60059OI\06005901-RP.016dwg FIG 5 C CD C/) 0 C -I C, CD 0) 0 S S S Sep 02, 2009 2:32pm cdavidson K:Uobs\060059-QUENDALL\06005901 \06005901-RP-008.dwg FIG 6 to EN 1 /4 Wffcç&4I? Mi4&* y•4 v 4\ •• Ah, Xy :1 4 • 44%/?P41.'' : I . •'. fr INN WA 64 All : ts*.+s .4 '4N I' ' 41 1M, V 'V'' ' 'V Al 'a. a. a. 'a. . •J ' k' 'Ô4' '+R .w4Vqr+vqv.. - ;i •••.•• -.- 4 ."z. .. M. \:PIS . ' (y, II • 0' IL — 10 , 1 E1: •I co ':4 I 0 0) o C- 0 0a CID 0) CD 3 CD . 0) 2 0) CD = 0 -4---1 11 -,CD XJ— CD CD3 C -D =3 c CD —4 .• S Sep 08, 2009 10:12am cdavidson K:\Jobs\060059-OUENDALL\06005901\06005901-Rp.004.dwg FIG 7 rn ma,O (1 2 x:l 1CD C IN o NI H Ln rD rD -+ r! 0) U CD D) (D 0) ol or-,. CD cu -3 - - - - - -. -. -.--- -. . - ----.-.-_ ._,c.._______ ___- i-.- •_% S Sept2.2009ahook ll:\Projecls\Oavis WrhtTermaine_LLP\QuendalI Entitlement - 200Ine ReStOratIOn\GRAPHIC\RENDERED\QUendaII Landscape 11x17 si j i4 NS\••\ • ,)_ ..... / i .7 .• h I - IN- 61, -. 9 ----.••-..• _\ N 1 I lo la V/ 0 CD CD Cl) CD0 CD CD CD Co • _//i - "S . ' 55•5 -'5-' -•n N / 7/ moO : -:.. .? i 'H I . rn I I,, z I 0 Q -> mC C z>' _m , rn m>< rn >< I— m 0)< m —>< (flu IT nmQ 0W0 00 mQ -r m-4 0 m > m mOm - - 0 j0 '•' -n I- - 0OG G C) >G) 0< m — mm Ln < 0 m m ,-. m Z (m , _4rfl 0 c- -nLn 0m 2[ mm —I — L1 O 00 0) 00 (.)0 rn m> i >o Ii 2 .l >m CmZ Z0 o 70 >Q G05 < mm 0> Z- 0 m-0 o ;cz — rn Z > > 00 0 z m n Z Z m m 0 0 n 0 Q o > > -I • ; -< , -< APPENDIX A PLAN VIEW AND CROSS SECTIONS OF WETLANDS A THROUGH H. 0 I] / / / // • 613 /• // // /' - WF-6A 14Ij'*\F 6 WF 6C- / ///' \\ , A/`/ // / 7 //• ,/• - - / / LEGEND: I I Wetland Location LA A1 Cross Section Location and Designation Wetland Flag Location — - Property Line - —.. - Oridinary High Water Mark IS Test Plot Location (OHWM) 0 40 HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83/91. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 Scale in Feet Existin8Surface_\\h Wetland l oZ 0) CL E Uj 0 40 80 Horizontal Distance in Feet ID 0 20 Scale in Feet Figure A-I Q A KTHOD Wetland A Port Quendall Terminal QEA Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Report bWF-8- 1 If 'WF 9 - 7 'I /1 • (":H B' WF-1O / Wetland B / j ' I J WF 41 i---- 21 LEGEND: 9 0 0) I. -I Wetland Location LB BI Cross Section Location and Designation Wetland Flag Location - - — Property Line - . - - Oridinary High Water Mark f5l Test Plot Location 0 (OHWM) HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83191. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 Scale in Feet Existing Surface B OHWM 11 -B ______________ WetlandB •1 -- 25 H 20- :1.5 40 Uj Horizontal Distance in Feet 0 20 Scale in Feet Figure A-2 ANCHOR Wetland B Port Quendall Terminal QEA -' Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Report I] LEGEND: 1 Wetland Location 4L_C Cji Cross Section Location and Designation a. Wetland Flag Location - — Property Line — - Oridinary High Water Mark N Test Plot Location (OHWM) o 0 40 to HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83/91. 91 VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 Scale in Feet 1 OHWM 80 Horizontal Distance in Feet 0 20 Scale in Feet 0 • Figure A-3 Q ANCHOR Wetland C Port Quendall Terminal _I-. Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Report Wetland D I LEGEND: Wetland Location Wetland Flag Location - -•• - - Oridinary High Water Mark (OHWM) D D Cross Section Location and Designation Property Line WF-9 - I: \Vkr o1° I "r !" WF-11[ --- 1: W-13 WF4 I Test Plot Location 0' HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83/91. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 Scale in Feet 1 / / / / D 41 25 co 20 . <15 (Z I >-. (3) w 0 Wetland D Existing Surface Horizontal Distance in Feet 0 20 Scale in Feet OHWM 120 FigureA- ANCHOR Wetland 0 Port Quendall Termina QEA Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Reporl -- 'I Wetland E' WF-8 \\ wL-9 WF-10 \ 1• 1/ / WF-18' WF-13 ) WF-14 w -11 / -16 - WF-12 / / - - / / / (I / r I, I / / \\ LEGEND: I Wetland Location t.E E_j1 Cross Section Location and Designation Wetland Flag Location - - - Property Line to - - -. - Oridinary High Water Mark 19 Test Plot Location 0 (OHWM) 0 40 HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83/91. I VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 Scale in Feet -j U 00 T 30 Wetland E Sorelne 25 Lj- 0 40 80 120 Uj Horizontal Distance in Feet 0 20 Scale in Feet t- I Figure A-5 Q ANCHOR Wetland E Port Quendall Terminal QEA Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Report S V / II / 'II WF1r / ' 'A /\ Wetland F a'WF-2 ,1 F , \\ \\ 'I I Wetland I', ----- 1,. ---- LEGEND: I I Wetland Location ALF Cross Section Location and Designation Wetland Flag Location - - - Property Line - - - - Oridinary High Water Mark 19 Test Plot Location (OHWM) 0 40 HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83/91. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 - Scale in Feet Existing Surface Wetland F OHYVM CL Horizontal Distance in Feet Cn 0 20 Scale in Feet Figure A-€ ANCHOR Wetland F Port Quendall Terminat QEA ' Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Reporl S I i j OBWFgB -, _-T - WF-7B ±T J4 - kF4A: - N - \\ / / / / / LEGEND: I - I Wetland Location 4_G G ± Cross Section Location and Designation CL Wetland Flag Location - Property Line -. -. - Oridinary High Water Mark N Test Plot Location (OHWM) 40 § HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83/91. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 Scale in Feet -J jj Existing SIDunface G 4-1 35, 00 MZ Qj CL Horizontal Distance in Feet 0 20 Scale in Feet SI I Figure A-7 ANCHOR Wetland G Port Quendau Terminal Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Report // ,•/ / I z' K /4)) 41 _F-1 ;-;- -. 2 —0LEGEND: I 1 Wetland Location t.H Cross Section Location and Designation Wetland Flag Location - - - Property Line - - -. - Oridinary High Water Mark N Test Plot Location 0 (OHWM) 0 40 HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83/91. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 Scale in Feet IF Existing Surface 1—WetlandH -I 40 Horizontal Distance in Feet 0 20 Scale in Feet H' OHWM 0 80 Figure A-8 ANCHOR Wetland H Port Quendall Terminal QEA '-' Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Report /:/ 4s /!/'/" WF-6--.- //#' WF-i Wetland I / S 7 r / YiWF 0 07 - V I , WF11 / 7F/ j WF2/ wiV a. LEGEND: I 1 Wetland Location 4 1f Cross Section Location and Designation Wetland Flag Location - - - Property Line Ln -" - - Oridinary High Water Mark N Test Plot Location 0 (OHWM) 0 40 HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83/91. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 Scale in Feet -J H Wetland I I Property Line 35. I I 00 Scale in Feet Figure A-9 ANCHOR Wetland I Port Quendall Terminal tZ; AQI '...' --"-- L-.L. - Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Report JWF6 H 1' ! WF-4 / Wetlandi - I / 0 Z 17 / I LEGEND: I I Wetland Location t i J I Cross Section Location and Designation Wetland Flag Location - - -- Property Line - -. - Oridinary High Water Mark N Test Plot Location (OHWM) HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83/91. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 - -- 0 510 Scale in Feet E c) 0 0 Property Line - 1-•• Wetland J 40 0 20 Scale in Feet 80 Figure A-1( ANCHOR Wetland I Port Quendall Termina' - QEA '- Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Reporl APPENDIX B ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK FLAG LOCATIONS S 0 Property Line OHWM OHWM-11 Matchline to Figure B-2 OHWM'1;i, - OHWM 20r !. L--' 'I I / 0HWM-19 0HWM-18 - OHWM17r/ OHWM-16 OHWM-15 / OHWM-12 OHWM-14' OHWM-12!- H / I OHWM-10 oHw9r,' OHWM-8p' OHWM - -- / OHWM-6/ /• - '- OHWM-5r; \rPHwM 4 - OHWM-2 OHWM-3 ow 25 - k 25 --------__ __ ___ LEGEND: Shoreline Flag Location Wetland Location -. -. - - Oridinary High Water Mark (OHWM) - - - Property Line HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83/91. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 0 Scale in Feet 1 I Figure B-i ANCHOR DRAFT Ordinary High Water Mark Flag Locations - South ~4 Port Quendall Terminal QEA Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Report OWM-42 / 0HWM-41 ThHWM-40 OHWM-39 - - 1---- T_- -- // -- --- - --- I I - $ \_------- A -- - ---- - QHWM-38 \ - OHWM-37 OHWM OHWM-3M36 I OWM-34 / OHWM-31 OHWM-33 OHWM-3O/ OHWM-29 :-- - - :,- OHWM-28/ 25 - y OHWM-27 \ OHWM-25 r-\ 0HWM-25) / OHWM \. oH\/M24 OHWM23 oHWM-22/ . Matchline to Figure B-I LEG END: Shoreline Flag Location Wetland Location PPI) —. — — — Oridinary High Water Mark (OHWM) HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington o 80 State Plane North, NA083/91. - - — Property Line VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 Scale in Feet 1) Figure B-2 Ordinary High Water Mark Flag Locations — North ANCHOR DRAFT Port Quendall Terminal QEA '- Natural Resource and Habitat Assessment Report APPENDIX C SAMPLE PLOT SUMMARY DATA S S 0 n Appendix C - Sample Plot Swnmaiy Data Table C-i Plant Species Observed During the Investigation Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status1 Trees Alnus rubra Red alder FAC Arbutus menziesii Pacific Mardone NL Populus balsamifera Black cottonwood FAC Salix lasiandra Pacific willow FACW Sa!ixscouleriana Scouler willow FAC Shrubs Corn us sericea Red-osier dogwood FACW Cytisus scoparius Scot's broom NI Fraxinus latifolia Oregon ash FACW Lonicera involucrata Black twinberry FAC Qemleria cerasiformis Indian plum FACU Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU Rubus paiviflorus Thimbleberry FAC Rubus spectabilis Sal monberry FAC Sambucus racemosa Red elderberry FACU Spiraea doug/ash Spirea FACW Ferns & Herbaceous Athyrium fihix-femina Lady fern FAC Carexobnupta Slough sedge OBL Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweed NL Epilobium ciliatum Purple-leaved willowherb FACW Equisetum arvense Field horsetail FAC Galium aparine Catchweed bedstraw FACU Geranium robertianum Robert geranium NI Impatiens sp. Touch-me-not FACW Iris pseudacorus Yellow flag iris OBL Hedera helix English ivy UPI Lemna minor Small duckweed OBI Lycopus americanus American bugleweed OBL Juncus effusus Soft rush FACW Phalaris arundinacea Reed canarygrass FACW Plantago major Common plantain FACU Polygonum cuspidatum Japanese knotweed FACU Polystichum munitum Sword fern FACU Wetland and Ordinary Thgb Water Mark Delineation Report September2009 Quendall Tenninai C-' 060059-01 Appendix C - Sample Plot Summazy Data Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status1 Ranunculus repens Creeping buttercup FACW Rumex crispus Curly dock FAC Tanacetum vuigare Common tansy NL Taraxacum officionale Common dandelion FACU Trifolium repens White clover FAC Typha latifolia Common cattail OBL Notes: These categories, referred to as the "wetland indicator status" (from the wettest to driest habitats) are as follows: obligate wetland (OBL) plants, facultative wetland (FACW) plants, facultative (FAC) plants, facultative upland (FACU) plants, and obligate upland (UPL) plants. Table C-2 Summary of Wetland Sample Plot Vegetation Data Wetland Sample Plot Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status1 Cover % A Wet Alnus rubra (tree stratum) Red alder FAC 100% Corn us sericea Red-osier dogwood FACW 20% Alnus rubra (shrub stratum Red alder FAC 10% Lonicera involucrata Black twinberry FAC 10% Rubus pcirviflorus Thimbleberry FAC 10% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 5% Iris pseudacorus Yellow flag iris OBL 5% Convolvu/us arvensis Field bindweed NL 5% Hedera helix English ivy UPL 5% A Up Alnus rubra Red alder FAC 75% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 35% Oemleria cerasiformis Indian plum FACU 20% Equisetum arvense Field horsetail FAC 1% B Wet Populus balsamifera Black cottonwood FAC 25% Salix lasiandra Pacific willow FACW 25% B Up No vegetation Present C Wet Polygonum cuspidatum Japanese knotweed FACU 65% Salix lasiandra Pacific willow FACW 10% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 5% Juncus effusus Soft rush FACW 50% Epilobium ciliatum Purple-leaved willowherb FACW 25% Rumex crispus Curly dock FAC 5% Wetland and Ordinary Hih Water Mark Delineation Report - September2009 Quendall Terminal C-2 060059-01 S . S J Appendix C - Sample Plot Summary Data Wetland Sample Plot Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status1 Cover % Lycopus americanus American bugleweed OBL 5% Lemna minor Small duckweed OBL 5% Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweed NL 5% Trifolium repens White clover FAC 5% Polygonum cuspidatum Japanese knotweed FACU 80% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 20% D lWet Populus balsamifera Black cottonwood FAC Salix lasiandra Pacific willow FACW Corn us sericea Red-osier dogwood FACW Lonicera invo/ucrata Black twinberry FAC Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU P/unto go major Common plantain FACU D 2Wet Alnus rubra Red alder FAC 75% Corn us sericea Red-osier dogwood FACW 15% Rubus spectabilis Salmonberry FAC 10% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 5% iris pseudacorus Yellow flag iris OBL 5% Epilobium ciliatum Purple-leaved willowherb FACW 5% Pha/aris arundinacea Reed canarygrass FACW 5% D Up Populus balsamifera Black cottonwood (tree stratum) FAC 100% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 25% Populus balsamifera Black cottonwood (shrub stratum) FAC 5% Epilobium ciliatum Purple-leaved willowherb FACW 5% E Wet Salix lasiandra Pacific willow FACW 90% Populus balsamifera Black cottonwood FAC 10% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 5% E Up Populus balsamifera Black cottonwood FAC 75% Lonicera invo/ucrata Black twinberry FAC 15% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 10% Cornus sericea Red-osier dogwood FACW 5% Epilobium ciliatum Purple-leaved willowherb FACW 15% Hedera helix English ivy UPL 5% Rubus spectabilis Salmonberry FAC+ 5% F Wet Alnus rubra Red alder FAC 50% Salix lasiandra Pacific willow FACW 15% Wetland and Ordinary Hih Water Mark Delineation Report September2009 Quendall Terminal C-3 060059-01 Appendix C - Sample Plot Swrnnary Data Wetland Sample Plot Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status1 Cover % Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 15% Populus balsamifera Black cottonwood FAC 10% Juncuseffusus Soft rush FACW 35% Phalaris arundinacea Reed canarygrass FACW 25% Iris pseudacorus Yellow flag iris OBI 10% Galium aparine Catchweed bedstraw FACU 10% Plantago major Common plantain FACU 5% Rumex crispus Curly dock FAC 5% F Up Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 15% Polygonum cuspidatum Japanese knotweed FACU 60% Epilobium ciliatum Purple-leaved willowherb FACW 5% G Wet Salix lasiandra Pacific willow FACW 60% Alnus rubra Red alder FAC 20% Cornus sericea Red-osier dogwood FACW 20% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 10% Polygonum cuspidatum Japanese knotweed FACU 5% G Up Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 25% Polygonum cuspidatum Japanese knotweed FACU 60% H Wet Popu/us balsamifera Black cottonwood FAC 40% Alnus rubra Red alder FAC 20% Salix lasiandrc, Pacific willow FACW 20% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 10% Spiraea douglasii Spirea FACW 15% Lonicera involucrata Black twinberry FAC 15% Juncus effusus Soft rush FACW 10% Phalaris arundinacea Reed canarygrass FACW 10% Equisetum arvense Field horsetail FAC 5% Rumex crispus Curly dock FAC 5% Ranunculus repens Creeping buttercup FACW 5% Con va/vu/us wvensis Field bindweed NL 5% H Up Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 25% Phalaris arundinacea Reed canarygrass FACW 40% Equisetum arvense Field horsetail FAC 10% Polygonum cuspidatum Japanese knotweed FACU 10% Tanacetum vu/gore Common tansy NL 10% Wet Cornus sericea Red-osier dogwood FACW 60% Polygon urn cuspidatum Japanese knotweed FACU 25% S 0- [1 Wetland and Ordinary Hih Water Mark Delineation Report September2009 Quendall Tenninal C-4 060059-01 Appendix C - Sample Plot Summary Data Wetland Sample Plot Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status1 Cover % SaI!x lasiandra Pacific willow FACW 15% Epilobium ciliatum Purple-leaved willowherb FACW 5% Up Polygonum cuspidatum Japanese knotweed FACU 100% Salix lasiandra Pacific willow FACW 15% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 10% J Wet Phalaris arundinacea Reed canarygrass FACW 100% Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 15% Alnusrubra Red alder FAC 10% J Up Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 80% Phalaris arundinacea Reed canarygrass FACW 15% Notes: These categories, referred to as the "wetland indicator status" (from the wettest to driest habitats) are as follows: obligate wetland (OBL) plants, facultative wetland (FACW) plants, facultative (FAC) plants, facultative upland (FACU) plants, and obligate upland (UPL) plants. Wetland and OrdinazyHi-h Water Mark Delineation Repo.zt September2009 Quenda]] Temilnal C-5 060059-01 Appendix C— Sample Plot Summary Data Table C-3 Summary of Wetland Sample Plot Hydrology Data Wetland Sample Plot Hydrology A Wet Saturation at surface and freestanding water in pit at 10 inches A Up Saturation at surface and freestanding water in pit at 15 inches B Wet Soil pit not excavated. Constructed stormwater feature with standing water present. B Up Soil pit not excavated. C Wet Soil pit not excavated. Constructed stormwater feature with standing water present. C Up Soil pit not excavated. No evidence of hydrology. D iWet No saturation or freestanding water in pit to 18 inches D 2Wet Saturation at surface and freestanding water at surface D Up Saturation at surface, no freestanding water in pit to 18 inches E Wet Soil pit not excavated. Constructed stormwater feature with standing water present. E Up Soil pit not excavated. No evidence of hydrology. F Wet No saturation at surface, freestanding water in pit at 11 inch inches F Up Soil pit not excavated. No evidence of hydrology. G Wet Soil pit not excavated. Constructed stormwater feature with standing water present. G Up Soil pit not excavated. No evidence of hydrology. H Wet Soil pit excavated. Standing water at surface. H Up No soil pit excavated no visible evidence of hydrology. Wet Saturation at surface, no freestanding water in pit to 18 inches Up Saturation at surface, no freestanding water in pit to 18 inches J Wet Saturation at surface and freestanding water at surface J Up Saturation at surface, no freestanding water in pit to 18 inches S. S . Wetland and Ordinary High WaterMark Delineation Report September2009 Quendall Terminal C-6 060059-01 S C Appendix C- Sample Plot SwnmaiyData Table C-4 Summary of Wetland Sample Plot Soils Data Wetland Sample Plot Soil Horizon (inches) Matrix Color Redox Color Redox Abundance (%) Texture A Wet to 10 10YR 3/1 None None Clay loam 10-18 10YR 3/2 None None Clay Loam 18+ 2.5Y 3/1 10YR % 5% Clay Loam A Up to 8 10YR 3/1 None None Clay loam 8 to 18+ 10YR 3/1 1OYR 4/3 15% Sand B Wet Due to known contamination, soil pits not excavated B Up C Wet Due to known contamination, soil pits not excavated C Up D iWet 0to6 10YR3/2 None None Sandy loam 6 to 18+ 10YR 5/1 10YR 4/6 10% Silt loam, gravel interspersed at 6 to 8 inches. D 2Wet 0 to 10 10YR 2/1 None None Loamy sand 10 to 12 2.5YR 4/1 10YR 4/6 25% Loamy sand 12 to 18+ 2.5Y 4/1 None None Sand D Up 0 to 18+ 2.5Y 5/2 None None Loamy clay E Wet Due to known contamination, soil pits not excavated E Up F Wet 0 to 6 2.5Y 4/2 10YR 5/6 20% Sand 6to18+ 2.5Y 4/1 L 40% 10YR4/6 Sand F Up Due to known contaminants, soil pits not excavated G Wet Due to known contaminants, soil pits not excavated G Up H Wet Due to known contamination, soil pits not excavated Up H Wet 0 to 6 10YR 3/1 None None Loam 6 to 12 10YR 3/2 2.5YR 4/6 15% Loam 12 to 18 5Y 4/2 10YR 6/8 2.5y4/2 50% 25% Silty loam Up 0 to 8 10YR 3/3 None None loam 8 to 18 10YR 3/3 7.5YR 5/8 5% loam i Wet 0 to 3 Root mat None None organic 3 to 18 10YR 3/1 None None Silty loam J Up 0 to 18 10YR 4/2 None None Silty loam Wetland and Ordinary Hzh Water Mark Delineation Report September2009 Quendail Tetwical C-7 060059-01 Appendix C—Sample Plot Surnma.zy Data Table C-5 Summary of Wetland Sample Plot Data and Wetland Determination Wetland Sample Plot Vegetation Soils Hydrology Determination A Wet Hydrophytic Hydric Positive Wetland A Up Non-hydrophytic Hydric Positive Upland B Wet Hydrophytic N/A Positive Wetland B Up None N/A Negative Upland C Wet Hydrophytic N/A Positive Wetland C Up Non-hydrophytic N/A Negative Upland D iWet Hydrophytic Hydric Positive Wetland D 2Wet Hydrophytic Hydric Positive Wetland D Up Non-hydrophytic Non-hydric Positive Wetland E Wet Hydrophytic N/A Positive Wetland E Up Hydrophytic N/A Negative Upland F Wet Hydrophytic Hydric Positive Wetland F Up Non-hydrophytic N/A Negative Upland G Wet Hydrophytic N/A Positive Wetland G Up Non-hydrophytic N/A Negative Upland H Wet Hydrophytic N/A Positive Wetland H Up Non-hydrophytic N/A Negative Upland Wet Hydrophytic Hydric Positive Wetland Up Non-hydrophytic Non-hydric Negative Upland .1 Wet Hydrophytic Hydric Positive Wetland J Up Non-hydrophytic Non-hydric Negative Upland Wetland and Ordinary High. Water Mark Delineation Report - September2009 Quendall Tem,Jnal C-s 060059-01 APPENDIX D FIELD DATA SHEETS S S 40 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 04/2312009 • Applicant/Owner. Quendall State: WA Sampling Point Wet A SP#lUp Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29124N/5E Landfomi (hilislope, terrace, etc.): Lakefringe Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (II no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0 Soil 0. Or Hydrology 0, significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes ID No 0 Are Vegetation 0. Soil 0. Or Hydrology 0, 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 0 No Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: Data plot includes wetland hydrology and soIls, but lacking in hydrophytic vegetation. VEGETATION - Use scientifle nms nf nlnts Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet: % Cover Species? Status Alnusrubra 75 Yes FAC Numberof Dominant Species ThatAre I A) OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across 3 (B) 4 All Strata: 75 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are 330/ (A/B) 0 SaplinqlShrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: Rubus armeniacus 35 Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: Oelmeria cerasiformls 20 Yes FACU Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 xl = 0 FACW species I x2 = 2 FAC species 75 x3 = 225 55 = Total Cover FACU species 55 x4 = 220 Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = Equlsetum arvense I No FACW Column Totals: 131 (A) 447 (B) ii. Prevalence Index = B/A 3.41 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: No Dominance Test is >50% No Prevalence Index is Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. 1 Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 99% Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: 33% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test and Prevalence index < 3. Hydrophytic vegetation not present. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast— interim Version Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL nntnn 0,,n1 AMf A Q01I I 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 to 8 IOYR 3/1 100 None None None None Clay loam 8 to 18+ IOYR 3/1 85 IOYR 4/3 15% 0 M Clay loam 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 (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (P.2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) 0 Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172) Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (176) Sandy Mucky Mineral (SI) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): I ype: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: I chroma With redox features. HYDROLOGY WellandHydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) Water-Stained Leaves (139) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) High Water Table (P.2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 413) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturalion(A3) 0 SaltCrust(8ll) 0 DrainagePatterns(BlO) Water Marks (Bi) 0 Aquatic invertebrates (1313) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Z Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (134) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No 0 Depth (inches): 15 inches Saturation Present? (includes capfllary fringe) Yes No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Z No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Saturation and standing water observed in sample plot US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version I.- WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 04123/2009 • Applicant/Owner. Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N/5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Lakefringe Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology D significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks,) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site mao showina samolina noint locations. transects. imnortant fpatijres. etc Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Wetland A associated with Lake Washington; also receives stormwater runoff. Adjacent upland areas bolstered by placement of riprap materials and silt fencing. VF(FTATIflM - I Ica ceiant'f,- ..sF Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) ' Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator aLa~ Dominance Test Worksheet: Alnus rubra 100 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, orFAC: 5 (A) 3 Total Number of Dominant Species Across 7 (B) 4 All Strata: 100 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are 71 (NB) Saplini/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5. Cornus stolonifera 20 Yes FACW Prevalence index worksheet: 6. Alnusrubra 10 Yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiolyby: 7. Lonicera Involucrate 10 Yes FAC OBL species xl = 8. Rubus parvifiorus 10 No FAC FACW species x2 = 9. Rubus armeniacus 5 No FACU FAC species x3 55 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = 10. Hedem helix 5 Yes NL Column Totals: (A) (B) 11. Iris pseudacorus 5 Yes OBL Prevalence lndex = BIA 12. Convolvulus arvensls 5 Yes NL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 13. Yes Dominance Test is >50% 14. Prevalence Index is <301 15. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in 16. Remarks or on a separate sheet) 17. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 18. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 19. 20. 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 10 = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: 71% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test E1 US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL D,.,.1. %AL.+ A CD441Al,,* 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 to 10 10YR 3/1 100 None None None None Clay loam Coarse organics 10 to 18 10 YR 3/2 100 None None None None Clay loam 18+ 2.5Y 3/1 95 10YR 3/4 5 RM M Clay loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matnx Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172) 0 Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless dIsturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (If present): Type: Depth (Inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: 1 chroma HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 413) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (811) 0 Drainage Patterns (BlO) Water Marks (Bi) 0 Aquatic invertebrates (813) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial imagery (09) Drift Deposits (133) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) Iron Deposits (135) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): 4 inches Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Saturation and standing water observed in sample plot US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version I WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 04/23/2009 • Applicant/Owner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Wet C SP#lUp Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N/5E Landform (hilislope, terrace, etc.): Constructed stormwater feature Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): None Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Eg No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0. Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0. significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0. Soil 0. Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site ma showina samolina oolnt locations, transects. imoortant features. etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area withIn a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Sample plot located on compacted berm adjacent and upland to Wetland C. VFTATIflP'J - I JQP crionfifir m%mac r,f ninnte Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) - Absolute % Cover DOrrnflant lnthcator Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are 0 A 2. OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across 2 (B) 4. ftJl Strata: 100 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are (A/B) SaplinglShrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBI. FACW, or FAC: 5. Polygonum cuspldatum 80 Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 6. Rubus armenlacus 20 Yes FACU Total % Cover of. Multiply by: 7. OBL species xl = 8. FACW species x2 = 9. FAC species x3 100 = Total Cover FACU species x4 Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = 10. Column Totals: (A) (B) 11. Prevalence Index = B/A = 12. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 13. Yes Dominance Test is >50% 14. Prevalence Index is 3.0' is. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetiand hydrology must be present, = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation not present in sample plot location. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version Project Site: Quendall Terminal son mnlinr, Pr,int- Wf ( SPMlW,c 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) % Typet Loc2 Texture Remarks tlype: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Porè Lining, M=Matrix Hydnc Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydilc Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (85) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) "Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: Due to known contaminants in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in some areas. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (Bi 1) 0 Drainage Patterns (810) Water Marks (81) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (B 13) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) O Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (136) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (137) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): 4 inches Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Sample plot located on compacted berm adjacent to Wetland C; no evidence of wetland hydrology. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version I- I p WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 04/23/2009 • Applicant/Owner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point ZWet Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N/5E Landforrn (hilislope, terrace, etc.): Constructed stormwater feature Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): None Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53W Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0, significantly disturbed? Are Norn,al Circumstances present? Yes E9 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site man showinn samnllnn nnint Ine-ntinnc firnincoi-tc imnnrfnnf fanf.ima th, Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 E.th,Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Wetland C is a constructed stormwater feature that receives stormwater runoff from the property. Does not appear to be maintained. VPtETATIflN - tIø iDnfi nnmae nf Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are 4 (A) OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (8) = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are 100 (NB) SalinalShrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: Polygonum cuspidatum 65 Yes FACLJ Prevalence Index worksheet: SalIx las/andre 10 Yes FACW Total % Cover of: Multioly by: Rubus armeniacus 5 No FACU OBL species xl = FACW species x2 = FAC species x3 = 80= Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = Juncus effusus 50 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) Epilobium clllatum 25 Yes FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = Rumex cnspus 5 No ObI Hydrophytic Vegetation IndIcators: Lycopus amerlcanus 5 No Olb Yes Dominance Testis >50% Lemna mInor 5 No Obi Prevalence Index is 30l Trifolium repens 5 No FAC Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Convolvulus arvensls 5 No NL Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1lndicators of hydiic soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 100= Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 10 Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: 100% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance tesL US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL SmrIinn Pe,inF Wt R P1Wth -A Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) - - - - - - - -- Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C= Concentration, DDepletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (176) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or Sandy Gteyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Due to known contaminants in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in some areas. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained leaves (139) Z High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (BI 1) 0 Drainage Patterns (BlO) Water Marks (BI) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (813) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) Iron Deposits (135) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) FIeld Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Saturabon Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hrdrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Standing water present in constructed stormwater feature. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version I.. P . WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals CitylCounty: Renton/King Sampling Date: 0412312009 • ApplicantJOwner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Wet C SP#lUp Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29124N15E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Constructed stormwater feature Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): None Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic/ hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0. Or Hydrology 0, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0. naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site man showino samntinn nnint Ine-atinnq franimarta Imr.r.r+nf G,. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No Remarks: Sample plot located on compacted dirt road adjacent and upland to Wetland B. VFCFTATIflN - I Ia ign+fh' Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Indicator Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 100 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are SaplinqlShnib Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAG: (NB) Prevalence index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species xl FACW species x2 = FAG species x3 = Total Cover FACU species x4 Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species xfl = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence lndex=B/A= Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Yes Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is 3.0' Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (ExplaIn) 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Present? Yes 0 No Remarks: No vegetation present in sample plot location. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version Project Site: Quendali Terminal SOIL SmnIinri Print Wt ( $PL1l In Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: 1-listosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (P2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (72) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Due to known contaminants in the Study area, soil pits were not excavated in some areas. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) High Water Table (P2) (except MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (BlI) 0 Drainage Patterns (BlO) O Water Marks (Bi) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (04) 0 Shallow Aqultard (D3) Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (136) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): 4 inches Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Sample plot located on compacted dirt road adjacent to Wetland B; no evidence of wetland hydrology. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast— Interim Version I WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: QuendaD Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 04/2312009 • Applicant/Owner Queridall State: WA Sampling Point: Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24NI5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Constructed stormwater feature Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): None Subregion (LRR): A 1.at: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NW1 classification: None mapped Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the Site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0 Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site maø showinci samouina Doint locations, transects. imnortant featurps rt Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes Z No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: Wetland B is a recently constructed stormwater feature that receives stormwater runoff from the property. VFtFTATIfltU - I n+.f ,.f Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) AbSclUte Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are 2 A OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are 100 Saolinn/Shwb Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: Populus balsamifera 25 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: Salix Iasiandra 25 Yes FACW Total % Cover of Multioly by: OBL species xl = FACW species x2 = FAC species x3 = 50= Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence lndex= B/A= Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Yes Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is 301 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: 100% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test. Young willows and cottonwoods surrounded constructed stormwater feature. S US Army Corps of En gineers Western Mountains, Valley. and Coast - Interim Version Project Site: Quendall Terminal soil SmnIinri Pnint Wt (' SPf1Wot Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matdx Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gteyed Matrix (F2) O Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or oroblematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (Inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Due to known contaminants in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in some areas. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 48) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 48) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (Bli) 0 Drainage Patterns (810) Water Marks (Bi) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (82) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (CS) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (136) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes Z No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Standing water present In constructed stormwater feature. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - interim Version I p WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 04/30/2009 • ApplicanUOwner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: ZWet Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N/5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Lakefringe Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Bellingham silt loam NWI classification: Palustrine scrub-shrub Are climatic! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0 Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0, significantlydisturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0. Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site maD showina samolina oolnt locations, transects. imnnrtant features etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 10 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Wetland 0 associated with Lake Washington; also receives stormwater runoff. VFCFTATIOW - I IcP crionfifirnnmac nf ninnfa Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute Dominant lnthcator Dominance Test Worksheet: % Cover Species? Status Populus balsamffera 55 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are Salix lasiandra 35 Yes FACW OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across 4 3 (B) All Strata: 90 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are 100 (A/B) SalingIShrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: Cornus sericea 20 Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet: Lon/cera involucrate 10 No FAC Total % Cover of: Mult3ly by: Rubus armeniacus 10 No FACU OBL species xl FACW species x2 = FAC species x3 40 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = Plantago major 5 No FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index= B/A= Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Yes Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is <3.0' Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1lndicalors of hydrlc soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 5= Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: 100% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast— Interim Version Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL 0,,;,,,. iAI,,$ r% 0fl.UIAI, 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) % Typ& Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 6 IOYR 3/2 100 None None None None Sandy loam 6 to 18+ 10 YR 3/I 100 IOYR 4/6 10 D M Silt loam Compacted 1Type: C= Concentration, D"Depletion, RMReduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Localion: PL=Pore Lining, M'Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (Al 0) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (AS) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) El Sandy Mucky Mineral (SI) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland O Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (If present): Type: Coarse angular rock Depth (Inches): 6-8 inches Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: 2 chroma, mottles. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) El High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (Bli) 0 Drainage Patterns (BlO) Water Marks (BI) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (813) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) Surface Soil Cracks (136) 19 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No 0 Depth (inches): 4 inches Saturation Present? (indudes capillary fringe) Yes No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Primary indicators present. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version I. p WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 04/30/2009 • AppIicanVOwner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N15E Landforn, (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Lakefringe Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Belllngham silt loam NWI classification: Palustrine scrub-shrub Are climatic! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0 Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances' present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0. Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0 naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site man showino samnlina nnint IoiatInns franqer'f Imnnrhm* fpittirøc All' Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area withIn a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Wetland D associated with Lake Washington; also receives stormwater runoff. Sample plot located near the lake's edge. VFGTATItTh - tIa qripnfifir nzirnaa .sf nlrn,f Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absctute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Alnus rubra 75 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are 2. OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A) 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across 4. All Strata: 6 (B) 75 Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are 100 (A/B) SapIincIShrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW. or FAC: 5. Comus sarlcea 15 Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet: 6. Rubus specta bills 10 Yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 7. Rubus arrneniacus 5 No FACU OBL species xl = 8. FACW species x2 = 9. FAC species x3 40 = Total Cover FACU species x4 Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = 10. iris pseudacorus 5 Yes OBL Column Totals: (A) (B) 11. Epiobium ciliatum 5 Yes FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 12. Phalaris arundinacea 5 Yes FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 13. Yes Dominance Test is 50% 14. Prevalence Index is 53.01 15. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportIng data in 16. Remarks or on a separate sheet) 17. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 18. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (ExplaIn) 19, 20. 'Indicators of hydrlc soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 15= Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: 100% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast— Interim Version Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL S2mnflnn Pe,int Wt fl QPKqw.t 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 bc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 10 10YR 2/1 100 None None None None Loamy sand 10 to 12 2.5Y YR 411 75 IOYR 4/6 25 RM M Loamy sand Oxidized rhizospheres, transition 12 to 18+ 2.5Y 4/1 100 None None None None Sand 1Type: C= Concentration, DDepletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS'Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PLPore Lining, MMatrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (173) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: 1 chroma, mottics. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) 0 Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (69) 0 High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 413) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 46) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (611) 0 Drainage Patterns (610) Water Marks (81) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (813) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) 0 Iron Deposits (85) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (CS) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (136) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Water Table Present? Yes No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Saturation Present? (indudes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Primary indicators present. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version I- 11 S S WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 04/30/2009 Applicant/Owner: Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Wet 0 SP#1 Up Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29124N15E Landfomi (hilislope, terrace, etc.): Lakefringe Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Bellingham silt loam NWI classification: Palustrine scrub-shrub Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0, signifIcantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attarh site mn qhnwinn cnmnfln. nnt 4....$ '&..-.... Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Wetland D associated with Lake Washington; also receives stormwater runoff. Sample plot located adjacent to Wetland D. VFTATIflPJ - I I If,. Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Indicator Species? Status D ominance Test Worksheet: Populus balsamifera 100 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across 4 All Strata: 3 (B) 100 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are pijn/Shnib Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66 (A/B) Rubus armenlecus 25 Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet Populus balsamifera 5 No FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species xl = FACW species x2 = FAC species x3 = 30 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = Eplloblum cilia turn 5 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Yes Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is 3Q1 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 5= Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 30 Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: 66% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL Q,,.,,,-,I,,. D,.,e. AL.* fl QD#lI I.., 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) % Typo Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 18+ 2.5Y 512 100 None None None None Loamy day Compacted 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CSCovered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PLPore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydnc Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic(A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA l) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (Inches): Hydnc Soils Present? Yes 0 No Remarks: No evidence of hydric soils. I HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 413) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (Bli) 0 Drainage Patterns (BlO) Water Marks (Bi) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (Bi 3) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (01) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Primary indicators present; saturation at surface. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast— Interim Version I WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 04/30/2009 • Applicant/Owner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Wet E SP#1 Up Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N/5E Landform (hifslope, terrace, etc.): Constructed stormwater feature Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): None Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0 Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0. significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0 Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0 naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site mao showlnci samnllnn noint lnn2tinns trncor4 imnrr+ont fanfivroa M.- Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No Remarks: Sample plot located on compacted dirt road adjacent and upland to Wetland B. VE(FTATIO1'J - I lo Qriantifie nnmaa nF .,Ioon+o, Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Indicator Species? status Dominance Test Worksheet: Populus balsamffera 75 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAG: A Total Number of Dominant Species Across (B) 4 All Strata: 75 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are 1000/ AJB) 0 SaplinqlShwb Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5. Lonicera involucraja 15 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 6. Rubus armenlacus 10 No FACU Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 7. Comas ser/cea 5 No FACW OBL species xl = 8. FACW species x2 = 9. FAC species x3 = 30 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 10. Epjloblum ciliatum 15 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 11. Hedera helix 5 No UPL Prevalence Index = B/A = 12. GeranIum roberilanum 5 No NL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 13. Yes Dominance Test is >50% 14. Prevalence Index Is 3.0' 15. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in 16. Remarks or on a separate sheet) 17. Wetland Non-Vascular Plant& 18. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 19. 20. 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 25 = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 25 Present? Yes 19 No 0 Remarks: 100% Percent of Dominant Species that are FAC, FACW, or L. Large cottonwood extending from wetland to test plot US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast— Interim Version Project Site: Quendall Terminal SO" Q',,rnnfln,, O.-,i. M* C C1344 I I,.. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (P2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (SI) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or 0 Redox Depressions (F8) problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): I ype: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Due to known contaminants in the Study area, soil pits were not excavated in some areas. Test plot located on bermed area adjacent to Wetland E and has developed into dirt road. Soils appear very compact. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 High Water Table (P2) (except MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (Bi 1) 0 Drainage Patterns (810) Water Marks (Bl) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) Algal Mat or Crust (134) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) Iron Deposits (B5) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): 4 inches Saturation Present? (includes capdlary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Sample plot located on compacted dirt road adjacent to Wetland B; no evidence of wetland hydrology. US Army Coips of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast— Interim Version p I WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/king Sampling Date: 04130/2009 • Applicant/Owner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: SP#lWet Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N/5E Landform (hitlstope, terrace, etc.): Constructed stormwater feature Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0 -2 % Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0 naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site mao showina samolinci noint Ioctlnns. trnsert imnnrt2nf fptiire. etr Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes Z No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Wetland E is a constructed stormwater feature that receives stormwater runoff from the property. VGFTATIflN - Use snientifin nmes nf n1nnta Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Indicator Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Salix Iaslandra 90 Yes FACW Number of Dominant Species That Are Populus balsamifera 10 No FAC OBL, FACW, or FAC: I (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across 2 (B) 4 All Strata: 100 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are 50 (NB) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5. Rubus armeniacus 5 Yes FACIJ Prevalence Index worksheet: 6. . Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 7. OBL species xl = 8. FACW species x2 9. FAC species x3 = 5= Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = 10. Column Totals: (A) (B) 11. Prevalence Index = B/A = 12. Hydrophytic Vegetation IndIcators: 13. Yes Dominance Test is >50% 14. Prevalence Index is<3.0' 15. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in 16. Remarks or on a separate sheet) 17. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' 18. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 19. 20. 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground In Herb Stratum 20% Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: 50% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test. US Army Coips of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version I Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL Smn5nr, Pr,inf WM P Q0A1W.f Profite 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) % Typ& Loc2 Texture Remarks Type: C= Concentration, DDepletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AID) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (T172) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (At 1) 0 Depleted Matrix (P3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Due to known contaminants in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in some areas. II HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 48) 0 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (Bi 1) 0 Drainage Patterns (BID) Water Marks (81) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (Bi 3) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (82) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) - FIeld Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Saturation Present? (includes capilfary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Tide gauge installed in constructed stormwater feature. At thria of siirvcy water was at height 0'. Evidence that water at one time reached 4 leeL No indication if the tide gauge was installed correctly. Remarks: Standing water present in constructed stormwater feature. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version 0 S S S US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley. and Coast - Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 05/06/2009 Applicant/Owner. Quendall State: WA Sampling Point Wet F SP111 Up Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29124N/5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Lakefringe Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0 significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0. naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site mao showinci samolina ooint locations. transects. imnortant fpat,jrp ot, Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No Remarks: Data plot location on upland berm between Wetland F and Wetland C. VGFTATION - Uqp sr.ientifur nnmpq nf nInf Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) SOlUtS % Cover Dominant Indicator Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are 0 A ( 2, OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across 2 (B) 4 All Strata: = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are Saplinc/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) 00/ OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 Rubus armeniacus 30 Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species xl = FACW species x2 = FAC species x3 = 30 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = Polygonum cuspidatum 60 Yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) Epilobium cilia turn 5 No FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: No Dominance Test is >50% No Prevalence Index is <3.01 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 65 = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: 0% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test and Prevalence index < 3. Hydrophytic vegetation not present. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version I p S S S Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL 5amnIina PoinI Wt F Pt1tJn 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 1lype: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM'Reduced Matrix, CS-Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PLPore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2 cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (51) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or 0 Redox Depressions (F8) problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (Inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Due to known contaminants in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in some areas. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 413) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 413) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (Bl 1) 0 Drainage Patterns (BlO) Water Marks (Bl) 0 Aquatic invertebrates (BI 3) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (82) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aqultard (03) Iron Deposits (135) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): 15 inches Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No evidence of wetland hydrology. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: RentonlKing Sampling Date: 05/06/2009 Applicant/Owner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N/5E Landlorm (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Lakefringe Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0. Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site mao showina samolinci ooint locations, transects. Imnortant fahires. ete Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 19 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes Z No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Wetland F associated with Lake Washington; also receives stormwater runoff and overflow from Wetland C constructed storniwater structure. VGFTATIflP4 - Use sdentifir, names nf nbinf Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are 3 (A) 2. OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across 4. All Strata: 3 (8) 100 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL. FACW. or FAC: 100 (NB) 5. Amos rubra 50 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 6. Salixlasiandra 15 No FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 7. Rubus armeniacus 15 No FACU OBL species xl = 8. Populus balsamlfera 10 No FAC FACW species x2 = 9. FAC species x3 = 90 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 10. Juncus effusus 35 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 11. Phalaris arundinacea 25 Yes FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 12. IrIs pseudacorus 10 No OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 13. Gal/urn aparine 10 No FACU Yes Dominance Test is >50% 14. Plantago major 5 No FACU Prevalence Index is <3.0' 15. Rumex crlspus 5 No FAC Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in 16. Remarks or on a separate sheet) 17. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' 18. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 19. 20. 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 90 10 = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum5 Present? Yes 129 No 0 100% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version I [1 Project Site: Quendalt Terminal SOIL O.,....Ih..,.. 0,.h,4. hL..* C 0flU4%*I...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 0to6 2.5Y4/2 80 10YR5/6 20 RM PL Sand 6 to 18+ 2.5Y 4/1 60 1OYR 4/6 40 RM PL Sand tType: C= Concentration, DDepletion, RMReduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PLPore Lining, M=Matnx Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRR5, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol(A1) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (SB) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) 0 Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless drsturbed or problematic. Restrictive l_ayer (if present): Type: Depth (Inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: 2 chroma with mottles. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) 0 Water-StaIned Leaves (89) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 413) 0 Saturation (AS) 0 Salt Crust (811) 0 Drainage Patterns (BlO) Water Marks (BI) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aqultard (03) Iron Deposits (135) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): 11 inches Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): 11 inches Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Saturation and standing water observed in sample plot US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 05/06/2009 Applicant/Owner. Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Wet G SP#lUp Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N/5E Landfomi (hilislope, terrace, etc.): Constructed stormwater feature Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): None Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0. significantly disturbed? Are NormaI Circumstances" present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site mao showino samplinu point locations, transects. Important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Sample plot located on compacted berm adjacent and upland to Wetland G. V(TATIAPJ - I Ica qnianfifid- nnmoq M nlnf. Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Indicator Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are 0 'A 2. OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across 2 (B) 4. AJI Strata: 75 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are 0 (A/B) Saplinq/Shnib Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: 5. Rubus armeniacus 25 Yes FACU 6. Total % Cover of Multiply 7. OBL species xl = 8. FACW species x2 = 9. FAC species x3 30 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = 10. Polygonum cuspidatum 60 Yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) 11. Prevalence Index B/A" Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 12. 13. Yes Dominance Test is >50% 14. Prevalence Index is <3.01 15. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in 16. Remarks or on a separate sheet) 17. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 18. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 19. 20. 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 25 = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 25 Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: No Dominant Species that are FAC, FACW, or OBL. No wetland vegetation observed in sample plot 0 0 US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version S E1 E Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL c,,,,,t;,,,, Dnin4' %M4 f CD4II Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PLPore Lining, MMatrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Exptain In Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) ThIck Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (176) Sandy Mucky Mineral (SI) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (If present): Type: Depth (Inches): Hydric SoIls Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Due to known contaminants in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in some areas. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 48) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (BI 1) 0 DraInage Patterns (BlO) Water Marks (BI) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) 0 OxIdized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (134) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilted Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (136) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): 4 inches Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrolor Present? Yes 0 No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Sample plot located on compacted upland area adjacent to Wetland G; no evidence of wetland hydrology. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County Renton/King Sampling Date: 05/6/2009 ApplicanUOwner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N/5E Landform (hilislope, terrace, etc.): Constructed stormwater feature Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): None Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53W Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0 significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0 Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site mao showina samolinci oolnt locations, transects. imnortant features. ete Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes Z No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: Wetland G is a constructed stormwater feature that receIves stormwater runoff from the property. VF(FTATIflW - I I'p cripnfifir nnmac r'.f rk,nf, Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Indicator Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Salix lasiandra 60 Yes FACW Number of Dominant Species That Are 2. Alnus rubra 20 Yes FAC OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across 4 All Strata: 4 (B) 80 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are Saolino/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75% (NB) 5. Comus sericea 20 Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet 6. Rubus armeniacus 10 No FACU Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 7. OBL species xl = 8. FACW species x2 = 9. FAC species x3 = 30 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 10. Polygonum cusp/datum 5 Yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) 11. Prevalence Index = B/A = 12. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 13. Yes Dominance Test is >50% 14. Prevalence Index is <3Q1 15. Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in 16. Remarks oron a separate sheet) 17. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 18. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 19. 20. 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 5 = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 25 Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: 75% Percent of Dominant Species that are FAC, FACW, or OBL. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version 11 S Project Site: Quendall Terminal 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 bc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PLP0re Lining, MMatrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2 cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (72) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (51) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Te: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Due to known contaminants in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in some areas. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (BI 1) 0 Drainage Patterns (BID) Water Marks (BI) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (813) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (CS) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (136) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Water Table Present? Yes Z No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), If available: Remarks: Standing water present US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast— Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 05/06/2009 Applicant/Owner: Quendall Stale: WA Sampling Point: Wet H SP#lUp Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29124N/5E 40 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Ditch Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showina samiina øolnt locations, transects. Imnortant features. etc Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No Remarks: Wetland H was historically a constructed stormwater feature that conveys water to Lake Washington. During the survey stormwater flowed directly into the wetland as well as to an adjacent ditch that conveyed water to Wetland H via a culvert. Upland plot located on berm north of wetland. VEGETATION - [lee slentifis1 nme nf ntnfe Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absokite Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are A C OBI, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across 2 (B) All Strata: Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are SaplinqlShrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) so (NB) OBL, FACW, or FAC: Rubus armeniacus 25 Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of. Multiply by: OBL species xl = FACW species 40 x2 = 80 FAC species 10 x3 = 30 25 = Total Cover FACU species 35 x4 = 140 Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) IJPL species x5 = Phalaris arundlnacea 40 Yes FACW Column Totals: 85 (A) 250 (B) Equlsetum asvense 10 No FAC Prevalence Index B/A = 2.94 Polygonum cuspidatum 10 No FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Tanacetum vulgare 10 No NL Yes Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is 3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 70= Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 20 Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: 100% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test. Prevalence index <3.0. Hydrophytic vegetation present US Army Coips of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version 0 S S Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL amnlini Pôint Wt H SP*1Wt Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, MMatrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AID) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black i-listic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (SI) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches); Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Due to known contaminants in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in some areas. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (Bil) 0 Drainage Patterns (BiD) Water Marks (Bi) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (82) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) 0 Odized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) Iron Deposits (135) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (06) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Di) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (137) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): 4 inches Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No Z Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No wetland hydrology present US Army Co'ps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Rentonfking Sampling Date: 05/06/2009 ApplicanUOwner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: e et Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N/5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Ditch Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.53N Long: 122.20W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 19 No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0. Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0, significantly disturbed? Are Nornial Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0. Soil 0. Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site mao showina samolina noint locations, transects. lmnnrtant feahirps ett Flydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes E3 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Wetland H was hIstorically a constructed stormwater feature that conveys water to Lake Washington. During the survey stormwater flowed directly Into the wetland as well as to an adjacent ditch that conveyed water to Wetland H via a culvert. VFGFTATIflIU - I IQP lzrionfifir nnic rsf ninnfc Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet: % Cover Species? status Populus balsamffera 40 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 5 (8) 40 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are Saplinci/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) 100 (NB) OBL, FACW, or FAC: Alnus rubra 20 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: Salix lasiandra 20 Yes FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Lonicera lnvolucrate 15 No FAC OBL species xl = Spiraea douglasil 15 No FACW FACW species x2 Rubus annenlacus 10 No FACU FAC species x3 = 80 = Total Cover FACU species x4 Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = Juncus effusus 10 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) Phalaris arundinacea 10 Yes FACW Prevalence Index = B/A Equisetum arvense 5 No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Rumex crlspus 5 No FAC Yes Dominance Test Is >50% Ranunculus tepens 5 No FACW Prevalence Index is 3.0' Convoh'ulus a,vensls 5 No NL Morphological Adaptation& (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 40= Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 Present? Yes No 0 100% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version P p Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL SnnIin,, P,nI W4 I-I O01%Ail 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 bc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C= Concentration, DDepletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2bocation: PL=Pore Uning, M'Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No 0 Remarks: Due to known contaminants in the study area, soil pits were not excavated in some areas. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (811) 0 Drainage Patterns (810) Water Marks (81) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (82) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No 0 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No 0 Depth (inches): 4 inches Saturation Present? (includes captlary fringe) Yes No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), II available: Remarks: Saturation and standing water observed in sample plot US Aimy Cotps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant or Species? aiaha Dominance Test Worksheet: Salix !aslandra 15 Yes FACW Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: A Total Number of Dominant Species Across 4 All Strata: 2 (8) 15 Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are SaplinqlShrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) Poiygonum cuspidatum 90 Yes FACU Prevalence index worksheet: Rubus anneniacus 10 No FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 xl = FACW species 20 x2 = 40 FAC species 10 x3 = 30 100 = Total Cover FACU species 90 x4 = 360 Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = Epioblum ciliatum 5 No FACW Column Totals: 120 (A) 430 (B) Prevalence lndex= B/A 3.58 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: No Dominance Test is >50% No Prevalence Index is 301 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 5 = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 95 Present? Yes 0 No Remarks: The area Is dominated by Japanese knotweed which is choking out the entire herb and shrub stratum. I. WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals CityICounty: Renton/kirig Sampling Date: 06/19/2009 ApplicanVOwner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Up I SP92UP Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29124N/5E Landiorm (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Ditch Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.31N Long: 122.11W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Bellingham Silt Loam - NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0 significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0 Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site ma showina samoilna ooint locations, transects. imnortant featnres ei Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No Remarks: Wetland I Is located between a city road and a State/ federal interstate. The area is a depression and ditch which appears to have standing water or saturated soils for several months a year. VEGETATION - Uc sclentifit namec nf ntanf US Army Co,ps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast— Interim Version Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL mnHn,, P,.nf fl,.1 QOIIITID 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 10yr313 100 None Siltloam 8-18 lOyr 3/3 95 7.5yr 5/8 5 RM M Silt loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RMReduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric SolIs: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AID) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (Inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2. 4A, and 413) (MLRA 1,2, 4A and 48) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (811) 0 Drainage Patterns (BiD) Water Marks (BI) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (BI 3) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 GeomorphIc Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) Iron Deposits (B5) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC.Neutral Test (05) Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): inge) Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No evidence of hydrology was found at this soil plot. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: RentonlKing Sampling Date: 0611912009 ApplicanuOwner: Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Wet? SP#1 Wet investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29/24N15E 0 Landforrn (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Ditch Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat 47.31N Long: 122.11W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Bellingham Silt loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0 Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0. Or Hydrology 0. naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site mao showino samnhina noint Iocatinns trannprtn imnnr+nf fpfiirg= cfr. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes Z No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Wetland I Is located between a city road and a State/ federal interstate. The area is a depression and ditch which appears to have standing water or saturated soils for several months a year. VIFTATIflPd - I Ic.a Qriintifi# nnmac nf Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) - AbsOlUto % Cover Dominant Indicator Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are 2 A OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across 4 All Strata: 2 (B) 0 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are Sapllnq/Sh rub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 A/B) Sali.x Iasiandra 15 No FACW Prevalence Index worksheet: Polygonum cusp/datum 25 No FACU Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Cornus serlcea 60 Yes FACW OBL species 0 xl = FACW species 80 x2= 160 FAC species 0 x3 = 100 = Total Cover FACU species 25 x4 = 100 Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = Epilobium cilIafum 5 Yes FACW column Totals: 105 (A) 260 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.47 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Yes Dominance Teal is >50% Yes Prevalence Index is 3.01 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks oron a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 5= Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 95 - Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: 100% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast— Interim Version p S S Project Site: Quendat Terminal SOIL 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) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-6 lOyr 3/1 100 Loam 6-12 10yr3/2 85 2.5yr 416 15 0 M Loam 12-18 5y4/2 50 1Oyr6/8 50 0 M Loam 2.5Y412 25 D PL 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matnx Hydrlc Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (P2) 0 Stripped Matrix (56) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) Z Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (If present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydnc Soils Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: Depleted matrix HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (P3) 0 Salt Crust (Bi 1) 0 Drainage Patterns (BlO) Water Marks (BI) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (BI 3) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (134) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAG-Neutral Test (05) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (136) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain In Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): 11 inches Saturation Present? (includes capiliary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous Inspections), if available: Remarks: Saturation and standing water observed in sample plot US Am3y Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINAT{ON DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Rentonlking Sampling Date: 06/1912009 Applicant/Owner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Up J SP#2UP Investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29124N/5E Landform (hillstope, terrace, etc.): Ditch Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.31N Long: 122.11W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Bellingham Silt Loam NWI classification: None mapped Are climatic! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes N No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances' present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology D naturally problematic? (II needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site mat, showina samolina ooint locations, transects. imnortant features Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No N Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No N Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No N Remarks: Wetland J Is located between a city road and a State/ federal interstate. The area Is a depression and ditch which appears to have standing water or saturated soils for several months a year. VF(FTTIflPJ - I Ica criantifir nmac ,',f riI,n*c Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Status DomInance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are I A OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across 2 (B) 4 All Strata: 15 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: so (NB) Rubus arrneniacus 80 Yes FACLJ Prevalence Index worksheet: Phalarls arundlnacea 15 No FACW Total % Cover of. Multiply by: OBL species 0 xl = 0 FACW species 15 x2 = 30 FAC species x3 = 100 = Total Cover FACU species 80 x4 = 320 Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = Column Totals: 95 (A) 350 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.7 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: No Dominance Test is >50% No Prevalence Index is <3.0' Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 5 = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 95 Present? Yes 0 No N Remarks: The area is dominated by Himalayan blackberry and choking out the majority of the herb stratum. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast— Interim Version 0 S S Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL Samrilinri Pnin I In I SPiDI IP 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 0-18 10yr412 100 None Siltloam 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 S0ils3: Histosol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox(S5) 0 2cm Muck (AID) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (SI) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophylic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (If present): Type: Depth (Inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes 0 No Z Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 413) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (Bi 1) 0 Drainage Patterns (BlO) Water Marks (Bi) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Posit ion (132) Atgal Mat or Crust (134) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) 0 Recent Iron Reduction In Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (136) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fiinge) Yes 0 No Q Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No evidence of hydrology was found at this soil ploL US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Quendall Terminals City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 06/19/2009 Applicant1Owner Quendall State: WA Sampling Point: Wet J #1 Wet 0 investigator(s): A. Gale, J. Pursley Section, Township, Range: 29!24N/5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Ditch Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0 to 2 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.31N Long: 122.11W Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Bellingham Silt loam NW! classification: None mapped Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Z No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0 significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes 0 No 0 Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, Or Hydrology 0. naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site man showina samnilna noint lnc'atinns trancer.tc imrinrtnt ft,ir Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 19 No 0 Remarks: Wetland J Is located between a city road and a State/ federal interstate. The area Is a depression and ditch which appears to have standing water or saturated soils for several months a year. VEGETATION - Uqp scipnfifi namPs M ntants Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 30 foot radius) Absolute % Cover Dominant Indicator Species? Dominance Test Worksheet: Alnus rubra 10 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are 2 (A) OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 Total Number of Dominant Species Across 2 (B) All Strata: 0 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are SaplinIShrub Stratum (Plot Size: 15 foot radius) OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (NB) Phalan's arundinacea 100 Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet: Rubus armeniacus 15 No FACU Total % Cover of: Multiply by. OBL species xl = FACW species x2 = FAC species x3 = 100 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = l4erb Stratum (Plot Size: 3 foot radius) UPL species x5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Yes Dominance Test is >50% Yes Prevalence Index is <301 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, 5= Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1. 2, = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 95 Present? Yes 0 No 0 Remarks: 100% dominant wetland vegetation per the Dominance test I US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version 0 S S Project Site: Quendall Terminal SOIL mnllnr, PinF U1.f I QNfIW,,t 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 Dense root mat, organic 3-18 10YR 3/1 100 Silty loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CSCovered 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 (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2cm Muck (AlO) Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Hisfic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (M) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) Depleted Matrix (F3) Z Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes Z No 0 Remarks: Thick dark surface with matrix chroma of <1. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al). 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (139) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 413) Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (811) 0 Drainage Patterns (810) 0 Water Marks (Bi) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) 0 Sediment Deposits (132) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Ci) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (133) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (134) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) 0 Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (01) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) inundation Visible on Aerial imagery (137) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): 4 inches Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): At surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections). If available: Remarks: Saturation and standing water observed in sample plot US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast - Interim Version APPENDIX E ECOLOGY WETLAND RATING FORMS S 0 Wetland name or number A O WETLAND RATING FORM - WESTERN WASHINGTON Versi on 2 - Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland A Date of site visit: 0423/2009 Adam Gale and Joe Pursley Trained by Ecology? YesXNo Date of training May 2007 Rated by__ SEC: 29 TWNSHP: 24N RNGE: 5E Is SIT/R in Appendix D? Yes NoX Map of wetland unit: Figure Estimated size 0.1 Acre SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland Category I = Score >=70 Score for Water Quality Functions 12 Category II = Score 51-69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 8 Category III = Score 30-50 Score for Habitat Functions 20 Category IV = Score <30 TOTAL score for Functions 40 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I_ H_ Does not ApplyX Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) Summary of basic information abont the wetland unit Wetland Unit has Special Characteristics - - Wetland HGM Class - used for Rating Estuarine - Depressional - Natural Heritage Wetland - Riverine Bog - Lake-fringe 3< Mature Forest - Slope - Old Growth Forest - Flats - Coastal Lagoon - Freshwater Tidal - Interdunal None of the above X - I Check if unit has multiple X HGM classes present - Wetland Rating Form - western Washington August 2004 version 2 To be used with Ecology Publication 04-06-025 Wetland name or number A Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Additional Protection VIES NO (in the for _addition_to_ _protection_recommended_ _its_category) SP 1. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? X For the purposes of this rating system, 'documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFWfor the state? Does the wetland unit have a local signficance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number A 0 Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple 11GM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO - go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) Ifyour wetland can be classfled as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). 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. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? XThe vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (8 ha) in size; XAt 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) Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be veiy gradual), X The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetfiow, or in a swale without distinct banks. X The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in veiy small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 3 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number A 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 two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine 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, jfpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 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 Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM clases. 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 your wetland. 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 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 Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARIINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still 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. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 4 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number A L Lake-fringe Wetlands Points WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (Only I SCOre improve water quality per box) L I L 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? I (see p.59) L L 1.1 Average width of vegetation along the lakeshore (use polygons of Cowardin classes): Figure - Vegetation is more than 33ft (lOm) wide points = 6 Vegetation is more than 16 (5m) wide and <33ft points = 3 Vegetation is more than 6ft (2m) wide and <16 ft points = 1 Vegetation is less than 6 ft wide points = 0 3 Map of Cowardin classes with widths marked L L 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland: choose the appropriate description Figure that results in the highest points, and do not include any open water in your estimate of coverage. The herbaceous plants can be either the dominant form or as an understory in a shrub or forest community. These are not Cowardin classes. Area of Cover is total cover in the unit, but it can be in patches. NOTE: Herbaceous does not include aquatic bed. Cover of herbaceous plants is >90% of the vegetated area points = 6 Cover of herbaceous plants is >2/3 of the vegetated area points = 4 Cover of herbaceous plants is >1/3 of the vegetated area points = 3 Other vegetation that is not aquatic bed or herbaceous covers > 2/3 unit points = 3 Other vegetation that is not aquatic bed in> 1/3 vegetated area points = 1 Aquatic bed vegetation and open water cover> 2/3 of the unit points = 0 3 Map with polygons of different vegetation types L Add the points in the boxes above 6 L L 2. Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p.61) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in the lake water, or polluted surface water flowing through the unit to the lake. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qual jfy as opportunity. Wetland is along the shores of a lake or reservoir that does not meet water quality standards - Grazing in the wetland or within 150ft - Polluted water discharges to wetland along upland edge - Tilled fields or orchards within 150 feet of wetland multiplier - Residential or urban areas are within 150 ft of wetland - Parks with grassy areas that are mamtained, balifields, golf courses (all within 2 150 ft. of lake shore) Power boats with gasoline or diesel engines use the lake Other__________________________ YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 L TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from Li by L2 Add score to table on p. 1 12 Comments Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 9 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number A L Lake-fringe Wetlands HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to - reduce shoreline erosion L L 3. Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce shoreline erosion? L L 3 Distance along shore and average width of Cowardin classes along the lakeshore (do not include aquatic bed): (choose the highest scoring description that matches conditions in the wetland) > 3/4 of distance is shrubs or forest at least 33 ft (lOm) wide points = 6 > % of distance is shrubs or forest at least 6 ft. (2 m) wide points =4 > '4 distance is shrubs or forest at least 33 ft (lOm) wide points = 4 Vegetation is at least 6 ft (2m) wide (any type except aquatic bed) points =2 Vegetation is less than 6 ft (2m) wide (any type except aquatic bed) points = 0 Aerial photo or map with Cowardin vegetation classes L Record the points from the box above L L 4. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce erosion? Are there features along the shore that will be impacted if the shoreline erodes? Note which of the following conditions apply. There are human structures and activities along the upland edge of the wetland (buildings, fields) that can be damaged by erosion. - There are undisturbed natural resources along the upland edge of the wetland (e.g. mature forests other wetlands) than can be damaged by shoreline erosion - Other YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 L TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from L 3 by L 4 Add score to table on p. 1 Comments Points (only I score per box) (see p.62) Figure - 4 4 (seep. 63) multiplier 1.1 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 10 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number A These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points (only I score HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that unit functions to provide important habitat per box) H 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Figure - Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin)- Size thresholdfor each class is '/4 acre or more than 10% of the area ?unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. Aquatic bed Emergent plants XScrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) XForested (areas where trees have >30% cover) If the unit has a forested class check 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 Add the number of vegetation structures that qualfy. Ifyou have: 4 structures or more points =4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures points = 2 2 structures points = 1 1 1 structure points =0 H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) Figure - Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or '/4 acre 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 point = I 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 X Lake-fringe wetland =2 points Freshwater tidal wetland =2 points Map of hydroperiods 2 H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2. (d/Jerent patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrjfe, Canadian Thistle If you counted: > 19 species points =2 List species below ifyou want to: 5 - 19 species points = I <5 species points = 0 I Total for page Wetland R.ating Form - western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number A H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) Figure - Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H 1. 1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. 0 None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points N [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water 2 the rating is always "high". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpoints you put into the next column. XLarge, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). XStanding snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland XUndercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft (lOm) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least ¼ acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated. (structuresfor egg-laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. H 1. TOTAL Score - potential for providing habitat I Add the scores from Hi. 1. Hi.2. H1.3. H1.4. H15 I Comments Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number A H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (seep. 80) Figure - Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed." - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) Points = 5 - 100 m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 - 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water> 25% circumference,. Points =3 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points =3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above - No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (8 Oft) of wetland> 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points =2 - No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points =2 - Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 - Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0. - Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points =1 3 Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES = 4 points (go toH2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least SOft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES=2points (gotoH2.3) NO=H2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 mi of a lake greater than 20 acres? 2 YES =1 point NO =0 points Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 15 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 E Wetland name or number A H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw. wajio v/ha b/p hslist. him ) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (lOOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. _Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). _._Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 152). _Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. _Old-growthfMature 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 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre)> 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 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: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 158). 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 WDFWPHS report p. 161). _......jnstream: 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: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). 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. S _Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. _Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 in (0.5 -6.5 ft), 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> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are > 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 in (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats =3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4) Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number A E H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within V2 mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development, points = 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within '/2 mile points = 5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within '/ mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points = 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within V2 mile points = 3 There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile, points = 2 There are no wetlands within V2 mile, points =0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat I Add the scores from H2.1,H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 TOTAL for H 1 from page 14 Total Score for Habitat Functions - add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on p. 1 20 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number A CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS 0 Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit 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 X SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Bstuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat. I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES= Category l XNOgotoSC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. I - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat. II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (1111). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category 11 while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. - At least 3/4 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 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. S. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number A S SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgramlDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a SectionlTownship/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact VNHP/DNR) S/hR information from Appendix D - or accessed from WN}IP/DNR web site YES - contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO X Cat. I SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland SC3.OBogs (seep.87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? Yes - gotoQ.3 XN0-gotoQ.2 Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 X No - Is not a bog for purpose of rating Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes - Is a bog for purpose of rating X No - go to Q. 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" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 1. Is the unit forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? 0 1 2. YES = Category I NoX Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 19 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 August 2004 Wetland name or number A SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Ifyou 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/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. - Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 - 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO Xnot a forested wetland with special characteristics a sc 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) 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 surface 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 NOX not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets 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 invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). - At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I - The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. H S S S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW defmitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number A SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES - go to SC 6.1 NO X not an interdunal wetland for rating Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its 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 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category II X NO - go to SC 6.2 Cat. H SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III Cat. ifi Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics Choose the "highest" rating ifwetlandfalls into several categories, and record on p.'. If you_answered NO_for_all_types_enter_"NotApplicable"_on_p.1 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number B S WETLAND RATING FORM - WESTERN WASHINGTON Versi on 2 - Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland B Date of site visit: 04/23/2009 Rated by, Adam Gale and Joe Pursley Trained by Ecology? YesNo. Date of trainingM '2007 SEC: 29 TWNSHP: 24N RNGE: 5E Is SIF/R in Appendix D? Yes_ No Map of wetland unit: Figure Estimated size 0.1 Acre SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I__ II_ iIIX Iv__ Category I = Score >=70 Score for Water Quality Functions Category II Score 51-69 Score for Hydrologic Functions Category HI = Score 30-50 Score for Habitat Functions 5 Category 1V = Score < 30 TOTAL score for Functions Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I II_ Does not Apply.X Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) Summary of hasir infnrmtinn nhniit thp wt1nd unit 4 24 14 42 a Wetland Unit has Special Characteristics - Wetland HGM Class used for Rating - - Estuarine Depressional X Natural Heritage Wetland - Riverine - Bog - Lake-fringe - Mature Forest - Slope Old Growth Forest - Flats Coastal Lagoon - Freshwater Tidal - Interdunal None of the above X Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present - Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 1 August 2004 version 2 To be used with Ecology Publication 04-06-025 S Wetland name or number Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Additional Protection YES NO (in the for _addition_to_ _protection_recommended_ _its_category) SP 1. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (T/E species)? x For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. Has the wetland wilt been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? Does the wetland unit have a local signifIcance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number! Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington 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. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO - go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. It'it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). 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. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? .._The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (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) Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual) X The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetfiow, or in a swale without distinct banks. The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? 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 <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 3 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number B 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 two years. NOTE: The rivethie wilt can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine 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, ifpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO -go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 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 Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM clases. 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 your wetland. 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 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 Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still 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. Wetland Rating Form western Washington 4 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number B D Depressional and Flats Wetlands Points WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only 1 score - improve water quality box) D D 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.38) D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: Figure Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 3 D Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) points = 1 Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = 1 (If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing") 2 Provide photo or drawing S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS defmitions) D YES points =4 0 NO points =O D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest Cowardin class) Figure - D Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation > = 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation > = 1/2 of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation 4/10 of area points = 0 0 Map of Cowardin veqetation classes Dl .4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation. Figure This is the area of the wetland unit that is ponded for at least 2 months, but dries out D sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is permanently ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of 10 yrs. 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 0 Map of Hvdrooeriods multiplier 2 4 D Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above D D 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. - Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft X. Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland - Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft of wetland - A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging - Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft of wetland - Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen - Other__________________________ YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 D TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from Dl by D2 - Add score to table on p. 1 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 5 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 August 2004 Wetland name or number B D Depressional and Flats Wetlands Points HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only iscore reduce flooding and stream degradation CI x D 3. Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.46) D D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland unit Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit is a "fiat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = 1 (If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing ") 2 Unit has an_unconstricted,_or slightly_constricted,_ surface flowing) _outlet _(permanently _points _=_0 D D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods Estimate the height ofponding above the bottom of the outlet. For units with no outlet measure from the surface ofpermanent water or deepest part (if dry). Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland" points = 5 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 Unit is flat (yes to Q. 2 or Q. 7 on key) but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 7 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft points = 0 D D 3.3 Contribution of wetland unit 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 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 3 Entire unit is in the FLATS class points = 5 D Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 1121 D D 4. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 49) Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide gate, flap valve, reservoir etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which of the following indicators of opportunity apply. - Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems - Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems - Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or stream that has flooding problems multiplier Other Overflows to Lake Washington YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 2 D TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D 3 by D 4 Add score to table on p. 1 . 24 Wetland Rating Form western Washington 6 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number B These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points (only 1 score HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that unit functions to provide important habitat per box) H 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Figure - Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin)- Size threshold for each class is Y4 acre or more than 10% of the area if wilt is smaller than 2.5 acres. Aquatic bed Emergent plants _Xi.Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) 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 Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify. Ifyou have: 4 structures or more points = 4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures points = 2 2 structures points = 1 1 structure points = 0 H 12. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) Figure_ Check the types of Water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or V4 acre 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 point = 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 Map of hydroperiods H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (see p. 75) 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) You do not have to name the species. Do not indude Eurasian Milfoil, reed canalygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 List species below ifyou want to: 5 - 19 species points = 1 <5 species points = 0 I Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) :jgu re - Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. cI (:: 0IIIIII*i@ None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points N [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water 2 the rating is always "high". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpoints you put into the next column. __Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft (lOin) _XS table steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) .__At least ¼ acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation 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 each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. H 1. TOTAL Score - potential for providing habitat I Add the scores from Hi! H1.2 FJ1.3. 91.4 1-115 I 6 - - - - - Comments S S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number B H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H2.1 Buffers (seep.80) Figure._ Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed" - 100 in (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) Points = 5 - 100 in (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 - 50 in (1 70ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 - 100 in (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water> 25% circumference,. Points = 3 50 in (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above - No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 in (80ff) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 - Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ff) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0. - Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 3 Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES = 4 points (gotoH2. NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES=2points (gotoH2.3) NO=H2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 ml (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 nil of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 ml of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES = 1 point NO =0 points Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 15 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number B H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw. wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (lOOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. ..__Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). .....Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 154. Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. ._._Old-growthfMature 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 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh: crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 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: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in W!)FWPHS report p. 158). __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 WDFWPHS report p. 161). ...._jnstream: 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 WDFWreport: pp. 167-1 69 and glossary in Appendix A). 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 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. _Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), 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> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are > 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and > 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in uuestion H 2.4) Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct 2008 Wetland name or number B S H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (see p. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development, points = 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within ½ mile points = 5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points = 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within ½ mile points = 3 There is at least 1 wetland within ½ mile. points = 2 There are no wetlands within ½ mile. points = 0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat 1 Add the scores from H2.1,H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 8 TOTAL for Hlfrompagel4 6 Total Score for Habitat Functions - add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on p. 1 14 E S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number B CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS 0 Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit 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 X . SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat. I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES = Category I X NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. I - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat. II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (1111). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. - At least 3/4 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 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. S S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S E Wetland name or number B SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgramlDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a SectionfFownship/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen outmost sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR) S/T/R information from Appendix D - or accessed from WNHPIDNR web site - YES - contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO ..X SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland Cat. I SC 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland-is a bog. Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? Yes - gotoQ.3 XNo -gotoQ.2 Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 )< No - Is not a bog for purpose of rating Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes — Is abog for purpose of rating X No - goto Q. 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" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (>30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES= Category I No X Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 19 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number B 0, SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? ifyou 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/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. - Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80— 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO s_not a forested wetland with special characteristics Cat. I SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) 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 surface 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..X not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets 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 invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). - At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I - The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. II S S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number B SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES - go to SC 6.1 NO X not an interdunal wetland for rating ffyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its 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 SC 6.1Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category II X NO - go to SC 6.2 Cat. II SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category Ill Cat. III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics Choose the "highest" rating if wetlandfalIs into several categories, and record on p.1. If you_answered NO_for_all types_enter "Not_Applicable"_on_p.1 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number C O WETLAND RATING FORM - WESTERN WASHINGTON Versi on 2 - Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland C Date of site visit: 04/23/2009 Rated byAdam Gale and Joe Pursley Trained by Ecology? YesNo_ Date of fraining M '2007 SEC: ! TWNSHP: 24N RNGE: 5E Is STI'IR in Appendix D? Yes_ NoX Map of wetland unit: Figure Estimated size <0.1 Acre SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I ii iii ivX Category I = Score >=70 Category II = Score 51-69 Category III = Score 30-50 Category IV = Score < 30 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOTAL score for Functions Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I_ II_ Does not ApplyX Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) a Summary of basic infnrmation about I-he wetlanl unit Wetland Unit has Special Characteristics - - Wetland HGM Class used for Rating Estuarine - Depressional X Natural Heritage Wetland - Riverine - Bog - Lake-fringe - Mature Forest - Slope - Old Growth Forest - Flats - Coastal Lagoon - Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above X Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present - - Wetland Rating Form - western Washington version 2 To be used with Ecology Publication 04-06-025 August 2004 E Wetland name or number 9 Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Additional Protection YES NO (in the for _addition_to_ _protection_recommended_ _its_category) Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? x For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the Wl)FW for the state? Does the wetland unit have a local significance in adcLidon to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to deteimine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. 0 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number C Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington 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. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO - go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) ffyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). 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. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? __The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (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) Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be veiy gradual), X The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetfiow, or in a swale without distinct banks. ____The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? 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 <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 3 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number 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 two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine 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, ifpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 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 Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM clases. 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 is the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. 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 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 wilt 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 Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still 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. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 4 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number C D Depressional and Flats Wetlands Points WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only 1 score improve water quality per box) D D 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.38) D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: Figure - Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 3 D Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) points = 1 Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = I (If ditch is not permanent lyflowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing ") 2 Provide photo or drawing S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions) D YES points =4 0 NO points 0 D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest Cowardin class) Figure D Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation > = 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation > = 1/2 of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation <1/10 of area points = 0 0 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes D1.4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation. Figure This is the area of the wetland unit that is ponded for at least 2 months, but dries out D sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is perrnanentlyponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out oflOyrs. 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 0 Map of Hydroperiods D Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above I 2 D D 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. - Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft X. Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland - Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft of wetland - A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging - Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft of wetland multiplier - Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen - Other 2 YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 D TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from Dl by D2 - Add score to table on p. 1 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 5. version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 August 2004 Wetland name or number C D Depressional and Flats Wetlands Points HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only lscore reduce flooding and stream degradation per ox) D 3. Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? 1 (see p.46) D D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland unit Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit is a "fiat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = 1 (If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing ") Unit slightly_constricted,_ surface flowing) _has _an_unconstricted,_or _outlet _(permanently _points _=_0 2 D D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods Estimate the height ofponding above the bottom of the outlet. For units with no outlet measure from the surface ofpermanent water or deepest part (itdiy). Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland" points = 5 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 Unit is flat (yes to Q. 2 or Q. 7 on key) but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 3 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft points = 0 D D 3.3 Contribution of wetland unit 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 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 unit is in the FLATS class noints = 5 D I Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above D D 4. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (seep. Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide gate, flap valve, reservoir etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which of the following indicators of opportunity apply. - Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems - Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems - Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or stream that has flooding problems multiplier Other Overflows to Wetland C and then Lake Washington 2 YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 D TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D 3 by D 4 Add score to table on p. .1 16 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 6 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number C These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points (only 1 score HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that unit functions to provide important habitat per box) H 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Figure Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin)- Size threshold for each class is acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. Aquatic bed Emergent plants Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) If the wilt has a forested class check iI 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 Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify. Ifyou have: 4 structures or more points = 4 Map of Cowardirt vegetation classes 3 structures points = 2 2 structures points = 1 o 1 structure points = 0 H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) Figure - Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or Viacre to count. (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods) _X3ermanently 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 point = 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 Map of hydroperiods H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 W. (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) 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 List species below ilyou want to: 5 - 19 species points = 1 <5 species points = 0 0 Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number C H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) :igure - Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. (:D 0 (a) (*) (*) None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points ( [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: if you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water o the rating is always "high" Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpoints you put into the next column. __Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). __Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland __Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft (lOm) ___Stable steep banks of fIne material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least 1A acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation 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 each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. 0 H 1. TOTAL Score - potential for providing habitat I Add the scores from Hl.l. H1.2. H1.3. H1.4. HiS 0 Comments E F- I S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number C H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H2.l Buffers (seep.80) Figure_ Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland wilt. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed." - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) Points = 5 - 100 m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 - 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water> 25% circumference,. Points = 3 - 50 m (l7Oft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above - No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80ft) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 - Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0. - Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 2 Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES = 4 points (gotoH2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES =2 points (go to H2.) NO = H 2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 mi of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES = 1 point NO =0 points Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 15 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 E1 Wetland name or number C H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report httn://wdfw. wa.ov/hab/phslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (lOOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. __Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). ...._Bio diversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in W!)FWPHS report p. 152). 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 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 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: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 158). _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 WDFWPHS report p. 161). __jnstream: 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 WDFWreport: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). 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 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. _Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft, 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> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H2.4) Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number C H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development, points = 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within ½ mile points =5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points = 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within ½ mile points = 3 There is at least 1 wetland within ½ mile, points = 2 There are no wetlands within ½ mile. points =0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat 1 Add the scores from H2.1,H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 6 TOTAL for Hlfrompagel4 Total Score for Habitat Functions - add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on - P. 1 6 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 fl Wetland name or number C CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS 0 Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Categoiy when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit 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 X SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat. I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES = Category I X NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. I - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat. II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. if the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (I/Il). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. - At least 3/4 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 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number C SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Prograni/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact W!%JHP/DNR) S/T/R information from Appendix D - or accessed from WNHPIDNR web site YES - contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO .K Sc 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland cat. I sc 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identif' organic soils)? Yes - gotoQ.3 XNo-gotoQ.2 Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 X No - Is not a bog for purpose of rating Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes — Is abog for purpose of rating X No - goto Q. 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" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (>30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES = Category I No...X Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 19 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Ifyou 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/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. Mature forests: (west of the cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 - 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO .Xnot a forested wetland with special characteristics a SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) 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 surface 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...X not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets 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 invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). - At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I - The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. II Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number C SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES - go to SC 6.1 NO X. not an interdunal wetland for rating Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its 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 sc 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category II X NO - go to SC 6.2 Cat. II SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III Cat. III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics Choose the "highest" rating if wetlandfalls into several categories, and record on P. If you_answered_NO_for_all_t'pes_enter_"Not_Applicable"_on_p.! S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number D . WETLAND RATING FORM - WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 - Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland D Date of site visit: 04/30/2009 Rated by Adam Gale and Joe Pursley Trained by Ecology? YesNo Date of training May 2007 SEC: ! TWNSHP: 24N RNGE: 5E Is SIT/R in Appendix D? Yes NoX Map of wetland unit: Figure ____ Estimated size 0.6 Acre SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I__ ii__ IJIX iv Category I = Score >=70 Score for Water Quality Functions 18 Category II = Score 51-69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 12 Category III = Score 30-50 Score for Habitat Functions 24 Category IV = Score <30 TOTAL score for Functions Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I_ II_ Does not ApplyX Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) H summary or basic intormation about the wetland unit - Wetland Unit has Special Characteristics - Wetland HGM Class used for Rating - Estuarine - Depressional - Natural Heritage Wetland - Riverine Bog - Lake-fringe Mature Forest - Slope - Old Growth Forest - Flats Coastal Lagoon - Freshwater Tidal - Interdunal None of the above Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present X Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 1 August 2004 version 2 To be used with Ecology Publication 04-06-025 S Wetland name or number D Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Additional Pi otection YES NO (in the for _addition_to _protection_recommended_ _its_category) SP 1. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? x For the purposes of this rating system, 'documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the Wl)FW for the state? Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. 0- To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number D Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington 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. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO - go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). 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. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? XThe vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (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) Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), _X —The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetfiow, or in a swale without distinct banks. X The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? 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 <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 3 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number D 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 two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine 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, ifpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 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 Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM clases. 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 your wetland. 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 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 Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still 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. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 4 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number D L Lake-fringe Wetlands Points WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only 1 SCOIC improve water quality per box) L I L 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? I (see p.59) L L 1.1 Average width of vegetation along the lakeshore (use polygons of Cowardin classes): Figure Vegetation is more than 33ft (lOm) wide points = 6 Vegetation is more than 16 (5m) wide and <33ft points = 3 Vegetation is more than 6ft (2m) wide and <16 ft points = 1 Vegetation is less than 6 ft wide points = 0 6 Map of Cowardin classes with widths marked L L 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland: choose the appropriate description Figure - that results in the highest points, and do not include any open water in your estimate of coverage. The herbaceous plants can be either the dominant form or as an understory in a shrub or forest community. These are not Cowardin classes. Area of Cover is total cover in the unit, but it can be in patches. NOTE: Herbaceous does not include aquatic bed. Cover of herbaceous plants is >90% of the vegetated area points = 6 Cover of herbaceous plants is >2/3 of the vegetated area points = 4 Cover of herbaceous plants is >1/3 of the vegetated area points = 3 Other vegetation that is not aquatic bed or herbaceous covers > 2/3 unit points = 3 Other vegetation that is not aquatic bed in> 1/3 vegetated area points = 1 Aquatic bed vegetation and open water cover > 2/3 of the unit points = 0 3 Map with polygons of different vegetation types ------ L Add the points in the boxes above I 9 L L 2. Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p.61)' Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in the lake water, or polluted surface water flowing through the unit to the lake. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants coining from several souryes, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. - Wetland is along the shores of a lake or reservoir that does not meet water quality standards - Grazing in the wetland or within 150ff Polluted water discharges to wetland along upland edge - Tilled fields or orchards within 150 feet of wetland multiplier - Residential or urban areas are within 150 ft of wetland - Parks with grassy areas that are maintained, balifields, golf courses (all within 2 150 ft. of lake shore) Power boats with gasoline or diesel engines use the lake - Other___________________________ YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 L TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from Li by L2 Add score to table on p. 1 18 Comments Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 9 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number P L Lake-fringe Wetlands Points HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only 1 score - reduce shoreline erosion per box) L L 3. Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce shoreline erosion? (see p.62) L L 3 Distance along shore and average width of Cowardin classes along the lakeshore (do Figure - not include aquatic bed): (choose the highest scoring description that matches conditions in the wetland) > 3/4 of distance is shrubs or forest at least 33 ft (lOm) wide points = 6 > 3/4 of distance is shrubs or forest at least 6 ft. (2 m) wide points = 4 > 1/4 distance is shrubs or forest at least 33 ft (lOm) wide points = 4 Vegetation is at least 6 ft (2m) wide (any type except aquatic bed) points = 2 Vegetation is less than 6 ft (2m) wide (any type except aquatic bed) points = 0 6 Aerial photo or map with Cowardin vegetation classes L Record the points from the box above I 6 L L 4. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce erosion? (See p.63 Are there features along the shore that will be impacted if the shoreline erodes? Note which of the following conditions apply. There are human structures and activities along the upland edge of the wetland (buildings, fields) that can be damaged by erosion. - There are undisturbed natural resources along the upland edge of the wetland (e.g. mature forests other wetlands) than can be damaged by shoreline erosion - Other multiplier1 YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 2 L TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from L 3 by L 4 Add score to table on P. 1 12 Comments S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 10 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S fl Wetland name or number D These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points (only 1 score HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that unit functions to provide important habitat per box) H 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Figure - Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin,)- Size threshold for each class is 3 acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. _Aquatic bed _.X_Emergent plants .X_Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) If the unit has a forested class check if: _X_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 Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify. Ifyou have: 4 structures or more points = 4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures points = 2 2 structures points = 1 2 1 structure points = 0 H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) Figure - Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or Macre 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 point = 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 .X. Lake-fringe wetland =2 points Freshwater tidal wetland = 2 points Map of hydroperiods 3 H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 W. (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) 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 List species below ifyou want to: 5 - 19 species points = 1 <5 species points = 0 I Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW defInitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) :ig u re Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. CD IIIIII*@ None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points (I \ L-' [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water the rating is always "high". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpoints you put into the next colwnn. Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland _._Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft (lOm) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>-30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) _At least Y4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation 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 each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. L__ _~ H 1. TOTAL Score - potential for providing habitat I u Add the scores from H1.1. H1.2. H1.3. H1.4. H1_5 12 I Comments Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 - - - S S S Wetland name or number D H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H2.1 Buffers (seep.80) Figure_ Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland wilt. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed" - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) Points = 5 100 m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 - 50 in (1 70ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water> 25% circumference,. Points = 3 - 50 m (1 70ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above - No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80ft) of wetland> 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 - Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0. - Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 4 Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES=4points (gotoH2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES=2points (gotoH2.3) NO=H2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 ml (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 ml of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 mi of a lake greater than 20 acres? 2 YES = 1 point NO =0 points Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 15 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFWpriorhy habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw. wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (lOOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. .__Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 152). Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. ................Old-growthlMature forests: COld-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 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: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WL)FWPHS report p. 15). __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 WDFWPHS report p. 161). ._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 WDFWreport: pp. 167-1 69 and glossary in Appendix A). __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 7.6 in (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), 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> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 in (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are > 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 in (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not induded in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4) S Wetland Rating Form— western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number D H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development, points = 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within ½ mile points =5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points = 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within ½ mile points = 3 There is at least 1 wetland within ½ mile. points = 2 There are no wetlands within ½ mile, points = 0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat 1 12 Add the scores from H2.1,H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 TOTAL for H 1 from page 14 12 Total Score for Habitat Functions - add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on - - - p. 1 24 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number D CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHA1ACTERISTICS 0 Please determine lithe wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category, Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit 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 X SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat. I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES = Category I x NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. I - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat. II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (I/Il). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. - At least 3/4 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 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number D S S SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgramlDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a Section!fownshiplRange that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen outmost sites before you need to contact WATHP/DNR) SIT/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHPIDNR web site - YES____ - contact WNHPIDNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO _ SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland SC 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? Yes - gotoQ.3 XNo -gotoQ.2 Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 X No - Is not a bog for purpose of rating Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes - Is a bog for purpose of rating X No - go to Q. 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" deep. If the pH is less than 5,0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (>30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES = Category I No..X Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Cat. I Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 19 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 August 2004 Wetland name or number D S . SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Ifyou 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/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. - Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 - 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO .not a forested wetland with special characteristics a SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) 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 surface 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 N0K not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets 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 invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). - At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I - The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. II Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number D S SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES - go to SC 6.1 NO X not an interdunal wetland for rating Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its 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 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category H X NO - go to SC 6.2 Cat. II SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III Cat. III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics Choose the "highest" rating ifwetlandfalls into several categories, and record on p.1. If you_answered NO_for_all_types_enter_"Not_Applicable"_on_p.1 S S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definilions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number E O WETLAND RATING FORM - WESTERN WASHINGTON Versi on 2 - Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland E Date of site visit: 05/06/2009 Rated by. Adam Gale and Joe Pursley Trained by Ecology? YesNo_ Date of training May 2007 SEC: 29 TWNSHP: 24N_RNGE: 5E Is SfF/R in Appendix D? Yes_ N0X Map of wetland unit: Figure Estimated size 0.1 Acre SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I__ Ii_ iiiX iv Category I = Score >=70 Score for Water Quality Functions 14 Category II = Score 51-69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 24 Category III = Score 30-50 Score for Habitat Functions 12 is Category IV = Score <30 TOTAL score for Functions 50 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I...._ IL_ Does not ApplyX Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) El summary ot basic in.tormation about the wetland unit Wetland Unit has Spedal Characteristics - Wetland HGM Class used for Rating Estuarine - Depressional X Natural Heritage Wetland - Riverine - Bog - Lake-fringe - Mature Forest - Slope - Old Growth Forest - Flats - Coastal Lagoon - Freshwater Tidal - Interdunal None of the above x - Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present - - Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 1 August 2004 version 2 To be used with Ecology Publication 04-06-02 5 Wetland name or number E Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Additional Protection YES NO (in _addition_to_ the _protection_recommended_ for _its_category) Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (T/E species)? X For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. Has the wetland wilt been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number E 0 Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington 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. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO - go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) ffyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). The entire wetland unit is fiat 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. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? __The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (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) Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual) X The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetfiow, or in a swale without distinct banks. ____The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these t)pe of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 3 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number E 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 two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine 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, ffpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 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 Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM clases. 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 your wetland. 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 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 withLr, 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 Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still 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. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 4 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW defmitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number E D Depressional and Flats Wetlands Points WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (oh1Yl score - improve water quality per box) D D 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.38) D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: Figure - Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 3 D Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) points = 1 Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = 1 (If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing ") 2 Provide photo or drawing S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions) D YES points =4 o NO points =0 D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest Cowardin class) Figure D Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation > = 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation > = 1/2 of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation <1/10 of area points = 0 3 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes Dl .4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation. Figure D This is the area of the wetland unit that is ponded for at least 2 months, but dries out sometime during the year. Do not count the area that ispermanentlyponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out oflOyis. Area seasonally ponded is> ½ total area of wetland points = 4 Area seasonally ponded is> 1/4 total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is < ¼ total area of wetland points = 0 2 Map of Hydroperiods D Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above I 1 7 D D 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 44) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. - Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland - Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft of wetland - A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging - Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft of wetland multiplier - Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen - Other 2 YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 D TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from Dl by D2 Add score to table on D. 1 14 Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 5 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 August 2004 Wetland name or number E D Depressional and Flats Wetlands Points FIYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only 1scoe reduce flooding and stream degradation perox) D 3. Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (see D D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland unit Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = 1 Vf ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing " 2 Unit has an_unconstricted,_or slightly_constricted,_ surface flowing) _outlet _(permanently _points _=_0 D D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods Estimate the height ofponding above the bottom of the outlet. For units with no outlet measure from the surface ofpermanent water or deepest part (if dry). Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland" points = 5 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 Unit is flat (yes to Q. 2 or Q. 7 on key) but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 7 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft points = 0 D D 3.3 Contribution of wetland unit 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 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 3 Entire unit is in the FLATS class points = 5 D Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above I 12 D D 4. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 49) Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide gate, flap valve, reservoir etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which of the following indicators of opportunity apply. - Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems - Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems - Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or stream that has flooding problems multiplier OtherOverflows to Lake Washington YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 2 D TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D 3 by D 4 Add score to table on p. 24 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 6 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number E These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points (only 1 score 1-LABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that unit functions to provide important habitat per box) H 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Figure - Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin)- Size threshold for each class is Macre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. .__Aquatic bed _Emergent plants Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) XForested (areas where trees have >30% cover) 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 Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify. Ifyou have: 4 structures or more points = 4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures points = 2 2 structures points = 1 1 1 structure points = 0 H 1.2. Hvdroperiods (seep. 73) Figure - Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or 3 acre to count. (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods) _Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3 _._Seasona1ly flooded or inundated 3 types present points = 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present point = 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 Map of hydroperiods 2 H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 W. (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfofi, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 List species below ifyou want to: 5 - 19 species points = 1 <5 species points = 0 I Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number E H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) F igure Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H 1. 1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. CD 0 (::E) (*) (*) None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points / [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water 2 the rating is always "high". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpoints you put into the next column. .__Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). __Standing snags (diameter at the bottom > 4 inches) in the wetland .._._Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft (lOm) _Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) ._....At least /4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation 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 each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. H 1. TOTAL Score - potential for providing habitat Add the scores from Hi. i, H1.2, H1.3, Hi. 4, Hi. 5 I - - - - I Comments Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S S Wetland name or number E H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H2.1 Buffers (seep.80) Figure_ Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed" - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) Points = 5 - 100 m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 - 50 m (1 lOft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water> 25% circumference,. Points = 3 - 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above - No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80ft) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 - Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0. - Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 0 Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES = 4 points (go to H2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES =2points (go toH2.3) NO=H2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 ml of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 ml of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES =1 point NO =0 points Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 15 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw. wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (lOOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. __Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). _Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 154. Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. ..........._Old-growthlMature 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 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 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: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 159). __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 (11,11 descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 161). _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. (lull descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFWreport: pp. 167-1 69 and glossary in Appendix A). 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 7.6 in (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. .._.Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. .__S nags 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> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are > 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and > 6 in (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in cuestion H2.4) S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number E S H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development, points = 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within ½ mile points =5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points = 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within ½ mile points = 3 There is at least 1 wetland within ½ mile, points = 2 There are no wetlands within ½ mile. points = 0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat 1 5 Add the scores from H2. l,H2.2, H2.3, H2. 4 - - - - - TOTAL for H 1 from page 14 Total Score for Habitat Functions - add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on 1 P. 12 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number E CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS is Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? - The dominant water regime is tidal, - Vegetated, and - With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES= GotoSCl.1 NOX SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat. I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES = Category I X NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. I - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat. II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (1111). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a 1(11 Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. - At least 3/4 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 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW defInitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number E SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgramlDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a Sectionllownship/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR) SIT/R information from Appendix D - or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site - YES - contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO .X SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland Cat. I SC 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? Yes - gotoQ.3 XNo-gotoQ.2 Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 X No - Is not a bog for purpose of rating Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes — Is a bog for purpose of rating X No- goto Q. 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understoiy you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (>30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES = Category I No..X Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 19 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least I acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Ifyou 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/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. - Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80— 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO ..Xnot a forested wetland with special characteristics Cat. I SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) 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 surface 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.X not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets 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 invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). - At least A of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I - The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. II Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number E SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES - go to SC 6.1 NO .X. not an interdunal wetland for rating Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its 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 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category II X NO — go to SC 6.2 Cat. II SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III Cat. III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics Choose the "highest" rating ifwet1andfalls into several categories, and record on P. If you_answeredNO_for_all_types_enter_"Not_Applicable"_onp.1 S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number F WETLAND RATING FORM - WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 - Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland F Date of site visit: 05/06/2009 Rated by_________________________ Adam Gale and Joe Pursley Trained by Ecology? YesNo Date of training May2007 SEC: ! TWNSHP: 24N RNGE: 5E Is Sff/R in Appendix D? Yes_ NoX Map of wetland unit: Figure ____ Estimated size 0.1 Acre SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I__ II_ 111K Iv. S Category I = Score >=70 Category II = Score 5 1-69 Category III = Score 30-50 Category 1V = Score < 30 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOTAL score for Functions 12 8 15 35 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland [_ II_ Does not ApplyX Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) 0 1 Summary of basic information about the wetland unit Wetland Unit has Special Characteristics - - Wetland HGM Class used for Rating - Estuarine - Depressional Natural Heritage Wetland - Riverine Bog - Lake-fringe 3< Mature Forest - Slope - Old Growth Forest - Flats - Coastal Lagoon - Freshwater Tidal - Interdunal None of the above X Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present x i i S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington version 2 To be used with Ecology Publication 04-06-02 5 August 2004 Wetland name or number F Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? is If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Additional Protection YES NO (in the for _addition_to_ _protection_recommended_ _its_category) SP 1. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? X For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. Has the wetland wilt been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, 'documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number F 0 Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington 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. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO - go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) Jfyour wetland can be classifIed as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). 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. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? XThe vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (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) Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual) _X —The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetfiow, or in a swale without distinct banks. X The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? 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 <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 3 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number F 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 two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filkd with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine 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, ifpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 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 Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM clases. 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 your wetland. 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 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 Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still 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. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 4 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 r L fl Wetland name or number F L Lake-fringe Wetlands Points WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (Y I score improve water quality per box) L I L 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.59) L L 1.1 Average width of vegetation along the lakeshore (use polygons of Cowardin classes): Figure - Vegetation is more than 33ft (lOm) wide points = 6 Vegetation is more than 16 (5m) wide and <33ft points = 3 Vegetation is more than 6ft (2m) wide and <16 ft points = 1 Vegetation is less than 6 ft wide points = 0 Map of Cowardin classes with widths marked L L 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland: choose the appropriate description Figure that results in the highest points, and do not include any open water in your estimate of coverage. The herbaceous plants can be either the dominant form or as an understory in a shrub or forest community. These are not Cowardin classes. Area of Cover is total cover in the unit, but it can be in patches. NOTE: Herbaceous does not include aquatic bed. Cover of herbaceous plants is >90% of the vegetated area points = 6 Cover of herbaceous plants is >2/3 of the vegetated area points = 4 Cover of herbaceous plants is >1/3 of the vegetated area points = 3 Other vegetation that is not aquatic bed or herbaceous covers > 2/3 unit points = 3 Other vegetation that is not aquatic bed in> 1/3 vegetated area points = 1 Aquatic bed vegetation and open water cover> 2/3 of the unit points = 0 3 Map with polygons of different vegetation types L Add the points in the boxes above 4 L L 2. Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p.61) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in the lake water, or polluted surface water flowing through the unit to the lake. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. Wetland is along the shores of a lake or reservoir that does not meet water quality standards - Grazing in the wetland or within 150ft - Polluted water discharges to wetland along upland edge - Tilled fields or orchards within 150 feet of wetland multiplier - Residential or urban areas are within 150 ft of wetland - Parks with grassy areas that are maintained, ballfields, golf courses (all within 2 150 ft. of lake shore) Power boats with gasoline or diesel engines use the lake - Other__________________________ YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 L TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from Li by L2 8 Add score to table on p. 1 uomments Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 9 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 E Wetland name or number F L Lake-fringe Wetlands Points FIYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only 1 score per - reduce shoreline erosion L L 3. Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce shoreline erosion? (see p.62) L L 3 Distance along shore and average width of Cowardin classes along the lakeshore (do Figure - not include aquatic bed): (choose the highest scoring description that matches conditions in the wetland) > 3/4 of distance is shrubs or forest at least 33 ft (lOm) wide points = 6 > 3/4 of distance is shrubs or forest at least 6 ft. (2 m) wide points = 4 > ¼ distance is shrubs or forest at least 33 ft (lOm) wide points = 4 Vegetation is at least 6 ft (2m) wide (any type except aquatic bed) points = 2 Vegetation is less than 6 ft (2m) wide (any type except aquatic bed) points = 0 4 Aerial photo or map with Cowardin vegetation classes L Record the points from the box above I L L 4. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce erosion? (see p.63) Are there features along the shore that will be impacted if the shoreline erodes? Note which of the following conditions apply. There are human structures and activities along the upland edge of the wetland (buildings, fields) that can be damaged by erosion. - There are undisturbed natural resources along the upland edge of the wetland (e.g. mature forests other wetlands) than can be damaged by shoreline erosion - Other multiplier YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 2- L TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from L 3 by L 4 - Add score to table on p. 1 8 Comments Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 10 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points (oely 1 score HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that unit functions to provide important habitat per box) H 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Figure - Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin)- Size threshold for each class is M acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. Aquatic bed __Emergent plants _Scrub/shnib (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) _Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) 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 Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify. Ifyou have: 4 structures or more points = 4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 StflittJICS points = 2 2 structures points = 1 1 structure points = 0 H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) Figure - Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or N acre 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 point = 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 .X_ Lake-fringe wetland = 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland = 2 points Map of hydroperiods 2 H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2. (dL(ferent patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not indude Eurasian Milfoil, reed canaryrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 List species below ifyou want to: 5 - 19 species points = 1 <5 species points = 0 1 Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number F H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) F igure - Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H 1. 1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. CD 0 (:D (*) (4) None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate 2 points N'----" [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water the rating is always "high". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpoints you put into the next column. __Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in, diameter and 6 ft long). __Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft (lOm) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation 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 each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 781s an error. H 1. TOTAL Score - potential for providing habitat I Add the scores from Hi. 1, H1.2, H1.3, Hi. 4, Hi. 5 6 I Comments E1 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW defInitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number F H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (seep. 80) Figure - Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed." - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) Points = 5 - 100 m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 - 50 m (1 70ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water> 25% circumference,. Points = 3 - 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above - No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80ft) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 - Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fIelds, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0. Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridoi). YES =4 points (go to H2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES =2points (go toH2. NO=H2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 mi (8km) of a braékish or salt water estuary OR within 3 ml of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 ml of a lake greater than 20 acres? 2 YES = 1 point NO =0 points Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 15 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number F H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw. wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (lOOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. _Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). Bio diversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 154. 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 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%: crown cover may be less that 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: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 158). __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 WDFWPHS report p. 161). jnstream: 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 WDFWreport: pp. 167-1 69 and glossary in Appendix A). 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 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. .__Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basaIt andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. __S nags 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> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are > 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not induded in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4) Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number F S H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development, points = 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within ½ mile points =5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points = 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within ½ mile points = 3 There is at least 1 wetland within ½ mile, points = 2 There are no wetlands within ½ mile. points = 0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat 1 Add the scores from H2.1 ,H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 9 TOTAL for H 1 from page 14 6 Total Score for Habitat Functions - add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on 1 P. 15 S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number F CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS 0 Please determine lithe wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit 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 X . SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat. I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES = Category I X NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. I - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat. II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (111!). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category H while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a IIII Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. - At least 3/4 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 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. S S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number F SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgramlDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. sc 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a SectioniTownshipfRange that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR) S/T/R information from Appendix D - or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site - YES - contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO .. SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland cat. i SC 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? Yes - gotoQ.3 XNo -gotoQ.2 Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 X No - Is not a bog for purpose of rating Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes — Isabogforpurposeofrating XNo- gotoQ. 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" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WiTH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (>30% coverage of the total shrub/berbaceous cover)? YES = Category I No_X Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 19 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (see p. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Ifyou 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/acre (20 irees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. - Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 - 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO Xnot a forested wetland with special characteristics lL I SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) 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 surface 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 boftom) YES = Go to SC 5.1 NO_K not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets 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 invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). - At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. cat. I - The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. II Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number F S SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES -. go to sc 6.1 NO .X. not an interdunal wetland for rating Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its 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 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category II X NO - go to SC 6.2 Cat. II SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III Cat. III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics Choose the "highest" rating if wetlandfalls into several categories, and record on P. If you_answered_NO_for_all_types_enter_"Not Applicable"_on_p.1 S S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number G O WETLAND RATING FORM - WESTERN WASHINGTON Versi on 2 - Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland G Date of site visit: 04/30/2009 Rated byAdam Gale and Joe Pursley Trained by Ecology? YesNo_ Date of training May 2007 SEC: ! TWNSFIP: 24N RNGE: 5E Is SIT/R in Appendix D? Yes NoX Map of wetland unit: Figure Estimated size 0.1 Acre SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I____ II_ in)K_ iv____ Category I = Score >=70 Score for Water Quality Functions Category 11= Score 5 1-69 Score for Hydrologic Functions Category III = Score 30-50 Score for Habitat Functions Category IV = Score < 30 1 TOTAL score for Functions Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I_ II_ Does not ApplyX Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) Summary of basic information ahniit thp wtlnd unit 18 16 11 45 0 Wetland Unit has Special Characteristics - Wetland HGM Class used for Rating Estuarine - Depressional X Natural Heritage Wetland - Riverine - Bog Lake-fringe - Mature Forest Slope - Old Growth Forest - Flats - Coastal Lagoon - Freshwater Tidal - Interdunal None of the above Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present — Wetland Rating Form - western Washington version 2 To be used with Ecology Publication 04-06-025 August 2004 Wetland name or number G Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Additional Protection YES NO (in _addition_to_ the _protection_recommended_ for _its_category) Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (T/E species)? x For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 r E Wetland name or number G 0 Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington 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. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO - go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands, If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). 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. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? __The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (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) Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), X The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetfiow, or in a swale without distinct banks. ____The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? 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 <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 3 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number G 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 two years. NOTE: The riverine wilt can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES The wetland class is Riverine 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, ifpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 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 Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM clases. 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 your wetland. 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 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 Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still 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. S Wetland Rating Form— western Washington 4 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number G D Depressional and Flats Wetlands Points WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only! score improve water quality per box) - D D 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.38) D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: Figure - Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 3 D Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) points = 1 Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = 1 (If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing ") 2 Provide photo or drawing S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions) D YES points =4 0 NO points =0 D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest Cowardin class) Figure - D Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation > = 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation > = 112 of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation <1/10 of area points = 0 1 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes Dl .4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation. Figure This is the area of the wetland unit that is ponded for at least 2 months, but dries out D sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is permanently ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out oflOyrs. 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 Map of Hydroperiods D Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above I 7 D D 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? (seep. 44) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunily. - Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland - Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft of wetland - A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging - Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft of wetland multiplier - Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen —Other 2 YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 D TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from Dl by D2 - Add score to table on p. 1 14 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 5 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 August 2004 Wetland name or number G D Depressional and Flats Wetlands Points HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only 1 score - reduce flooding and stream degradation per box) D 3. Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.4 6) D D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland unit Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = 1 Vf ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing " 2 Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) points = 0 D D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods Estimate the height ofponding above the bottom of the outlet. For units with no outlet measure from the surface ofpermanent water or deepest part (if dry). Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland" points = 5 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 Unit is flat (yes to Q. 2 or Q. 7 on key) but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 3 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft points = 0 D D 3.3 Contribution of wetland unit 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 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 3 Entire unit is in the FLATS class points = 5 D Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above I 8 D D 4. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (seep. 49) Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide gate, flap valve, reservoir etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which of the following indicators of opportunity apply. - Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems - Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems - Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or stream that has flooding problems multiplier Other Overflows to Wetland 0 and then Lake Washington YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 2 D TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D 3 by D 4 - Add score to table on p. 1 16 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 6 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number G These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points (only 1 score HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that unit functions to provide important habitat per box) H 1. Does the wetland unit have the RgLential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Figure - Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin)- Size threshold for each class is 1% acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. Aquatic bed _.X_Emergent plants _X_Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) 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 Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify. Ifyou have: 4 structures or more points = 4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures points = 2 2 structures points = 1 1 structure points = 0 H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) Figure Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or N acre 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 point = 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 Map of hydroperiods H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75) 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) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Miffoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 List species below ifyou want to: 5 - 19 species points = 1 <5 species points = 0 I Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number G H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) F igure_ Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H 1. 1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. CD (OD@ None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points / N [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water the rating is always "high". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpothts you put into the next column. __Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). __Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft (lOm) __Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) ._._.At least ¼ acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation 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 each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. 0 H 1. TOTAL Score - potential for providing habitat I - - Add the scores from Hi. 1, H1.2, H1.3, Hi. 4, Hi. 5 I Comments S S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number G H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (seep. 80) Figure Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed." - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) Points = 5 - 100 m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 - 50 m (1 70ff) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 - 100 in (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water> 25% circumference,. Points = 3 - 50 m (1 70ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above - No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 in (80ff) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 - Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ff) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0. - Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 2 Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (see p. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES = 4 points (go to H2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ff wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES =2points (go toH2.3) NO=H2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 ml (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 ml of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES = 1 point NO =0 points Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 15 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number G H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw. wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (lOOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. _.Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (hill descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 154. Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. Old-growthlMature 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 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 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: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 158). .__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 (hill descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 161). jnstream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. 0 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 WDFWreport: pp. 167-1 69 and glossary in Appendir A). 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 7.6 in (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), 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> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are > 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and > 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4) S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number G S H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development, points = 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within ½ mile points = 5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points = 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within ½ mile points =3 There is at least 1 wetland within ½ mile. points = 2 There are no wetlands within ½ mile. points = 0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat 7 Add the scores from H2.1 ,H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 TOTAL for H 1 from page 14 Total Score for Habitat Functions - add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on 1 P. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number G CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS 0 Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit 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 X SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat. I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES = Category! X NO go to SC 1.2 sc 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. I - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat. II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spar-dna spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (I/Il). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. - At least 3/4 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 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage PrograrnfDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a SectionlTownship/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR) SITIR information from Appendix D - or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site - YES - contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO X. sc 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland SC 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? Yes - gotoQ.3 XNo-gotoQ.2 Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 X No - Is not a bog for purpose of rating Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes - Is a bog for purpose of rating X No - go to Q. 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" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 1. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (>30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? 0 1 2. YES = Category I No..X Is not a bog for purpose of rating S S Cat. I Cat. I Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 19 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 August 2004 Wetland name or number G S SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least I acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Ifyou 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/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. - Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 - 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO X not a forested wetland with special characteristics Cat. I SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) 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 partialiy separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks - The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface 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 NOX not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets 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 invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). - At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I - The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. II S 0- Wetland Rating Form western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number 2 C SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES - go to SC 6.1 NO .X. not an interdunal wetland for rating Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its 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 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category H X NO - go to SC 6.2 Cat. II SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III Cat. III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics Choose the "highest" rating if wetlandfalls into several categories, and record on p.1. If you_answered NO_for_all_types_enter_"Not_Applicable"_on_p.1 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H WETLAND RATING FORM - WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 - Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland H Date of site visit: 05/06/2009 Rated by. Adam Gale and Joe Pursley Trained by Ecology? YesXNo Date of training May 2007 SEC: 29 TWNSHP: 24N RNGE: 5E Is SiT/R in Appendix D? Yes NoX Map of wetland unit: Figure Estimated size 0.1 Acre SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I_ II.......... III><_ IV. Category I = Score >=70 Score for Water Quality Functions 6 Category II = Score 5 1-69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 6 Category III = Score 30-50 Score for Habitat Functions 13 Category IV = Score < 30 TOTAL score for Functions 25 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I_ II_ Does not ApplyX Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) Sumniarv of basic infnrmtinn 2hnhlt thp wtlnd unit [1 Wetland Unit has Special Characteristics - - Wetland HGM Class used for Rating Estuarine - Depressional - Natural Heritage Wetland - Riverine - Bog - Lake-fringe Mature Forest - Slope X Old Growth Forest - Flats - Coastal Lagoon - Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above x - Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present - - Wetland Rating Form - western Washington version 2 To be used with Ecology Publication 04-06-025 August 2004 Wetland name or number H Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? if you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Additional Protection YES NO (in the for _addition_to_ _protection_recommended_ _its_category) SP 1. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TLE species)? X For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S Wetland name or number H 0 Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington 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, identifr which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO - go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. ifit is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarmne wetlands have changed (see p. ). 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. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? .__The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (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) Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be veiy gradual), _X —The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetfiow, or in a swale without distinct banks. X The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? 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 <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 3 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H 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 two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine 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, ifpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 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 clases. 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 your wetland. 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 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 Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still 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. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 4 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S E Wetland name or number H S Slope Wetlands Points WATER QUALITY FIJNJCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only 1 score improve water quality per box) S I S 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.64) S S 1.1 Characteristics of average slope of unit: Slope isl% or less (a 1% slope has a 1 foot vertical drop in elevation for every 100 ft horizontal distance) points = 3 Slope is 1% - 2% points = 2 Slope is2%-5% points =1 Slope is greater than 5% points = 0 2 S S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS defmitions) 0 YES =3points NO=Onoints S S 1.3 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Figure - Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits the vegetation in the wetland. Dense vegetation means you have trouble seeing the soil surface (>75% cover), and uncut means not grazed or mowed and plants are higher than 6 inches. Dense, uncut, herbaceous vegetation> 90% of the wetland area points = 6 Dense, uncut, herbaceous vegetation> 1/2 of area points = 3 Dense, woody, vegetation> ½ of area points = 2 Dense, uncut, herbaceous vegetation> 1/4 of area points = 1 Does not meet any of the criteria above for vegetation points = 0 Aerial ohoto or rnaD with vecetation oolvaons S Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above 3 S S 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. - Grazing in the wetland or within 150ft Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland Tilled fields, logging, or orchards within 150 feet of wetland multiplier - Residential, urban areas, or golf courses are within 150 ft upslope of wetland —Other 2 YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 t TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from Si by S2 Add score to table on o. 1 uomments Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 11 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number S Slope Wetlands HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion S 3. Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding and stream erosion? S S 3.1 Characteristics of vegetation that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms. Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fit conditions in the wetland. (stems ofplants should be thick enough (usually> 1/81n), or dense enough, to remain erect during surface flows) Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation covers > 90% of the area of the wetland. points = 6 Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation> 1/2 area of wetland points = 3 Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation> 1/4 area points = 1 More than 1/4 of area is grazed, mowed, tilled or vegetation is not rigid points = 0 S S 3.2 Characteristics of slope wetland that holds back small amounts of flood flows: The slope wetland has small surface depressions that can retain water over at least 10% of its area. YES points = 2 NO points =0 S Add the points in the boxes above S S 4. Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? Is the wetland in a landscape position where the reduction in water velocity it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows? Note which of the following conditions apply. - Wetland has surface runoff that drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems OtherLake Washington is located immediately downslope. (Answer NO if the major source of water is controlled by a reservoir (e.g. wetland is a seep that is on the downstream side of a dam) YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 S TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from S 3 by S 4 Add score to table on p. 1 Comments Points (only I score per box) (see p.68) 1 FA 1 —1 I 3 I J7s-ee`p7 7-0)-1 multiplier 2 .- Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 12 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S C E Wetland name or number H These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points (only I score HABITAT FUNCTIONS Indicators that unit functions to provide important habitat per ho) H 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Figure - Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin)- Size threshold for each class is Viacre or more than 10% of the area if wilt is smaller than 2.5 acres. Aquatic bed _X_Emergent plants _Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) __Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) lithe unit has a forested class check if , jhe forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify ffyou have: 4 structures or more points = 4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures points = 2 2 structures points = 1 2 1 structure points = 0 H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) Figure - Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or Macre to count. (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods) Perrnanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3 _X_Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present points = 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present point = 1 _Saturated only 1 type present points = 0 Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland _X Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake-fringe wetland = 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland = 2 points Map of hydroperiods 2 H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75) 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) 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 List species below ifyou want to: 5 - 19 species points = 1 <5 species points = 0 I Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) F igure - Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H 1. 1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. 0 None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points - N [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water 2 the rating is always "high". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpoints you put into the next column. __Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). __Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland __Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft (lOm) __Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turnedey/brown) At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation 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 each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. 0 - - - H 1. TOTAL Score - potential for providing habitat I Add the scores from H1.1. H1.2. H1.3. H1.4. H1.5 I Comments Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S El S E Wetland name or number H H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H2.1 Buffers (seep. 80) Figure_ Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating See text for definition of "undisturbed." - 100 in (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) Points = 5 - 100 m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 - 50 in (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 - 100 in (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water> 25% circumference,. Points = 3 - 50 in (1 70ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above - No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 in (80ft) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 - Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0. Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (darns in riparian corridors, heavily usedavel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES = 4 points (go to H2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES =2points (go toH2. NO=H2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 ml (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 ml of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES = 1 point NO =0 points Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 15 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw. wagov/hab/phslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (lOOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. .__Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). ...X..Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 154. ........_.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 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 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: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oaklconifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 156). __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 WDFWPHS report p. 161). _jnstrearn: 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 WDFWreport: pp. 167-1 69 and glossary in AppendiK A). 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 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), 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> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 in (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4) E Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H E H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development, points = 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within ½ mile points =5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points = 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within ½ mile points = 3 There is at least 1 wetland within ½ mile. points = 2 There are no wetlands within ½ mile. points = 0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat I 61 4 Add the scores from H2.1 ,H2.2, H2.3, H2INTOTAL for H 1 from page Total Score for Habitat Functions - add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result 1 P. 13 C E Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS 0 Please determine if the wetlandmeets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Cirde the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? - The dominant water regime is tidal, - Vegetated, and - With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES= GotoSCl.1 NO SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat. I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-15 1? YES = Category I NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. I - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat. II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (1111). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. - At least 3/4 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 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S S S Wetland name or number H SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgramlDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a Sectiontrownship/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR) SIT/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHPIDNR web site - YES - contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to sc 2.2 NO sc 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = Category I NO not a Heritage Wetland cat. I SC 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? Yes - gotoQ.3 No-gotoQ.2 Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 No - Is not a bog for purpose of rating Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes - Is a bog for purpose of rating No - go to Q. 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" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (>30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES = Category I No..._ Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 19 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? ffyou 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/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. - Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80— 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO not a forested wetland with special characteristics Cat. I SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) 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 surface 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 meets 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 invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). - At least 1/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I - The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. II S S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H S SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES - go to SC 6.1 NO - not an interdunal wetland for rating Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its 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 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category II NO - go to SC 6.2 cat. ii SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III cat. III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics C'hoose the "highest" rating fwetlandfalls into several categories, and record on p.1. If you_answered NO_for_all_types_enter"Not_Applicable"_on_p.1 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number S WETLAND RATING FORM - WESTERN WASHINGTON Versi on 2 - Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland I Date of site visit: 06/19/2009 May2007 Adam Gale and Joe Pursley Trained by Ecology? YesNo_.. Date of training Rated by SEC: 29 . TWNSHP: 24N RNGE: 5E Is SiT/R in Appendix D? Yes_ NoX Map of wetland unit: Figure 2 Estimated size 0.05 Acre SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I II IIIX iv Category I = Score >=70 Score for Water Quality Functions Category II = Score 51-69 Score for Hydrologic Functions Category HI = Score 30-50 1 Score for Habitat Functions 5 1 Category IV = Score < 30 I TOTAL score for Functions 18 16 9 43 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I_ II_ Does not ApplyX Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) Summary of basic information about the wefland unit Wetland Unit has Special Characteristics - - Wetland HGM Class used for Rating - - Estuarine - Depressional X Natural Heritage Wetland - Riverine - Bog - Lake-fringe - Mature Forest Slope Old Growth Forest - Flats - Coastal Lagoon - Freshwater Tidal - Interdunal None of the above X Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present Wetland Rating Form - western Washington version 2 To be used with Ecology Publication 04-06-025 August 2004 S Wetland name or number Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Additional Protection YES NO (in _addition_to_ the _protection_recommended_ for _its_category). SP 1. Has the wetland unit been docwnented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TiE species)? x For the purposes of this rating system, 11 documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WE)FW for the state? X— Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number is Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington 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. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO - go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe if yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). The entire wetland unit is fiat 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. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (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) 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 sheetfiow, or in a swale without distinct banks. ____The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? 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 <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 3 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number 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 two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine 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, ifpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 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 clases. 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 your wetland. 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 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 Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still 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. S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 4 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 4 S Wetland name or number D Depressional and Flats Wetlands Points WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (°°'Y1 SCOI improve water aualitv per box) D D 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 3 D Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) points = 1 Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = 1 (If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing") Provide photo or drawing S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions) D YES points =4 NO points =0 D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest Cowardin clas Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation > = 95% of area points = 5 D Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation> = 1/2 of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation <1/10 of area points = 0 Map of Cowarclin vegetation classes Dl .4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation. This is the area of the wetland unit that is ponded for at least 2 months, but dries out D sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is permanently ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of lOyrs. 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 < '/4 total area of wetland points = 0 Map of Hydroperiods D Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above D D 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. - Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft X. Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland - Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft of wetland - A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging - Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft of wetland - Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen - Other______________________________________ YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 D TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from Dl by D2 Add score to table on a 1 (seep.38) Figure 2 Figure_ 3 Figure - multiplier 2 18 Wetland Rating Form— western Washington 5 version 2 Updated with new WDFW defInitions Oct. 2008 August 2004 Wetland name or number D Depressional and Flats Weflands Points HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only 1 score reduce flooding and stream degradation per ox D 3. Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? J (see D D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland unit Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = I (If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing ") Unit has an_unconstricted,_or slightly_constricted,_ surface flowing)_ points _outlet _(permanently _=_0 2 D D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods Estimate the height ofponding above the bottom of the outlet. For units with no outlet measure from the surface ofpermanent water or deepest part (if dry). Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland" points = 5 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 Unit is flat (yes to Q. 2 or Q. 7 on key) but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 3 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft points = 0 D D 3.3 Contribution of wetland unit 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 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 3 Entire unit is in the FLATS class points = 5 D I Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 181 D D 4. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 49) Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide gate, flap valve, reservoir etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which of the following indicators of opportunity apply. - Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems - Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or stream that has flooding problems multiplier —Other 2 YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 D TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D 3 by D 4 Add score to table on p. 1 16 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 6 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points (onty 1 score HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that unit functions to provide important habitat per l,ox) H 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Figure - Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin)- Size threshold for each class is V acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. __.Aquatic bed Emergent plants _Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) 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 Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify. Ifyou have: 4 structures or more points = 4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures points = 2 2 structures points = 1 0 1 structure points = 0 H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) Figure Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or Y acre 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 ...XOccasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present point = 1 ..X..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 Map of hydroperiods 2 H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75) 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) 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 List species below ifyou want to: 5 - 19 species points = 1 <5 species points = 0 0 Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) :igure Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes (descrthed in H 1. 1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. EiZ : 0 IIIIKIiII None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points ,---- .----. ' - - [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water the rating is always "high". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpoints you put into the next column. __Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4 in. diameter and 6 ft long). __Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (Zm) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft (lOm) Stable steep banks of fIne material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least ¼ acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation 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 each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. 0 - - - H 1. TOTAL Score - potential for providing habitat I Add the scoresfromHl.1,H1.2,H1.3,HJ.4,H1.5 II Comments S ED Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 E Wetland name or number H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H2.1 Buffers (seep.80) Figure_ Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed." - 100 in (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) Points = 5 - 100 in (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 - 50 m (llOft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 - 100 in (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water> 25% circumference,. Points = 3 - 50 in (llOft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above - No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80ft) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 - Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0. Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads; paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES=4points (gotoH2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES =2 points (go toH2.3) NO = H 2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 mi of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES = 1 point NO =0 points Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 15 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw. wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (lOOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. ..__Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). .._Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 152). Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. ........_..Old-growthlMature 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 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 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: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 158). __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 WDFWPHS report p. 161). .._jnstream: 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 WDFWreport: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). __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 7.6 in (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. ..Talus: Homoge.nou.s areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 in (0.5 - 6.5 ft), 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> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are > 2 in (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 in (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4) S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development, points = 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within ½ mile points = 5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points = 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within ½ mile points = 3 There is at least 1 wetland within ½ mile, points = 2 There are no wetlands within ½ mile, points = 0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores from H2. 1,H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 6 - - - - - TOTAL for H 1 from page 14 Total Score for Habitat Functions - add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on p. 1 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS 0 Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit 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 X SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat. I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES = Category I X NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category H Cat. I - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat. II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (1111). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a 1/11 Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. - At least 3/4 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 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. L S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number S SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 87) Natural. Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgramlDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WATHP/DNR) S/TIR information from Appendix D - or accessed from WNHPIDNR web site - YES - contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO .) cat. I Sc 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland S SC 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify lIthe wetland is a bog. Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identil' organic soils)? Yes - gotoQ.3 XNo-gotoQ.2 Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 X No - Is not a bog for purpose of rating Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes - Is a bog for purpose of rating X No - go to Q. 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" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 1. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (>30% coverage of the total shiub/herbaceous cover)? S L2 YES = Category I No.X Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 19 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 August 2004 Wetland name or number SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (see p. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least I acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Ifyou 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/acre (20 Irees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. - Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 - 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO X not a forested wetland with special characteristics Cat. 1 SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) 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 surface 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...X not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets 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 invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). - At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I - The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. II 0- 0 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number 1] SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES - go to SC 6.1 NO X not an interdunal wetland for rating Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its 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 sc 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category II X NO - go to SC 6.2 Cat. II SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III Cat. III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics Choose the "highest" rating fwetlandfalls into several categories, and record on p.1. If you_answered NO_for_all_types_enter "Not_Applicable"_on_p.1 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number WETLAND RATING FORM - WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 - Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland J Date of site visit: 06/19/2009 Rated by. Adam Gale and Joe Pursley Trained by Ecology? YesNo_ Date of training May 2007 SEC: 29 TWNSHP: 24N RNGE: 5E Is STF/R in Appendix D? Yes_ NoX Map of wetland unit: Figure 2 Estimated size 0.1 Acre SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I____ II__.. iiiX_ Iv Category I = Score >=70 Category!! = Score 51-69 Category Ill = Score 30-50 Category N = Score < 30 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOTAL score for Functions 14 10 14 38 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I_ II Does not ApplyX Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) 0 1 Summary of basic informitinn qhniit thp wet1nd irnit Wetland Unit has Special Characteristics - Wetland HGM Class used for Rating Estuarine - Depressional X. Natural Heritage Wetland - Riverine Bog Lake-fringe Mature Forest - Slope Old Growth Forest - Flats - Coastal Lagoon - Freshwater Tidal - Interdunal None of the above x Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present x Wetland Rating Form - western Washington version 2 To be used with Ecology Publication 04-06-025 August 2004 Wetland name or number Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Additional Protection YES NO (in the for _addition_to_ _protection_recommended_ _its_category) SP 1. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? X For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WL)FW for the state? Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its fun ctions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. 0- To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. 0-- Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number 0 Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington 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 Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO - go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) Jfyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuthne wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). 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. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? __The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (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) Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), X The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetfiow, or in a swale without distinct banks. The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? 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 <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 3 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number 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 two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine 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, ifpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 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 Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM clases. 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 your wetland. 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 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 Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still 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. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 4 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Figure - 3 Figure_ 2 multiplier 2 14 Wetland name or number D Depressional and Flats Wetlands Points WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only 1 score improve water quality per box) D I D 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.38) D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: Figure - Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 3 D Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) points = 1 Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = 1 (If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing ' 2 Provide photo or drawing S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions) D YES points =4 NO points =0 D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest Cowardin clas Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation > = 95% of area points = 5 D Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation > = 1/2 of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation <1/10 of area points = 0 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes Dl .4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation. This is the area of the wetland unit that is ponded for at least 2 months, but dries out D sometime during the year. Do not count the area that ispermanentlyponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of lOyrs. 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 < Y4 total area of wetland points = 0 Map of Hydroperiods D Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above D D 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. - Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland - Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft of wetland A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging - Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft of wetland - Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen - Other____________________________________ YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 D TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from Dl by D2 Add score to table on a 1 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 5 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 August 2004 Wetland name or number D Depressional and Flats Wetlands HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to - reduce flooding and stream degradation D 3. Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland unit Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch points = 1 Vf ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermiuentlyflowing"l Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) points = 0 D D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods Estimate the height ofponding above the bottom of the outlet. For units with no outlet measure from the surface ofpermanent water or deepest part (if dry). Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland" points = 5 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 Unit is flat (yes to Q. 2 or Q. 7 on key) but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft points = 0 D D 3.3 Contribution of wetland unit 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 its eli The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of 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 unit is in the FLATS class DOints = 5 Points (only I score per box) (see p.46) VA D I TotalforD3 Add the points in the boxesabove 1 5 D D 4. Does the wetland unit have the opportiw to reduce flooding and erosion? 7s Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide gate, flap valve, reservoir etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which of the following indicators of opportunity apply. - Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems - Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or stream that has flooding problems multiplier Other primary hydrology source from WSDOT pond 2 YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 D TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D 3 by D 4 Add score to table on p. 1 10 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 6 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes.Points (only 1 score HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that unit functions to provide important habitat per box) H 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Figure - Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin)- Size threshold for each class is Y acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. Aquatic bed _X_Emergent plants Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) 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 Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify. ffyou have: 4 structures or more points = 4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures points = 2 2 structures points = 1 1 structure points = 0 H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) Figure Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or V4 acre to count. (see text for descriptions ofhydroperiods) Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3 _X_Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present points = 2 _._Occasional1y flooded or inundated 2 types present point = 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 Map of hydroperiods 3 H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 W. (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milt'oil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 List species below Lfyou want to: 5 - 19 species points = 1 <5 species points = 0 1 Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) F igure - Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. cD( 0 :IIII)(:I*)(I:) None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points /• N [riparian braided channels] High =3points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water the rating is always "high". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpoints you put into the next column. __Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or, contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft (lOm) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least ¼ acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation 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 each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. 2 H 1. TOTAL Score - potential for providing habitat I Add the scores from Hi. 1. H1.2. H1.3. Hi. 4. Hi. 5 I 8 Comments Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new W])FW definitions Oct. 2008 S [I Wetland name or number H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H2.1 Buffers (seep.80) Figure_ Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland (mit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed." - - 100 in (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) Points = 5 - 100 in (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 - 50 in (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 - 100 in (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water> 25% circumference,. Points = 3 - 50 in (1 7Oft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above - No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 in (80ft) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 - Vegetated buffers are <21n wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0. - Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES =4 points (go to H2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES=2points (gotoH2.3) NO=H2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 ml of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 ml of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES = 1 point NO =0 points Total for page Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 15 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFWpriorhy habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw. wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (lOOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. ._.._Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). __Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 152). _Herbaceous B aids: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. .__Old-growthlMature 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 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 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: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFWPHS report p. 158). __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 WDFWPHS report p. 161). _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 WDFWreport: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). .__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 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. _Talus: Homogenous areas of rock nibble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), 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> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 in (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 in (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not mduded in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in cuestion H 2.4) ED Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development, points = 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within Va mile points =5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within ½ mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points = 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within ½ mile points =3 There is at least 1 wetland within ½ mile, points = 2 There are no wetlands within ½ mile, points = 0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat 1 Add the scores from H2.1,H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 6 TOTAL for H 1 from page 14 I - - - - - 8 Total Score for Habitat Functions - add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on - - - p. 1 14 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Cfrde the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? - The dominant water regime is tidal, - Vegetated, and - With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES= Gotoscl.1 N0.X SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat. I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-15 1? YES = Category I X NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category [I Cat. I - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat. II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (LIII). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a MI Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. - At least 1/4 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 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. S S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 S Wetland name or number SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgranifDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. sc 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WATHP/DNR) S/hR information from Appendix D - or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site YES - contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO .X. SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland Cat. I SC 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? Yes - gotoQ.3 XNo-gotoQ.2 Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 X No - Is not a bog for purpose of rating Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes — Isabogforpurposeofrating X No - goto Q. 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" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (>30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES = Category I No...X Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 19 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Ifyou 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/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. - Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 - 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO ..Xnot a forested wetland with special characteristics Cat. I SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) 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 surface 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 NOX.. not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets 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 invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). - At least 1/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I - The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. II S 11 S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Wetland name or number SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES - go to SC 6.1 NO X. not an interdunal wetland for rating Ifyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its 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 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category II X NO - go to SC 6.2 cat. ii SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III Cat. III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics Choose the "highest" rating ifwetlandfalls into several categories, and record on p.1. If you_answered NO for_all_types_enter"Not_Applicable"_on_p.1 S Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 APPENDIX F SITE PHOTOGRAPHS S S 40 Appendix F- Site Photographs I o '4 & J Photograph I Wetland A Facing West / 4 4 4 4 I • £ ) .Lj 4. 4 1 ; .. I ' 42 1sc ..,-, -: -- _____ I - : 4.1 - ..--- -: Photograph 2 Wetland B Facing South 0 Wetland and Ordinary Hiqh Water Mark Delineation Report September2009 QuendaLl TennthaJ F-I XXOax Appendix F- Site Photographs S Photograph 3 Wetland C Facing East S Photograph 4 Wetland D Facing North Wetland and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Report Septem ber 2009 Quendall Terminal F-2 S Appendix F- Site Photographs S Photograph 5 Wetland E Facing South S S Photograph 6 Wetland F Facing South Wetland and Ordinaiy Hiqh Water Mark Delineation Report September2009 Quendali Temiinai F-3 Appendix F- Site Photographs Jv ; - '•'' '•'" 'V 0 '. '"V • '' /'i" -'' ' '". V4J . ... ) IN J41 ' 4' ' "p ' VN V ;i? •_c 'V -V • • ' OA Photograph 7 Wetland G Emergent Community Photograph 8 Wetland G Soil Plot Location S .. S Wetland and Ordthaiy High Water Mark Deiineation Report September2009 Quendall Temjinal F-4 xtc Appendix F - Site Photographs S Photograph 9 Wetland H Facing West - !W -,. ...PA - 1~ W-27, -~ M~W.: I vz~ Photograph 10 Wetland H Soils (not touched or keyed due to known contaminants) Wetland and Ordinaxy High Water Mark Delineation Report September2009 Quendall Tenninal F-5 Appendix F- Site Photographs I - .... .. -. 1. \" - - , - Photograph 11 OHWM Delineation; Southern Half of Property Photograph 12 OHWM Delineation; Southern Half of Property Wetland and Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Report September2009 Quendall Terminal F-6 - : Appendix F- Site Photographs S Photograph 13 OHWM Delineation; Northern Half of Property S Photograph 14 - - Wetland J Facing Southeast Wetland and Ordinary Hiqh Water Mark Delineation Report Qjzendal] Terminal F-7 September2009 Appendix F— Site Photographs 'k S - -. M - $ * -. ---- --- ' S. 3-4 -A - - ?i• 4'1 Photograph 15 Wetland I Facing Southeast S S Wet/and and OrdthaiyHih Water Mark Delineation Report September2009 Quendall TerrninaJ F-8 APPENDIX G MITIGATION ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM, QUENDALL AND BAXTER PROPERTIES S 0 EARTH AM lATE 0 ASSOC BCIENCEBJ INC 911 FifthAvenue, Suit Men!peidum Washington 98003 Phone (425) 827-7701 Fax (425) 827-5424 DATE: February 17, 2000 PROJECT NO.: KB99142A PROJECT NAME: Quendall/Baxter Mitigation Analysis Memorandum TO: Larry Martin, Chuck Wotfe, John Ryan, Grant Hairrsworth, Ron Straka, Susan Carlson, Jennifer Henning, Bill Joyce, Catherine Petito Boyce, Elizabeth River Higgins, Jim Green, Erik Stockdale, Brian Sato, Gail Colbum, Martha Turvey, Sarah Suggs, Larry Fisher, David Bortz, Carol Cloen, Karen Walter, Glen St. Amant, Jim Hanken, and Lynn Manolopoulos FROM: Andy Kindig, Judith Light, and Carl Hadley REGARDING: Notes from the November 17, 1999 Meeting and The Final Remediation Mitigation Analysis Memorandum. . The third and final meeting on the Quendall Terminals and Baxter Remediation Mitigation Plan was held on November 17, 1999 in Renton. Handouts from that meeting were sent to your attention on November 18, 2000. Those included: The agenda, A Memorandum dated November 17, 1999 summarizing the comments received on the draft (October 19) Mitigation Analysis Memorandum and a brief description of how they were handled, and A revised Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, dated November 17, 1999. A summary of discussion during the November 17" meeting is attached in this package. That summary was not sent earlier, so that we could include the final results of discussions with Ecology on minor changes to the November 17, 1999 Mitigation Analysis Memorandum. The final changes were minor, and have been incorporated into a final Mitigation Analysis Memorandum report dated February 17, 2000. That report is also attached. The final changes agreed with Ecology included the following: 1. Any main north-south pedestrian trail connector proposed by subsequent . development would be landward and outside of the buffer along Lake Washington and the two wetland mitigation areas at Baxter Cove and the southwest corner of Quendall Terminals. Access would be controlled by FEB 23 2000 E signage, and any combination of fencing or dense/thorny native vegetation. The final Consent Decrees will provide for assurance that the mitigation described in the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum will be implemented, and that the contractor overseeing the implementation and the subsequent success monitoring will be made known in advance to Ecology. Monitoring would occur five times over 10 years, not over 5 years as previously proposed. Water derived from the dewatering of Baxter Cove to allow remediation would be treated as necessary and discharged to the sanitary sewer, not to Lake Washington. An error in Figure 4-4 was corrected, so that the tree cover was correctly referenced as 50 percent. All of these changes were minor. Thank you very much for participating in the preparation of this mitigation plan. In combination with contamination remediation, • implementation of this plan will greatly enhance the southeastern Lake Washington shoreline. ACKJId ._ KB99142A55 LD-D:Jth2-00 - W2K 2 0 QuendallfBaxter Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Third Meeting List of Attendees on November 17, 2000: Larry Fisher, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Martha Turvey, Washington Department of Ecology Gail Colburn, Washington Department of Ecology Grant Hainsworth, ThermoRetec Carol Cloen, Washington Department of Natural Resources Andy Kindig, Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Judith Light, Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Carl Hadley, Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Darlene Madenwald, Orion Group Lynn Manolopoulos, Davis Wright Tremaine Bill Joyce, City of Renton; Ogden, Murphy & Wallace Ron Straka, City of Renton Chuck Wolfe, Vulcan Northwest; Foster Pepper & Shefelman Jennifer Henning, City of Renton Meeting Notes from November 17, 2000: These notes are based on notes taken by Andy Kindig, Judith Light, and Carl Hadley. As you might expect, they reflect major topics and points, and are not intended to be a transcript of the meeting. [Light] Described the 1.5:1 wetland mitigation ratio basis as consistent with City of Renton policy given the proposed enhancement; and that the elimination of vertical and bare dirt banks at the lakeshore will actually create more lake-side wetlands than are being counted for acreage at the northern and southern ends of the mitigation area. Buffer averaging was discussed as up to the subsequent development to determine the need for; any implemented averaging would have to make biological sense given the restoration objectives of the mitigation plan. That determination would be made at the time of the final planting plan preparation, which Ecology and the Army Corps would review through the NWP 38 permitting process. [Suggs, Colbuni, Fisher] While Sarah Suggs indicated that she felt there should be no trails anywhere in the mitigation area, Larry Fisher indicated that he would prefer the main north-south trail spine be outside the mitigation area. [Light response] Public access is one part of the City's comprehensive plan for the property, and could be controlled with perpendicular extensions to the main north-south spine extending to outlooks landward of the ordinary high water mark of Lake Washington. It was agreed that placement of the main north-south trail spine outside of S February 17, 200) ASSOCL4TED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACEJId - FJ99142456 - LD-D:tidU-OO- W2K Page 1 the mitigation area would be presented to those deriving development concepts for the properties. [Light] 50 percent forest cover was being proposed to maintain and enhance the bird habitat along the shoreline. Greater tree cover would decrease the bird habitat value. [Suggs] Can tree type/placement be specified at this time? She wants full consideration to habitat, not to creating views. [Light response] Not at this time. Specifications would be prepared for Army Corps and Ecology review at the time of the final planting plan. [Suggs and Colburn] Enquired about placing vertical tree snags within the mitigation area. [Light response] Snags need to be buried up to at least 30 percent of their height to stay upright, and this would interfere with the capping objectives of the site, as well as potentially interfere with ground water flow. The objectives of the contaminant remediation team need to take priority, but will be consulted during preparation of the final planting plan to see if any snags could be safely placed. [Suggs] Requested 10 years of monitoring, rather than the 5 years proposed. Would the contractor guarantee planting success? [answer: yes for immediate success in first year]. [Madenwald] Who will get the reports, and will the Muckelsht)ots be involved? [Light response] We expect the mitigation reports will be distributed to anyone with an interest, but Ecology would likely be the lead to make the initial determination for a mailing list. The Muckleshoots have participated in the process since its first inception years ago, and receive all information as a listed participant. It is our understanding from Karen Walters that the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe views the remediation as a positive action, and are directing their resources in other directions at present. [Hadley] Described fisheries assessment and mitigative elements as being directed at all fish species in Lake Washington, not just sockeye. In response to questions about the accounting method for measuring linear extent of bulkheads, clarified that initial work looked south onto the Barbee Mill where genuine bulkheads occur, but that property is not now included. The category stayed nonetheless. Bollards were separately accounted from bulkheads in the report tables, although they both have the same fisheries habitat effect. The 33 percent of area with bank protections in place included bollards, rip-rap, log skids, and other reinforcements. There are no true bulkheads on the Quendall or Barbee properties. Februay 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. ACK/Id - KB9914L456 - LD.D:UdU-OO- W2K Page 2 S [Colburn] The question is procedural. [Suggs] Her experience with other municipalities does not give her assurance. She would like bonding. [Joyce] Doesn't see need for bonding, but it could be discussed further. [Colburn] Assurance is not documented in this mitigation report. [Wolfe and Joyce] We can consider an inclusion by reference to the Consent Decree obligations. [Suggs] What type of temporary irrigation would be used for the mitigation plantings? Would there be a diversion from Lake Washington? [Light] City water would be the source. [Suggs] In the early 1990s, portions of the Baxter site were cleared without a permit. [Colburn] The owners were required to mitigate at that time [City added that a permit was granted after the fact as an administrative matter]. Mitigation consisted of a silt fence, 5 straw cover on the cleared areas, and winter wheat planting (occurred in November). [Suggs] Then the site had more habitat value than at present. Is the comparison of enhancement to how it appears now, or then? [Hadley] To how it appears now. 50 years ago it was a forested river delta. [Light] The issue is moot. Vegetation will still be removed by remediation, and this mitigation proposal will replace it with greater value. [Kindig] Practically speaking, there are no data on the past 1990 action to apply a valuation to the alder that were removed, nor would it change the mitigation plan. The site exists as we see it at present, and that condition is documented. [Wolfe] In the 1960s to 1980s it had less value while industrial activity was active. The discussion closed at that point. Febnwry 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK114 - K89914Z456 - LD.D:tW12-W. W2K Page 4 MITIGATION ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM QUENDALL AND BAXTER PROPERTIES RENTON, WASHINGTON Vulcan Northwest City of Renton PROJECT NO. KB99142A February 17, 2000 CORPORATE OFFICE KrMond, Wa,hingfon 98033 911 Fifth Avenue, Suile 100 ASSOCIATED (425) 827-7701 EARTH FAX (425) 827-5424 AMSCIENCES, INC S BAINBRIDGE ISLAND OFFICE 179 Modrone i.one North Boinbridge Islond, WA 98110 (206) 780-9370 FAX (206) 780-9438 S S PORT QUENDALL MITIGATION ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM Prepared for: Vulcan Northwest 110 110" Avenue NE, Fifth Floor Bellevue, WA 98004 and The City of Renton . 1055 South Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, WA 98055 Prepared by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98033 a February 17, 2000 Project No. KB99142A S - Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum TABLE OF CONTENTS • 1.0 FNTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1.1 Objectives ........................................................................................... 1 1.2 Disclaimer........................................................................................... 1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED RESOURCES ...................................................... .............. 2 2.1 Water Quality ......................................................................... .............. 2 2.1.1 South Lake Washington.................................................................. 2 2.1.2 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage................................................................ 9 2.2 Plants and Animals .............................................................................. 12 2.3 Fisheries Affected Environment............................................................... 16 2.3.1 Introduction............................................................................... 16 2.3.2 Lake Washington Biology ............................................................. 1 7 PelagicSpecies............................................................................. 17 BenthicSpecies............................................................................. 21 2.3.3 Lake Washington Shoreline ........................................................... 21 SurveyMethodology ...................................................................... 21 On-Site Habitat and Valuation........................................................... 21 Off-Site Habitat ............................................................................ 27 2.3.4 Lake Washington Open Water ........................................................ 29 Benthic....................................................................................... 29 • Water Column.............................................................................. Surface....................................................................................... 30 30 2.3.5 Habitat Valuation........................................................................ 30 2.4 Recreational....................................................................................... 31 2.5 Cultural............................................................................................ 31 2.6 Economic.......................................................................................... 31 3.0 IMPACTS .............................................................................................................................. 32 3.1 Plants and Animals .............................................................................. 32 3.1.1 Disturbance to Shoreline............................................................... 32 3.1.2 Dredge Offshore Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAB) ................... 32 3.1.3 In-Water One-Foot Sediment Cap.................................................... 37 3.1.4 Dredge Offshore Areas with Greater Than 50 Percent Wood Chips ........... 37 3.1.5 Upland Soil Excavation and Capping................................................ 37 3.2 Fisheries Impacts................................................................................. 37 3.2.1 Shoreline Disturbance .................................................................. 37 3.2.2 Dredge Offshore (PAN) ...... . ......................................................... 38 3.2.3 Dredge Offshore (Wood Chips)....................................................... 38 3.2.4 Upland Soil Excavation and Capping................................................ 4.0 MITIGATION ........................................ . ...... . ........................................................................ 40 41 4.1 Plants and Animals .............................................................................. 43 4.1.1 Disturbance to Quendall Shoreline and Loss of Wetland C...................... 43 4.1.2 Excavation of Baxter Cove (Wetland E) and Loss of Wetland D............... 49 TED EARTH SCIENCES. INC: February 17, 200) ASSOCL4 Page ACK/jhIld - K899142457 - LD.D.ldZ.00 - W2K Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) 4.1.3 Dredge Offshore Areas with Greater Than 50 Percent Wood Chips........... 49 4.1.4 Dredge Offshore PAR Areas.......................................................... 50 4.1.5 Upland Soil and Excavation and Capping........................................... 50 4.2 Fisheries Mitigation ............................................................................. 50 4.2.1 In-Water Work Timing................................................................. 50 4.2.2 Shoreline Disturbance .................................................................. 51 4.2.3 Dredge Offshore (PAR and Wood Chips) .......................................... 51 4.2.4 Upland Soil Excavation and Capping................................................ 51 4.3 Water Quality..................................................................................... 53 4.4 Mitigation Implementation Schedule ......................................................... 53 4.4.1 Baxter Property .......................................................................... 53 4.4.2 Quendall Property....................................................................... 53 4.5 Monitoring and Contingency................................................................... 55 4.5.1 Performance Standards................................................................. 55 4.5.2 Maintenance.............................................................................. 56 4.5.3 Monitoring................................................................................ 56 4.5.4 Monitoring Schedule.................................................................... 57 4.5.5 Monitoring Reporting................................................................... 57 4.5.6 Contingency Plans....................................................................... 58 5.0 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 59 is ; LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1. Metro Water Quality Sampling Stations in Lake Washington ...............................3 Figure 2-2. Wetlands and Shoreline Vegetation...................................................................... 13 Figure 2-3. Aerial Overview of Port Quendall Remediation Site ........................................... 14 Figure 2-4. 1994 beach seining results at Kennydale Park...................................................... 18 Figure 2-5. Wetlands and Shoreline Structure......................................................................... 24 Figure 2-6. Wetlands and Shoreline Substrate and Depth....................................................... 25 Figure 2-7. Lake Washington Shoreline Composition along a 14-Mile Reach of Lakeshore on Both Sides of Quendall and Baxter in September 1995.............................................................. 28 Figure 3-1. Wetlands and Shoreline Vegetation with Remediation Overlay .......................... 34 Figure 3-2. Wetlands and Shoreline Structure with Remediation Overlay ............................. 35 Figure 3-3. Wetlands and Shoreline Substrate and Depth with Remediation Overlay ........... 36 Figure 4-1. Conceptual Shoreline and Wetland Mitigation Plan............................................. 42 Figure 4-2. Shoreline Enhancement Concept (shrub-dominated cross-section) ..................... 46 Figure 4-3. Shoreline Enhancement Concept (tree-dominated cross-section) ........................ 47 Figure 4-4. Conceptual Wetland Design for Lake Washington Shoreline .......................... .... 48 . February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK/Jh/td. KB99142A57- LD.D:02-00- W2K Page ii Quendall and Boxier Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum LIST OF TABLES S Pa2e Table 2-1. Nearshore Lake Washington Total Metals Concentrations for a Water Sample Collected South of the Gypsy Subbasin Culvert Outfall on the Baxter Parcel............................................4 Table 2-2. Lake Washington Surface Water Quality near the PortQuendall Property . .......................................................................................... 5 Table 2-3. Lake Washington Water Quality Data Collected nearthe May Creek Mouth. .................................................................................... 6 Table 2-4. Water Quality Measured in the Lower Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Outfall to Lake Washington . ................................................................. 10 Table 2-5. Results of Metals Screen for Lower Gypsy Subbasin Table 2-6. Table 2-7. Table 2-8. Table 2-9. Table 2-10. Table 2-11. 5 Table 3-1. Table 3-2. Table 3-3. Drainage at the Culvert Outlet to Lake Washington .................... . ........................ 11 Wetlands to be Dredged or Filled by the Port Quendall Remediation Actions .....................................................................15 Fish Species in Lake Washington.........................................................................19 Benthic Biota Present in Lake Washington . ............................. . ........................... 22 Lake Washington shoreline characteristics for the Quendall and Baxter Properties.......................................................... Comparison of Shoreline Conditions within the Remediation Area and the Surrounding Shoreline............................. Comparison of Overwater Pier Coverage within the Remediation Area (1997) and the Surrounding Shoreline (1989)...... Shoreline Vegetation Disturbance Resulting from Upland Excavation and/or Capping.................................................... Impacts to Wetlands to be Dredged or Filled by the Quendall and Baxter Remediation Actions (Refer to Figure 3-1)...... Valuation of Physical Shoreline Characteristics as Fish Habitat and Mitigated Condition Following Remediation r__.I A.....1 Ii 11C'l1\ 26 27 28 32 reet survcyeu ttpui i &, ii .i.......................................................... Table 4-1. Plant Species Proposed for Planting within the Wetland and Shoreline Buffers.............................................................................45 Table 4-2. Mitigated Lake Washington Shoreline Characteristics (3,130 ft. surveyed April 11 1997) ........................................................................ 52 Table 4-3. Mitigation of Short-Term Impacts Related to Site Cleanup.................................54 S February 17, 200) ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. iNC. ACK/jhIId.KB99!42A57-W-D:tdI2-OO- W2K Page iii Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objectives Mitigation analysis has been prepared for remediation of the Quendall Terminals (Quendall) and Baxter sites under Prospective Purchases Consent Decrees as provided for under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA). The remediation areas include the Quendall and Baxter properties, as well as areas offshore of the Quendall property. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is a landowner offshore of the Quendall and Baxter properties. Use authorization will be obtained from DNR prior to remediation activities on its property. Under a Consent Decree in conformance with MTCA (RCW 70. 105D), remediation actions are exempt from procedural requirements of permits under RCW Chapters 70.94 [Air], 70.95 [Solid Waste], 70.105 [Hazardous Waste], 75.20 [Hydraulic Permit], 90.48 [Water Quality], and 90.58 [Shorelands], and the procedural requirements of any laws requiring or authorizing local government permits or approvals for the remedial action (RCW 70. 105D.090). For the mitigation action, this would include such procedural requirements as Hydraulic Permit Approval (HPA), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issuance, and City of Renton wetland mitigation requirements and shorelands permits under the Renton zoning regulations. The Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) will ensure compliance with the substantive provisions of these laws and regulations through issuance of the Consent Decrees for the Quendall and Baxter remediation projects, and will make the final decision regarding which substantive prOvisions are applicable. The substantive requirements will be incorporated into the Consent Decrees as Ecology deems appropriate, or into other remedial action documents. The Consent . Decrees would provide assurance that the mitigation proposed in this document will be performed. The Consent Decrees would also require that the mitigation installation, oversight, and monitoring contractor be identified in advance to Ecology. In this document, references to City of Renton wetland buffer requirements, buffer widths, and shoreline setbacks are made for the purpose of comparing substantive elements of the proposed remediation under MTCA with the local procedural requirements for the Quendall and Baxter properties. Resources potentially impacted by the site remediation plans are described in Section 2.0, and impacts to those resources from remediation are described in Section 3.0. Conceptual mitigation plans are provided in Section 4.0. 1.2 Disclaimer The City of Renton has an interest in the Quendall property, and Vulcan Northwest, Inc. has an interest in the Baxter property. The DNR is a landowner of record for areas offshore of both properties that would be affected by some of the proposed remediation work. The City of Renton, and Vulcan Northwest, Inc. are submitting this document with the understanding that no independent liabilities shall be assumed by any party under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) or any comparable federal or state environmental laws should any party elect not to complete purchase of the subject properties; nor shall the current owners of the Quendall or Baxter project areas be in any way obligated to undertake any mitigation approach or recommendation contained herein. February 17, 200) ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. ACKJJIi/Id. K599142A57 - LD-D:02-(0 - W?K Page 1 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED RESOURCES 2.1 Water Quality 0 Lake Washington is the largest lake in King County with a drainage area of 472 square miles and an area of 21,500 acres. The lake has a volume of 2.35 million acre-feet, a mean depth of 108 feet, and a maximum depth of 214 feet. The Lake Washington watershed is urban, and approximately 63 percent of its area was developed by 1989 (Metro 1989). The basin is much more urbanized today. The main inflows to the lake are the Cedar River in the south end (57%) and the Sammamish River in the north end (27%). The Cedar River contributes 25 percent and the Sammamish River contributes 41 percent of the phosphorus load to the lake, respectively. The lake outlet is the ship canal, which flows through Portage Bay and Lake Union to Puget Sound near Shilshole. Metro has established numerous water quality monitoring stations for nutrients and conventional parameters throughout Lake Washington (Figure 2-1). Most of the historic water quality data available for Lake Washington are from 5 nearshore stations established in Juanita Bay, Yarrow Bay, Newport, Meydenbauer Bay and Kenmore, which are all north of the remediation site. However, additional nearshore and offshore stations were added to the monitoring effort beginning in 1992, which included three near the Port Quendall remediation site. These three lake stations are located at the mouth of May Creek (stations 0839 [shailow] and 0840 [deep]), and near Renton (station 0831). Lake Washington is listed as water quality limited for sediment under the 1972 Clean Water Act (Section 303(d) Segment No. 08-9350). Six sediment bioassay studies are cited as the basis for the listing. Three of the six bioassays were conducted on sediment collected near the Port Quendall site (Norton 1991; Norton 1992; Bennett and Cubbage 1992). Lake Washington (Waterbody Segment Number WA-08-9350) is listed as impaired for wildlife habitat as a result of industrial point source pollution. Contamination of the Quendall and Baxter properties, and cleanup standards agreed under Consent Decrees for each, are not the subject of this water quality section. Conventional water quality parameters are described, mainly from existing literature, to allow evaluation of habitat suitability following remediation. 2.1.1 South Lake Washington Beak Consultants Incorporated collected one on-site shoreline water sample on March 21, 1997 from Lake Washington approximately 200 feet south of the lower Gypsy Subbasin Drainage outfall to augment the Metro data, which lacked information on heavy metals. This sample was analyzed for metals (e.g., cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc) and hardness (Table 2-1). Cadmium and zinc exceeded the acute State water quality standards, and lead exceeded the chronic water quality standard. The exceedences were based on State standards (WAC 173-201A) for metals at the ambient hardness of 32 mg CaCO3 /L. February 17, 2000 ASSOCL4 TED &4RTH SCIENCES. ACK/JWW. K899142A57 - W-Djdt2. - W2K Page 2 08O4\ ri Li 7 1 f I. 07 0512 Lake Union 14 O5T8 ot21 :icJ Lake . TVT 1 wasnington 0834 p .-- • c•' ea1 We j - I ) J - I QUENDALLIBAXTER j 0840iQ83 9_ I May Creek . 31. - - 1 R i-ii - iCear ver LEGEND 4903 Historic water quality stations IllAllIb Shallow station NORTh Deep station NO SCALE METRO WATER QUALITY SAMPLING FIGURE 2-1 ASSOCIATED STATIONS IN LAKE WASHINGTON EARTH - QUENDALL AND BAXTER PROPERTIES DATE 9/24/99 SCIENCES1 INC REMEDIATION MITIGATION PROJECT RENTON WASHINGTON NO. K699142A Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-1. Nearshore Lake Washington Total Metals Concentrations for a Water Sample Collected South of the Gypsy Subbasin Culvert Outfall on the Baxter Parcel. Result (mg/L) Lake Class Criteria (WAC 173-201A) mg/L Standard Met? Metal Cadmium: 0.0010 Acute 0.0009 NO Chronic 0.0004 NO Copper: 0.002 Acute 0.0052 YES Chronic 0.0038 YES Lead: 0.001 Acute 0.0132 YES Chronic 0.0005 NO Zinc: 0.054 Acute 0.0397 NO Chronic 0.0360 NO Water sample collected from Baxter parcel shoreline by Beak Consultants on March 21, 1997. Metals standards shown for hardness of 32 mg/L as CaCO3 in the sample. Metro has monitored two Lake Washington stations near the mouth of May Creek and an offshore station near Kennydale Park in Renton (Table 2-2). The sampling frequency varied, but was from approximately 1992 to the present, with samples collected bimonthly. Parameters monitored were temperature, D .0., p1!, conductivity, transparency, turbidity, alkalinity, nitrate + nitrite-nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, total nitrogen, orthophosphate, total phosphate, chlorophyll-a, phaeophytin, fecal coliform, and enterococcus. The lake water quality near the Quenclall and Baxter sites can be described as moderate for a mesotrophic urban lake. The remediation actions are expected to improve sediment quality and decrease risk of exposure of aquatic organisms to contaminants originating on the two sites. Water quality for the whole lake is rated by Metro as good, except for algal blooms in periods of warm weather. Average transparency for the south lake stations was 3.8 m. Fecal coliforms were high at the May Creek nearshore station (average of 128 MPN), as was chlorophyll-a (9.6 mg/rn3 in 1996). Nutrients were low at the Kennydale Park and May Creek lake stations, with the average nitrate + nitrate nitrogen value less than 0.25 mg/L and the average orthophosphate was less than 0.OlOmg/L. Transparency, total phosphorus, and chlorophyll-a trends for METRO station 0839 during water years 1992 through 1994 indicate decreased transparency, slightly increased phosphorus, and slightly decreased chlorophyll-a (Table 2-3). Chlorophyll-a peaked annually from 1992 through 1994 in April or May offshore of May Creek, which may be reflective of nutrient loading from the Febniary 17, 20 ASSOCL4IW EARThI SCIENCES, INC. ACK/jhlld- K899142A57 - LD-D:102-00 - W2K Page 4 Quendall and Baxter Properues Mitiganon Analysis Memorandum creek coincident with increased sunlight in the spring. Table 2-2. Lake Washington Surface Water Quality near the Port Quendall Property. Water c;j) ()** - COild Transparency Turbid1ty AI (mg/L)- Entero '(mglL) ** Seccht (in)- (Nfl)) as C. MPN 1992- 13.68 10.43 7,86 96 4.2 1.2 36.4 10 1996/ 0831 1992- 15.55 11.11 7.83 97 4.4 1.3 36.0 54 1996/ 0839 1995/ 14.24 11.34 8.29 97 3.5 0.9 38.0 1 0840 1996/ 13.72 10.23 7.79 97 3.2 1.4 36.0 10 0840 1997*! 12.44 9.40 7.54 94 3.7 0.6 38.1 19 0840 V. Nitite OrthoP Total Tota1P Cb1oy1lr i'aeophytin Fecal Colifbrm (jj NIfrOfl - N (zngfL) (nigfL) nigIin 3 ig1m MPN/ Oi .(mg1I (mgfL) .. 'Y ooni:IY 1992- 0.157 0.022 0.296 0.009 0.022 4.4 1.5 25 1996 / 0831 1992- 0.117 0.029 0.31 0.008 0.017 4.2 3.4 128 1996/ 0839 1995 / 0.190 nm 0.32 0.006 0.020 9.6 1.0 2 0840 1996/ 0.181 0.031 0.324 0.007 0.020 rim rim 25 0840 1997 I 0.226 0.021 0.289 0.008 0.017 rim rim 52 0840 1 1 1 1 Notes; Lake Washington water quality data collected near Renton from 1992 to 1996 (Metro station 0831) Lake Washington water quality data collected from 1992 to 1995 offshore of May Creek mouth (Source Metro station 0839). Lake Washington water quality darn collected near May Creek mouth (Metro station 0840 - Deep Lake Station). Monthly average of water quality data collected at a depth of 1 meter. nm = not monitored * 1997 data includes only October, November and December Field measurement February 17, 200) ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC ACKJJh/1d. K899142A57- LD-D:IO2.0 - 142K Page 5 Quendall and Baxter Properries Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-3. Lake Washington Water Quality Data Collected Near the May Creek Mouth. Date Secchz Dfsc (Transpareiicy (meter) Total Pbosphate (mgIL) . Chlorophyll-a (mglm3) May 1192 5.0 urn 21.0 May 1892 3.4 0,011 1.5 May 26 92 4.6 urn cm June 01 92 6.0 0.006 1.6 June 15 92 5.7 0.001 urn June 22 92 5.8 0.023 urn July 06 92 - 5.5 0.0009 2.1 July2092 4.4 0.010 cm Aug 03 92 4.7 0.010 0.9 Aug 10 92 4.4 0.008 cm Aug 1792 4.1 0.017 cm Aug 2492 4.5 0.028 urn Aug 5192 4.3 0.020 cm Sep 0892 3.6 0.029 2.9 Average: 4.7 0.014 5.0 urn = not monitored Source: Metro Station 0839 (shallow) S February 17, 20X) ASSOCIATED EARTh! SCIENCES, INC. ACK1JfrJLd- KE99142A57 - LD-D:udZ-CO W2K Page 6 S Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-3. Lake Washington Water Quality Data Collected near the May Creek Mouth. (Continued) Date , &CCh1DiSC (Transpareimy eter) Total Phosphate (inglL) ... ., .... Chlorophyil-a (mg/z&) Oct05 92 5.0 0.014 . 2.5 Oct 2092 4.2 0.015 nm Nov 0292 6.5 0.017 1.8 Nov 17 92 4.6 0.022 2.3 Dec 0192 4.5 0.027 2.8 Jan0493 6.0 0.035 3.2 Feb0193 3.3 0.012 2.7 Mar 0193 3.3 0.025 7.6 Mar 16 93 2.4 0.02 1 0.7 Apr 15 93 2.1 0.024 21.0 Apr 1993 2.1 0.019 11.0 May 0393 3.0 0.009 4.0 May 25 93 3.3 0.036 4.5 Jun07 93 5.0 0.014 2.0 Jul 06 93 4.0 0.0 19 0.5 Aug 02 93 3.0 0.059 0.1 Sep07 93 4.2 0.009 0.4 Average: 3.9 0.022 4.2 nm = not monitored Source: Metro Station 0839 (shallow) February 17, 20()0 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC ACKJJhI1d - K899142A57 - LDD:IO2.- W2K Page 7 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-3. Lake Washington Water Quality Data Collected Near the May Creek Mouth. (Continued) 0 Date SecchiThsc (Fransparency) (meter), H Total Pllo6phate (mgIL} Chlorophyll-a (mglin3) Oct 04 93 7.0 0.009 0.4 Nov 01 93 5.0 0.011 2.4 Dec08 93 5.5 0.018 0.5 F- Jan0594 5.0 0.081 0.4 Feb 1594 3.8 0.011 4.1 Mar0794 3.2 0.023 4.5 Mar21 94 2.5 0.020 6.1 Apr 04 94 2.8 0.045 18.0 Apr1894 3.0 0.012 7.7 May 02 94 3.8 0.020 6.3 May23 94 2.7 0.017 6.9 Jun06 94 3.5 0.013 7.2 Jul05 94 4.0 0.018 3.6 Aug 04 94 5.0 0.031 2.0 Sep 06 94 4.5 0.017 2.0 Average: 4.1 0.023 4.8 run = not monitored Source: Metro Station 0839 (shallow) Februaty 17, 2000 - ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC ACKIJW1d KB99142A57 . LD.D:102-00 - W2K Page 8 I] Quendall and Baxter Properues Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-3. Lake Washington Water Quality Data Collected Near the May Creek Mouth. (Continued) Date SecchiDc (Transparency) (meter) Total Phosphate (mg/L) Chlorophyll-a (mg/rn3) Oct03 94 6.0 0.011 2.5 Nov 02 94 5.0 0.027 2.4 Dec 0595 4.0 0.028 2.3 Jan 23 95 5.5 0.027 5.0 Average: 4.8 0.028 3.7 11 am = not monitored Source: Metro Station 0839 (shallow) 2.1.2 Gvvsv SubbasinDrainage No historic water quality data were available for Lower Gypsy Subbasin Drainage. The Lower Gypsy subbasin flows from the east side of 1-405 through an approximately 125-foot open channel before entering a culvert in the northern area of the project site that discharges directly to Lake Washington. Lower Gypsy subbasin water discharges via tightline directly to Lake Washington and is thus classified as Class A (extraordinary) by WAC 173-201A. This drainage is distinct from Gypsy Creek, which joins May Creek at RM 1.15. Limited water quality monitoring of the Lower Gypsy subbasin occurred on March 28, 1997 by Beak Consultants, Inc. (Table 2-4). The results were consistent with an urban stream and show some influence of upstream wetlands. Waters were neutral, cool, with low dissolved oxygen, high conductivity, and high total dissolved solids relative to most regional waters. Oil and grease were below detection, fecal coliforins were moderate (41 CFU/ 100 mL) and hardness was moderate. Nutrients were moderately elevated: nitrate and nitrite oxygen was 1.0 mg/L and total phosphorus was .038 mg/L. All metals met the chronic toxicity standard (WAC 173-201A) adjusted for the ambient hardness (Tables 24 and 2-5); however, while cadmium, lead, mercury, and silver were all below detection, the detection levels for these metals were above their respective standard. Based on the limited water quality data (one sampling event), dissolved oxygen was below the Class AA standard (>9.5 mg/L). Turbidity may not meet the standard, but compliance was not determined because of lack of baseline data. It is likely that temperature would not meet the standard (< 16°C) during the summer months due to the low elevation and the wetland component of the stream system. During some site visits, a strong sewer odor was noticed where Gypsy February 17, 20W ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACKJjMd . K0991424$7- LD-D.tdI2.00 - W2K Page 9 :Thiè -. Water, pH • Temperature (C) 10:21 t 9.85 7.15 Dissolved Oxygen Conductivity Total OR & Grease TPE (m/L/%) (ohzns/c&) (nigft) 8.00/71.8 1 180 1 <1 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum subbasin enters the site from the east; however, this odor was not apparent during the single monitoring event reported here. Origin of this odor is not obvious. Table 24. Water Quality Measured in the Lower Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Outfall to Lake Washington. Anunonla Nltrate+ Total TotaiPlusphorus OrthoPhosphate FecatCohforin jftog Nitrite nitrog.. (zngfL) (mgfl4 (CFU/lOOniL) .nk/L) Nitrogen (mg/L) (avg. 3 reps.) 0.028 1.0 FO. 5 1 0.038 0.025 1 41 TotalCopper4 Total Zinc Hardness 1'D S TS S Turbidity TotatLead (vg. Nr'J) (mgFl) (ing/L) • . (nig(L) (mgIL) 110 5 6.3 <0.02 <0.002 0.06 74 <0.02 (dissolved) <0.002 (dissolved) 0.0105 (dissolved) Monitoring Date: March 28, 1997 24-hour rainfall recorded at Sea-Tac was 0.10 on March 27, 1997. * See Table 2-5 for a complete listing of the metals screening analysis. A February IZ 2000 ASSOCIATED EARThI SCIENCES, INC. ACK/) h/Id - X899142.457 - LD.b:tLd12-OO - W2K Page 10 Quendall and Baxter Properties Miiigat on Analysis Memorandum Table 2-5. Results of Metals Screen for Lower Gypsy Subbasin Drainage at the Culvert 0 Outlet to Lake Washington - rch 28 Relt Imektion Untilt - P1raznet .., . -, A1umum - 0.26 -. 0.01 Antimony <0.02 0.02 Arsenic <0.03 0.03 Boron <0.1 0.1 Barium 0.015 0.003 Beryllium <0.005 0 .005 Calcium 18.0 0.1 Cadmium <0.002 0.002 Cobalt <0.003 0.003 Chromium <0.006 0.006 Copper <0.002 0.002 Iron 1.6 0.01 Mercuiy <0.01 0,01 Potassium 2.2 1.0 Lithium <0.02 0.02 Magnesium 7.2 0.1 Manganese 0.320 0.002 Molybdenum <0.01 0.01 Sodium 8.9 0.1 Nickel <0.01 0.01 Phosphorus 0.08 0.05 Lead <0.02 0.02 Sulfur 3.3 0.1 Selenium <0.03 0.03 Silicon 1.0 0.10 Silver <0.01 0.01 Tin 0.02 0.02 Strontium 0.120 0.003 Titanium <0.01 0.01 Thallium <0.03 0.03 Vanadium <0.002 0.002 - Yttrium <0.001 0.001 Zinc -- 0.060 0.002 Samples collected on March 28, 1997, Lower Gypsy Creek subbasin outfati at Lake Washington. Note: Total metals. All values are in mgIL. EPA Method 200.7. Italics indicate results which exceed or may exceed the WAC 173-20 IA surface waxer standard (chronic); the ambiguity occurs when the standard is lower than the detection limit and the result is below detection. Bold italics indicate a result which may exceed the acute standard (silver). Februarj 17, 2(KW) ASSOCIATED EA.R17-I SCiENCES. INC. ACKI1hJId - KB9142.457- -D:102-00 - w-x Page 11 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 2.2 Plants and Animals 6, The Port Quendall and Baxter parcels are sparsely vegetated. Five wetland areas were delineated within the Quendall/Baxter remediation area (David Evans and Associates 1997, Figure 2-2). The Port Quendall parcel is currently an active log yard; vegetation on the site is primarily limited to the shoreline (Figure 2-3, Table 2-6). Two of the wetlands (Wetlands A and B) are found along the Quendall shoreline. Wetland A is a palustrine forested wetland dominated by immature red alder (Alnus rubra) and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), with a sparse herbaceous layer of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), buttercup (Ranunculus repens) and yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus). Wetland B is a palustrine forested wetland comprised of red alder with a hardhack (Spiraea douglasii) and Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra) shrub layer. Hydrology in Wetlands A and B is controlled by the lake level. Only minor surface discharge enters these areas. Vegetation and embedded logs help stabilize the shoreline. These wetlands provide little flood control, base flow support or water quality improvement, because they lie along the shoreline and receive little surface discharge. A third wetland (Wetland C) located on the Quendall parcel is a remnant of an old industrial lagoon which currently supports a permanent open water component, emergent vegetation dominated by cattails (Typha larifolia) and a black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) sapling shrub layer. Wetland C detains some drainage from the adjacent log yards and therefore provides some water quality function by diverting this runoff from the lake. However, no outlet was observed and the area appears to be isolated from ground water, therefore, no base flow support is provided by this wetland. The remaining vegetated shoreline along the Quendall parcel is dominated by red alder, willow and Himalayan blackberry. Industrial activities on the Baxter parcel ended in the early 1980s; a portion of the site is currently S used to store bark mulch. The compacted fill soils on the Baxter parcel support sparse stands of non-native grasses and patches of sapling- and seedling-size black cottonwood and soft rush (Juncus efflisus). Baxter Cove (Wetland E) is found along the southern Baxter shoreline and appears to have been created by shoreline fill or fill and dredge activities. Baxter Cove supports an open water component, cattails and a shrub layer comprised of Himalayan blackberry, red alder saplings and red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonfera) and a few willow (Salix spp.) and Pacific Madrone (Arbutus menziesil). The second wetland area (Wetland D) on Baxter is an old industrial pond isolated from Lake Washington that is dominated by cattail, Pacific willow and red-osier dogwood. The floodwater control, base flow support and water quality functions provided by Baxter Cove and Wetland D are limited due to the small area that drains each wetland area. A narrow band of vegetation, approximately 25 feet wide, along the remaining Baxter shoreline is comprised of Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) (also frequently referred to as Scott's broom) and Himalayan blackberry. A short open channel section of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage is also located on the Baxter parcel. The Baxter site was cleared in 1990. Sapling red alder and willow are present on the steep banks of the channel. However, only extremely limited habitat value is currently provided by this vegetation. Februari JZ 20(X) ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK/Jh/W. VJ99142457- LD-D:1d12-00 - Page 12 to J.9&A / / - Il -u mc,, mn< 0(1, 1c o w -<C,, p t4% tHCfl I OUTER HARBOR BOUNDARY .<v S 1 4Q o-i- DNR OWNERSHIP In oz In z (J) ;vmrmr Z Zmr -4 0> CO) Tom 203V! GO Z z •u < -' m m -4 0 z 2MG) z -4 Cl) U) r m 2<' C) < o- rn U, z S - Quendall and Barter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-6. Wetlands to be Dredged or Filled by the Port Quendall Remediation Actions Physical Biological Condition and Chancteristics Habitat Supported A 0.20 Wetland along Lake Washington PFO - immature red alder with a Himalayan shoreline, minor surface discharge from blackberry urtderstory and a sparse herbaceous project site; some shoreline protection cover of cattail, reed canarygrass, buttercup provided by vegetation and logs and flag iris; habitat value is moderate due to embedded nearshore: little flood control, adjacency to the lake; provides potential base flow support or water quality habitat for amphibians, passerine birds and improvement is provided, limited waterfowl nesting - observed wildlife use includes Canada goose, beaver, several species of passerine birds. B 0.37 Wetland along Lake Washington PFO - red alder with a hardback and Pacific shoreline, minor surface discharge from willow shrub layer: habitat value is moderate project site: some shoreline protection due to adjacency to the lake; provides provided by vegetation and logs potential habitat for amphibians, passerine embedded nearshore: little flood control, birds and limited waterfowl nesting: observed base flow support or water quality wildlife use includes Canada goose. beaver. improvement is provided, several species of passerine birds. C 0.17 The wetland resulted from excavation in PSS/PEM/POW - black cottonwood saplings, fill material; detains drainage from log cattails and soft rush; perennial open water; yards; no outlet was observed and the low habitat value due to low vegetative area appears to be isolated from ground diversity and isolated nature of area; observed water, therefore no base flow support is wildlife use includes Canada goose, mallards, provided by this wetland: water quality and green heron. improvement provided by detention of log yard runoff. D 0.08 Old industrial settling pond isolated from PSS - small wetland within former industrial Lake Washington; little flood control or area dominated by cattail, Pacific willow and base flow support is provided; no water red-osier dogwood; overall habitat value is quality improvements provided, low; observed wildlife use includes red- winged blackbird, snipe. E 0.23 Cove created by fill along the lake PEMIPOW/PSS . cattail, Himalayan (Baxter Cove) shoreline: some shoreline protection blackberry, red-osier dogwood and red alder provided by vegetation and togs sapling; emergent vegetation established after embedded nearshore; flood control, base 1990: habitat value is moderate due to flow support and water quality adjacency to the lake; provides potential improvement are limited due to the habitat for amphibians, passerine birds and small area that drains into the cove, water fowl: observed wildlife use includes turtles (painted and sliders); beaver, red-wing blackbird, mallards. PFO = Palustrian Forested Wetland PSS = Palustrian Scrub-Scrub Wetland PEM = Palustrian Emergent Wetland POW Palustrian Open Water February 17, 20(Y) ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK,Md 899142.457- LD-D:udlZ'oo- 9/2K Page 15 - Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum in general, the habitat value of the remediation area is low due to the disturbed nature of the former and active industrial areas which support limited vegetation. Oily sheens were observed on the surface of the open water wetland areas and areas along the lake shoreline. The shoreline areas provide the highest habitat value in the remediation project area, but the habitat value of these areas are limited due to the dominance of non-native invasive plant species, lack of vegetative diversity and structure, and lack of special habitat features such as snags and woody debris. Most of the wildlife use observed on the site occurs along the Quendall and southern Baxter shoreline. Canada geese (Branta canadensis) were observed in both the vegetated and hardscape shoreline areas. The geese were observed nesting along the vegetated shoreline and in the osprey nest located on the Quendall Cable Station nesting platform. Puget Sound Energy moved an osprey nest from a retired distribution pole on the Baxter site to a new nest pole platform erected on the south side of the cable station in 1993. Puget Sound Energy also placed a perch on top of the first transmission pole leading away from the station to provide a safe place for the birds to perch. The osprey (Pandion haliaetus) have successfully nested on the platform since the transfer of the nest in 1993 until 1997, when the osprey built a new nest at the top of the wood chip elevator located on the Barbee Mill site to the south of the Quendall property. The osprey are present in the area from mid-March through August. Osprey have been observed hunting small mammals (likely mice) on the north Baxter site as well as fishing the lake. Canada geese and bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucophalus) have occasionally been observed perching on the nest platform during the winter months. It is assumed the bald eagles used the perch site to forage for fish and waterfowl along the lake shoreline. The closest known bald eagle nest site is located approximately 0.75 mile west of the remediation area (WDFW, May 1997 PHS database). Numerous duck species also use the Baxter offshore area. Beaver (Castor canadensis) have been observed in the wetland habitat along the lake shoreline. Pond sliders (Pseudemys scripta) are present in Baxter Cove and have been observed on floating logs off of the southern Baxter and northern Quendall shoreline. Red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) were observed using cattail habitat along the shoreline and isolated patches of cattails away from the shoreline (Wetland D). Snipe (Capella gallinago) were observed in the Wetland D area and in the cottonwood sapling-dominated areas on the Baxter parcel. Other species of passerine birds and amphibians could be supported by the shoreline wetlands and the narrow red alder-dominated upland shoreline area. 2.3 Fisheries Affected Environment 2.3.1 Introduction This section describes existing fish habitat conditions within the area that would be impacted by remediation activities, and provides an assessment of the various components that make up this habitat. A description of known fish use of the habitat is also provided. February 17, 2WO ASSOCLI &RTh SCIENCES. INC. ACK/Jh/Id - KB99142A57 - W-D:02-00 Page 16 Quentkill and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum The remediation activities are being implemented with a primary intent of enhancing sediment and S water quality in Lake Washington. Improving the uplands portion of the sites is also a critical component of the remediation project. This will benefit all species rearing and migrating along the project shoreline. Existing conditions for the shoreline and nearshore areas are described in the following text. 2.3.2 Lake Washington Biology Pelagic Species Lake Washington supports a variety of anadromous salmonids, including chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytsclza), coho (0. kisutch), and sockeye salmon (0. nerka), and steethead (0. ,nykiss) and cutthroat trout (0. clarki). Runs of non-anadromous kokanee (0. nerka) salmon are also present (King County, 1993). Lake Washington contains a wide variety of non-salmonid species, some of which are considered "warm water" species. These include both native and non-native species such as speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus), three-spine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus), northern squawfish (Plychocheilus oregonensis), yellow perch (Percaflavescens), black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smailmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui), mountain whitefish (Prosopiuin williamso,u), largescale sucker (Catostomus macrocheilus), lorigfin smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys), and prickly sculpin (Cottus asper) among other species (Pfeifer and Weinheimer 1992, King County 1993, Wydoski and Whitney, 1979). A more complete list of fish species potentially found near the project is provided in Table 2-7. Of particular importance to the project is the presence of chinook salmon in Lake Washington. On March 16, 1999, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) listed the Puget Sound evolutionarily significant unit of chinook salmon as a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). Adult chinook salmon migrate past the site on their way to the Cedar River each summer. Juvenile chinook pass the site on their trip back out to the Puget Sound and may spend some time rearing in the site vicinity. Beach seining surveys by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe in Kennydale Park found chinook fry rearing nearshore from March through June (Figure 2-4). Fthruarj JZ 200) ASSOCIATED EARThI SCIENCES. INC. ACK/ihied - K.899142A57 LD-D:u02-00 - W2K Page 17 70 - 60 50 c4 40 c4 C 30 20 10 Feb Mar Apr May Jun 1994 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Figure 2-4. 1994 beach seining results at Kennydale Park. .- Mar 60 f- 50 CA 40 C 30 10 20 Feb --SOCKEYE FRY —*-- CHINOOK —+-- SQUAWFISH Apr May 1994 —R—SOCKEYE PRESMOLTS ---COHO —*—YELLOW PERCH ——LM BASS —SM BASS Jun February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES INC. ACKJJMd K.899142A57- W-D:102-00 . W2K Page 18 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum is Table 2-7. Fish Species in Lake Washington Petromyzontidae k lamprey rRi Lamperra richardsoni Lampreys ey Enwspheiws rrideniatu.s y Lwnpetra ayresi Acipenseridae White sturgeon Acipenser transmontanus Siurgeons Clupeidae American shad ,4losa sapidisshna Herrings Salmonidae Mountain whitefish Prosopium williamsoni Trouts Cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki Rainbow trout (sceelhead) Oncorhynchus mykiss Brook trout Solvelirzus fontinalis Lake trout Salvelinus namaycush Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisuich Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Chum salmon Oncorhynchus keta Pink salmon Oncorhynchus gorbuscha Sockeye salmon (kokanee) Oncorhynchus nerka Osmeridae Longfin smelt Spirinchus ihaleichthys Smelts Cyprtnidae Carp Cyprinus caiplo Minnows Peamouth Mylocheilus caurinus Northern squawfish Ptychoceilus ore gonensis Speckled dace Rhinichihys osculus Redside shiner Richardsonius baiteatus Tench Tinca tinca Catostomidae Largescale sucker Catostomus macrocheilus Suckers Ictaluridae Brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus Catfishes Channel catfish - Ictalurtts pun ciatLis Gasterosteidae Threespine stickleback (Jasterosteus aculeatus Stickleback Centrarchldae Smailmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui Suntishes Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Black crappie Poxomis nigromaculatus Percidae Yellow perch Percaflavescens Perches Cottldae Coastrange sculpin Cotius aleuticus Sculpins Shorthead sculpin Cortus confusus Torrent sculpin Cotus rhoiheus Prickly sculpin Cottus asper Riffle sculpin Cotius gulosus Pacific staghorn sculpin Leptocottus amatus Source: Shepard and Hoeman 1979. Also of importance to the project is the population of sockeye salmon juveniles which rear in Lake Washington. These fish may utilize the shoreline and offshore habitat along the project for rearing. The majority of sockeye outmigrate from the Cedar River, although a smaller number .. February 17, 20)O ASSOCL4 TED E14RTH SCIENCES, INC. ACX/Jh/W- KB99I42457-LD-D102' W7K Page 19 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum may be the result of beach spawners. The Cedar River sockeye is a non-native species originating predominately from Baker River stock and introduced in 1935 (WDFW et al. 1994). The stock is currently believed to be depressed based on a long-term negative escapement trend (WDFW et al. 1994). Sockeye are not known to have spawned historically along the Quendall and Baxter project sites (Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, 1997). Areas of suitable substrate were looked for during diver and video surveys for this project. It was assumed that any area with large sand to medium sized gravels and evidence of upwelling may be used for sockeye spawning; however, little suitable habitat was found and there was not any evidence of redds. One small upwelling site was noted by divers in about 30 feet of water off the mouth of May Creek. Similar small upwellings may exist off the Quendall and Baxter shorelines that were not observed by divers, however geohydrology studies and modeling do not suggest concentrated points of upwelling should be expected to occur. Naturally spawned fry begin leaving the Cedar River each year starting in late December. Millions more hatchery fry are released into the river starting in March. The fry migrate downstream to Lake Washington where they may spend from one to two years before emigrating to the sea. Recent studies in southern Lake Washington found the majority of sockeye fry migrate into deep water soon after reaching the lake and head north (Burgner, 1991; UW, 1996). A few fry were found in the nearshore environment for up to one month after emerging. By late summer, sockeye densities are highest at the north end of the lake (Burgner, 1991). Predation of sockeye fry in Lake Washington is believed to be a major cause of low recruitment (University of Washington, 1996). A considerable amount of research is currently being undertaken by the Muckleshoot Tribe, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), University of Washington (UW), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and King County to better understand the early life history of sockeye in Lake Washington and the various factors influencing predation. Currently northern squawfish and cutthroat trout are believed to be the major predators of fry (UW, 1996). Estimates of sockeye consumption by squawfish in Lake Washington range between 3,000,000 and 11,000,000 fry per year (UW, 1996). Smallmouth and largemouth bass, prickly sculpin, yellow perch, rainbow trout and coho salmon also consume sockeye juveniles but in much fewer numbers. Although bass were once believed to be major sockeye predators, recent evidence indicates this is not entirely true (UW, 1996). Life history studies of the two bass species and sockeye in Lake Washington show few opportunities for the three species to interact. Gut analysis confirmed the studies (UW, 1996). Each spring when juvenile salmon are most abundant, less than 10 percent of the diet of smailmouth bass is made up of this prey item. Most sockeye consumed by largemouth bass are taken in the ship canal where they are concentrated during the outmigration period. Total bass consumption of sockeye fry is estimated at less than 100,000 fish per year (UW, 1996). Ten beach seining surveys at Kennydale Park, approximately 0.7 miles south of the remediation site, were conducted by the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe between February and June, 1994 (Muckleshoot, 1997). One survey was completed during the Februavy 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTh! SCIENCES, INC. ACKI1h/ld - K899142A57 - O02-0 - W2K Page 20 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorarsdwn day and one survey at night each month. Relatively high numbers of sockeye fry, chinook fry, coho fry, and yellow perch were captured (Figure 2-4). Lesser numbers of sockeye presmolts, smalimouth bass, and squawfish were caught. Most sockeye were observed in May during the daytime surveys. A high number of yellow perch were also captured during the same survey. Fewer sockeye fry were captured in June but a higher number of chinook were netted. Again, an abundant yellow perch population was also netted. The coho population peaked in April. Benthic Species Crayfish (Pacfasticus spp.) and freshwater shrimp (Ostracods and Mysids) are relatively abundant benthic biota in the vicinity of the project. Numerous individuals were observed in diver and video surveys within the outer harbor line. Most crayfish were associated with larger pieces of wood where many were noted protecting the entrance to dens under logs. Freshwater clams (Pelecypods) were also noted in several places on the lake bed. Other benthic species potentially found in Lake Washington, within and around the remediation bounds are listed in Table 2-8. No site specific benthic studies were completed as part of the assessment for this project. 2.3.3 Lake Washington Shoreline Survey Methodology Physical surveys of the Lake Washington shoreline along the project boundary were undertaken to is characterize existing conditions affecting fish habitat. A total of 3,130 feet of shoreline was walked from the northern edge of the Baxter property to the southern edge of the Quendall parcel. A hip-chain was pulled to measure distances. Five variables (riparian vegetation, bank type, bank protection, substrate, and water depth) were assessed at roughly five-foot intervals. The dominant characteristic in each five-foot interval was noted on a spreadsheet. Substrate and water depth were measured approximately five feet from shore. Overwater structures were also noted and measured. Existing literature was reviewed to describe shoreline characteristics in the immediate vicinity of the project. This information is provided for comparison with project site conditions. On-Site Habitat and Valuation Project shoreline characteristics are shown in Figures 2-2, 2-5 and 2-6. Features within the remediation area are summarized in Table 2-9. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCiENCES, INC. ACK/Jh/ld- KJ99142A57 - LD-D:Ud2-00 . WK Page 21 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-8. Benthic Biota Present in Lake Washington. :14riw Macropelopia, Eukiefferiella, Ffeterorrissocladius, parakieffereriella, Chironomus, Cladopelma, Tanyrarsus Cryprochironomous, Dicrotendipes, Einfeldia, Phaenopsectra, Polypedilwn !IL_. I. Midges l Chironomithe Ceratopogonidae biting midges Oligochaeta Tubificidae. Naididae aquatic earthworms Nematoda roundworms Ostracoda seed shrimp Pelecypoda Pisidium freshwater clams Tricoptera caddisflies Copepoda mainly harpacticoids Hydracarina Piona water mites Gastropoda Planorbella Snails Amphipoda Hyalella azreca scuds and sideswimmers Ephemeroptera Mayflies Plecoptera Perlodidae stoneflies Collembola springtails Mysidacea Taphromysis seed shrimp Hirudinea leeches Tardigrada water bears Porifera sponges Brachiopoda daphnia Isopoda Caecidotea aquatic sowbugs Coleoptera - Psephenus beetles Sources: Shepard and Hoeman, 1979, Bennet and Cubbage, 1992. The shoreline riparian vegetation is dominated by Himalayan blackberry (467o) which grows up to, and in places, over the lake. The remaining area is split about evenly between shrubs (primarily Scotch broom) and an unvegetated condition (Table 2-9). Approximately 25 percent of the shoreline is also overhung with a sparse tree canopy layer. Most trees are young alder (to about 4 inches diameter at breast height [DBH]). The trees are typically set back from the shoreline five to ten feet and associated with the four lakeshore wetlands (Figure 2-2). No trees large enough to provide large woody debris (LWD) were noted. Wetland habitat influences approximately 17 percent of the shoreline. S S Februarj 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCiENCES, INC. ACK/ih/lK99142A57-LD.DIW%200 W2K Page 22 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum The existing shoreline vegetation provides little visual refuge for fish, bank stability, insect habitat, S or shading, because the lack of diversity and non-native characteristics of the existing vegetation are not well suited for these purposes. The young, sparse hardwood stand currently growing along the banks do not provide any of the above functions or serve as a source of large woody debris or bank refuge beneath undercut rootballs. The majority of the bank (56%) is unsupported and consists of steep dirt banks from one to four feet high (30%), or relatively low gradient "beach" like shoreline (26%) (Figure 2-5). Manmade structures and protection features (rip-rap, log bollards, piers, buildings, log skids) cover 33 percent of the shoreline (Table 2-9). Eleven percent of the bank could not be surveyed due to heavy blackberry coverage. Four percent of the bank (110 feet) is undercut by wave action. Large logs floating or sitting on the lake bottom near the shore protect 81 percent of the shoreline. These logs not only shelter the banks from wave action, they provide excellent rearing and shelter habitat for fish and macroinvertebrates. Historically the lake shoreline was primarily low-gradient beach habitat formed as the delta of May Creek. Over time, erosion caused by industrial landfihling, riparian vegetation removal, and wave action has created oversteepened banks. Other banks are artificially protected with rip-rap and log bollards. Neither condition is conducive to habitat formation. Cull logs and stringers from the mill effectively provide many of the habitat functions and diversity normally associated with large woody debris (LWD). Various manmade structures provide some diversity and overhead cover, and may be used by juvenile salmonids (Ratte and Salo, 1985; Heiser and Finn, 1970). Inlets, or coves make up approximately 26 percent of the shoreline. Most have a few pieces of LWD floating or sitting on the bottom. These areas of meandering shoreline add diversity to the relatively straight shore elsewhere. Shallow coves filled with LWD could provide nursery areas for many species of fish and benthic organisms. Surficial substrate along the shoreline is dominated by sands (547o) with relatively equal proportions of mud/silt and gravel in other areas. None of the substrates are free of silts; a muddy layer underlies most areas. A large amount of woody debris including wood chips covered the substrate in several areas (Figure 2-6). Clean gravels can provide spawning habitat for sockeye as well as macroinvertebrate habitat. Finer materials anchor vegetation and are preferentially inhabited by other aquatic species. Dense wood chip coverage leads to anaerobic conditions and a relatively sterile environment. No benefit is derived from the wood chip coverage. Water depths five feet from shore are typically less than one foot (57%). Only 15 percent of the shoreline has a slope greater than about 3:1. These areas are usually heavily disturbed by nearshore activities and may have resulted from past filling of the lake. Februaiy IZ 20(X) ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. ACXI1hJId. KB99142A57 . .D:t02-00- W2J( Page 23 4 I" - - -1 42-tecd S S OUTER HARBOR BOUNDARY DNR 00 rn 0> cn > 2 0— I— C ;:i < w 0' 2 >0 (U r CL a 0 m z >0 0,0 c) >- rn DØ (j C a m cn z '1 ':"•'':.• H - C C m z C mr Zm —4 0> FO-Z 2c O W >Z (.0 -n —1 ;xi O O zz--irn rn cn 0 m OUTER HARBOR BOUNDARY DNR OWNERSHIP \ \ 'S \ Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-9. Lake Washington shoreline characteristics for the Quendall and Baxter 0 Properties. 11 - - -- - 800 none 1,425 Vegetion b1ackbe 905 shrubs 770 trees 535 wetland I - - 26% 46% 29% 25% 17% B asic type/Protection beach 805 26% vertical dirt 930 30% rip-rap 415 13% bul khead 0 0% log bollard 515 16% ier 55 2% building 35 1% ogskid 35 1% undercut 110 - 4% inlet 820 26% logs 2,550 81 % Substratea mudlsilt 755 24% sand 1,685 54% gravel 690 22% b woodwaste 500 16% Deptha 0-1 ft. 1,775 57% 1-2 ft. 870 28% >2ft. 485 15% 3,130 feet, surveyed 11 April 1997 Measured or sampled approximately five feet out from shoreline. b Woodwaste = areas where chips and bark exceed 50% surface coverage. Anthropogenic structures are found in several areas along the shoreline. Two boat sheds (one sunken), half a dozen docks, a barge, three boats, two log skids and several other smaller structures impact approximately 5 percent of the shoreline. All of these structures overhang shallow water habitat in Lake Washington. No floating log rafts were present offshore of Baxter or Quendall the day of the survey, although aerial photographs indicate this practice was historically common. The Gypsy Subbasin Drainage enters the Baxter property via a 24-inch concrete culvert beneath the Burlington Northern railroad cracks (Entranco, 1995). The culvert is 55 feet long, has a gradient of approximately 2 percent, and is likely a barrier to upstream fish passage. Upon entering the property, the drainage is discharged to a small (approximately 10 foot diameter), quarry-spall lined pond. From the pond, the drainage enters a 24-inch, 46-foot long concrete culvert beneath a dirt haul road before daylighting again to an open channel. The open channel is S February 17, 20(Y) ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES INC. 4CK/Jh/Id - IC1199/42A57- LD-D:Idt2-oo - W2K . Page 26 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Figure 2-7. Lake Washington Shoreline Composition along a 14-Mile Reach of Lakeshore on Both Sides of Quendall and Baxter in September 1995. - 100% 90% . i 80% 53 I Z 70% 60%! £ '0 50%,. Rendtkn area O 40% Lu I 30%- c 0 20% a. - 10% 0 6 0% C 6 6 6 £ 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 LAKEMIL.E % BULKHEAD o % SLO £ % VEGETATED source reference: Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 1995 Pier coverage of the water surface within 100 feet of the shoreline was estimated from 1989 aerial photographs and a review of environmental documents published between September 1991 and July 1995 (Muckleshoot, 1997). The values are believed to underestimate the real coverage due to an incomplete database and unauthorized development. For the eleven mile reach surveyed (which includes the remediation reach) a total of 517 piers were counted (47 piers/mile). This compares with 4 piers, or 7 piers/mile within the remediation reach (Table 2-11). Overall surface coverage averages 4.2 percent of the first 100 feet of lake for the eleven mile reach. Within the remediation area, only 0.6 percent of the lake surface is covered with piers. Table 2-11. Comparison of Overwater Pier Coverage within the Remediation Area (1997) and the Surrounding Shoreline (1989). Number of Piers/mile 7 47 Estimated Coverage (ft2 /mile) 3,008 22,368 Estimated Coverage (%) 0.6 4.2 1989 data supplied by the Muciclesnoot inalan irme twiucluesnuoL, i",. E S February 17, 2000 ASSOCL4TE[) EARTh! SCIENCES, INC. 4CK/)hIld- K299142A57 . W-D:02-00 - W2K Page 28 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 2.3.4 Lake Washington Open Water Benthic In general, the Quendall and Baxter offshore lake bottom drops off gently at slopes between approximately 20:1 and 9:1. Small localized areas with slopes in excess of 3:1 are present. After dropping relatively quickly to 15 to 20 foot depths within 250 feet from shore, the gradient flattens into a broad plateau sloping gently for another 400 to 600 feet offshore. Approximately 5 to 10 additional feet in depth are gained over this plateau. Additional topography/bathyrnetrY information and a map is provided in the Sediment Quality Memorandum, Section 4.1 (RETEC, 1997). The vast majority of remediation activities will take place in 10 or less feet of water, although dredging near the old T-dock would occur in about 30 feet of water. The surface of the lake bottom substrate was characterized in terms of particle size and organic material (e.g., wood chips). The subsurface composition was examined via sediment-profile imaging (SPI). The surficial layer was surveyed with video by both towed and diver operated cameras, and during the SPI surveys. In general the lake bottom consists of very fine particles. Occasional sandy areas were also noted. No graveled areas were noted. A more complete description is provided in Section 4.2 (RETEC, 1997). SPI images provide a measurement of the substrate depth in which aerobic activity is occurring (RETEC, 1997). These data are useflul in assessing the quality of habitat for epifauna and infauna. A thin redox potential discontinuity (RPD) is indicative of a stressed environment. Stress can occur physically (e.g., prop wash) or chemically (e.g., high biological oxygen demand or chemical contamination). RPD depths of less than 0.4 cm are indicative of an anaerobic condition. The shallowest RPD depths in the remediation area (<0.2 cm) were measured off the southern end of the Port Quendall parcel and were associated with areas with high wood waste (RETEC, 1997, Figure 6-2). Intermediate RPD levels (0.2 to 0.8 cm) were observed over much of the rest of the lake bottom off Port Quendall. These levels are indicative of a disturbed environment where benthic stress is present but likely varies. Both scattered wood debris and chemical contamination are likely present. The rest of the remediation area has RPD depths over 0.8 cm, which is considered to be a relatively undisturbed benthic condition in terms of overall animal-sediment interactions for nearshore environs in this portion of Lake Washington (RETEC, 1997). A complete description of the SPI process, wood and chemical contamination extents, and associated maps are provided in the Sediment Quality Memorandum, Section 6 (RETEC, 1997). Sunken logs are present throughout the remediation area with the highest densities (3 to 5 logs/acre) mapped along the Quendall shoreline. Much of the aquatic organisms observed during video surveys (e.g., crayfish, sculpin, perch) were associated with the logs. Milfoil was noted during the side-scan sonar and video surveys (RETEC, 1997). Areas of dense milfoil are mapped in Figure 2-2. Milfoil is common throughout most of the remediation area at water depths from about 4 to approximately 15 feet. Only in the dense woodwaste area at the south end of the remediation area was milfoil relatively absent. February 17, 20(X) ASSOCL4 TED EARTH SCIENCES. iNC. ACKIjhItd. V.89142457 LD-D:ld12(I) - W2K Page 29 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Water Column Pilings and dolphins (tied piling cluster) are scattered throughout the remediation area with 64 percent located off the Port Quendall parcel. A total of 73 vertical structures, mainly dolphins, have been mapped to date. These structures provide vertical habitat which many species utilize, including some salinomd predators, (e.g., bass). Several hundred individual upright pilings, many not rising above the water surface, also likely exist but have not been mapped. The pilings also provide attachment and focal points for aquatic organisms such as freshwater mussels. Several sunken structures along the Quendall shoreline are also present in the water colunm including the old boat house and several partially sunken pier sections. Surface A number of anthropogenic structures and objects exist on the surface of Lake Washington which have an influence on aquatic habitat quality. A varying quantity of logs have been stored as log rafts off the shoreline of Barbee Mill, Baxter and Quendall. Vessels including tugs, barges and recreational boats have been anchored in the area. Numerous docks are present in either a permanent (i.e., mounted on pilings) or temporary (i.e., floating) basis. Structures on the lake surface provide overhead refuge cover for numerous aquatic species as well as their predators. Salmonids in particular prefer overhead cover, especially when near shore. A number of small oily slicks have been observed nearshore and are believed to be coming from old creosote deposits (Figure 4-6 in RETEC, 1997). These slicks impact aquatiçhabitat via both chemical and physical processes. Chemically, various components of the creosote are toxic to 0 aquatic life. Physically, the slicks present a barrier at the air/water interface. Fisbjeeding at the surface can become contaminated. Prey items stuck in the sheen are not consumable. 2.3.5 Habitat Valuation Numerous protected alcoves, abundant woody debris, overhanging trees, and relatively low human disturbance along the shoreline offer good potential rearing and migrating structure for fish, especially when compared to the adjacent Lake Washington shoreline. Although a number of beneficial habitat features exist, they are compromised by the constant seepage of chemicals and oily residues. Under existing conditions, therefore, habitat value of the remediation site for fish is low. Offshore habitat in the remediation area ranges from good to poor. Those areas contaminated with chemicals and wood chips offer poor to negligible benthic habitat. The majority of the lake bottom is relatively clean, however, and the numerous sunken logs provide good structural diversity for a number of aquatic species. The vertical and floating structures benefit some species (e.g., smalimouth bass) to the possible detriment of others (e.g., juvenile salmonids). February 17, 200) 4550 CLI TED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. ACX/jWld . K899142A57- LD-D:I1d2 Page 30 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandwn Fish habitat value of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage within the project boundary is minimal. The is two short open stretches offer some potential rearing habitat, however, shallow depths, a muddy substrate, no instream structure, and little instream cover limits the overall habitat value. With little protection from high velocities, winter storm events likely flush many fish from the system. Summer conditions produce extremely low flows which may also limit the habitat quality. 2.4 Recreational There is one private dock and boathouse located over Lake Washington at the extreme northern boundary of the Baxter parcel. No other recreational opportunities and no public access are currently provided on the site. Recreational resources are not discussed further. 2.5 Cultural See Larson Anthropological/ArchaeolOgiCal Services, 1997, for a cultural resource assessment of the Quendall and Baxter sites, as well as for recommendations for cultural monitoring based on the assessment findings. 2.6 Economic A portion of the Baxter parcel is used for storage of "beauty bark." The southern portion of the Quendall parcel is used for log sorting. Both of these uses would be curtailed by remediation. A utility right-of-way separates the Baxter and Quendall parcels, however use of this right-of-way is not affected by remediation. Economic resources are not discussed further. February 17, 20() ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. 4CK/JMd - K899142457- W-D:Ud2.00- W2K Page 31 Quendall and Baxter Properties &uitigation Analysis vfemorandum 3.0 IMPACTS 3.1 Plants and Animals 3.1. 1 Disturbance to Shoreline Land-based remediation will result in the excavation and/or capping of 1.150 feet of the Quendall shoreline (Figures 3-1 through 3-3). Approximately 660 linear feet of vegetated shoreline, including Wetlands A and B, will be impacted (Table 3-1 and Table 3-2). The capping activities on the Baxter Parcel are not expected to directly impact shoreline vegetation. All wildlife use of the shoreline areas will be eliminated where vegetation is removed, or severely curtailed where it remains, during active remediation. Remediation is likely to require an 18-month period. Nesting waterfowl and passerine bird use will be the greatest wildlife use impacted during shoreline remediation activities. Table 3-1. Shoreline Vegetation Disturbance Resulting from Upland Excavation and/or Capping diaderistic impacted Linear Distance (feet) Total shoreline impacted T 1, 150 feet Non-vegetated shoreline 490 feet Vegetated shoreline 660 feet Blackberry 425 feet Upland shrubs (non-blackberry) 235 feet Upland trees 345 feet Wetland 280 feet 3.1.2 Dredge Offshore Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) Wetland E (Baxter Cove) will be dredged to remove polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) sediments, which will remove all vegetation and woody debris in the wetland and most of the adjacent vegetated area. Turtles will be displaced from this shoreline area during the dredging activities. Red-wing blackbird nesting habitat will be eliminated. PAH dredging offshore of the Quendall parcel will remove 106,200 ft2 of milfoil, which is considered to be a positive impact. The positive impact will likely be short-lived, as the milfoil would be expected to recolonize. S S February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. ACKIJhJId- K899142e457 - LD-D:IO2-00- W2K Page 32 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 3-2. Impacts to Wetlands to be Dredged or Filled by the Quendall and Baxter Remediation Actions (Refer to Figure 3-1) k, A 0.20 Wetland along Lake FF0 - immature red alder with a A portion to be Washington shoreline, minor Himalayan blackberry understory and excavated and surface discharge from project a sparse herbaceous cover of cattail, replaced with clean site; some shoreline protection reed canarygrass, buttercup, and flag material; remainder to provided by vegetation and iris; habitat value is moderate due to be capped with 3 feet logs embedded nearshore; little adjacency to the lake; provides of clean material. flood control, base flow potential habitat for amphibians, support or water quality passerine birds and limited waterfowl improvement is provided, nesting - observed wildlife use includes Canada goose, beaver, several species of passerine birds. B 0.37 Wetland along Lake FF0 - red alder with a hardhack and A portion to be Washington shoreline, minor Pacific willow shrub layer; habitat excavated and surface discharge from project value is moderate due to adjacency to replaced with clean site; some shoreline protection the lake; provides potential habitat for material; remainder to provided by vegetation and amphibians, passerine birds and be capped with 3 feet logs embedded nearshore; little limited waterfowl nesting, observed of clean material. flood control, base flow wildlife use includes Canada goose, support or water quality beaver, several species of passerine improvement is provided, birds. C 0.17 Excavation in till material; PSS/PEM/POW - black cottonwood Excavated and detains drainage from log saplings, cattails and soft rush; replaced with clean yards; no outlet was observed perennial open water; low habitat material. and the area appears to be value due to low vegetative diversity isolated from ground water, and isolated nature of area: observed therefore no base flow support wildlife use includes Canada goose. is provided by this wetland; and mallards. water quality improvement provided by detention of log yard runoff. D 0.08 Old industrial settling pond PSS - small wetland within former A portion to be isolated from Lake industrial area dominated by cattail, excavated and Washington; little flood Pacific willow and red-osier replaced with clean control or base flow support is dogwood; overall habitat value is low; material; remainder to provided; no water quality observed wildlife use includes red- be capped with 3 feet improvements provided, winged blackbird, snipe, of clean material. E 0.23 Cove created by till along the PEM/POW/PSS - cattail, Himalayan Most to be excavated (Baxter lake shoreline; some shoreline blackberry, red-osier dogwood and 3 to 6 feet and Cove) protection provided by red alder sapling: emergent vegetation replaced with clean vegetation and logs embedded established after 1990; habitat value is material; remainder nearshore; flood control, base moderate due to adjacency to the lake; excavated to 3 feet flow support and water quality provides potential habitat for and replaced with improvement are limited due amphibians, passerine birds and water clean material. Minor to the small area that drains fowl; observed wildlife use includes portion to south along into the cove, turtles (painted and sliders); beaver, shoreline may be red-wing blackbird, mallards, retained. S . February 17, 2(XX) ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Page 33 ACK/jh/ld . Jf99142,457. W-D:102.00- W2K S wm -I0 m 03 -I . m IT1I -f z 0 a S S OUTER HARBOR BOUNDARY 1G) Coc rn !, - -.:-•:---_. !1t , I 11 I1fflU I rz OQ 0 > flH I I I I zr C))'— ' L L C-1 > 9. a, CD 2 . , \O. .Q. A) 0' c• . cco oD . , rn C" A)A) 5(D 3CD CoZ 0 >0 - (/) (0(A) (00) - B B V 0. 0 - Cl C. — CD mz WC). (D0 In >0 0.. 0 (A CD :!f A) -D j5 3 A). . CD 3 o ç' :11 a . o A) Xm . .A) 0. CL "II —m 0 rn rn -- -o o a(D cAB -.CL c (A a, 3 CL m . ?. CD 1 z OUTER HARBOR BOUNDARY Qo N 1- WWI 4 \\ N' I DNR OWNERSHIP ~-1 V!!. lo~ c Z z Fz ow CD X (n-fl4 Ornm zODr — jD0 2 Qom ZZO -4rn CO flic (n o -4 C m h rz 00 NNJ z CD ll1F1r Li11 > a CD o o 0 rn - g CD • C1 • c 0 = a 5CD 5CD CD - CD — 0. — a - CD cnZ a Co > ©(1 (0 0) ; ;;; 0 V 0. .0 — CD — (71 m z . CD CD • ,CD 3 •-' -i CD CD CD . -. DCD CD CD CD 3 3 QCD 0. .0 W. 0. 0. CL () z CD 0 Q• (0 9 CD CD '3 03 CL -. 030 0 CD 3 3 CL m 0 CD (0 :. . a a = CD 42o;c S S OUTER HARBOR BOUNDARY rz 00 0-1 cn Ii ftILL1 V 9 V Q Cl) ccn 09)'Q 6 0 -0 -u H R a - >C) fl, 0 a D -ID o rnz -° (D CD >0 U) as-C a g H H CL I•rn 1.111 I U I I CL m CD I Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Anahsis Memorandum 3.1.3 In-Water One-Foot Sediment Cap If Ecology determines that less than 50 percent woodwaste areas require remediation, these areas would be capped with one foot of clean sand. These areas are indicated as a "potential" one-foot cap in Figure 3-1. No impact to nearshore, partially submerged logs that provide resting platforms for waterfowl and turtles, or to other features along the shoreline and water interface, are expected due to this potential action, other than the staging areas within the impact zones shown in Figure 3- 1. 3.1.4 Dredge Offshore Areas with Greater Than 50 Percent Wood Chips No impact to plants or animals will result from the removal of material with greater than 50 percent wood chips. Although approximately 7,666 square feet of milfoil will be removed, this is considered to be a positive impact. 3.1.5 Upland Soil Excavation and Capping In addition to the removal of shoreline vegetation shown in Figures 3-1 through 3-3, all upland vegetated areas on the Quendall and Baxter parcels, including Wetlands C and D, will be eliminated with this action (Table 3-2 and Figures 3-1 through 3-3). The narrow band of existing shoreline vegetation on the Baxter site that is excluded from the shoreline impact zones in Figures 3-1 through 3-3 will be retained. The upland vegetation removal will eliminate all current wildlife use of the Quendall and Baxter parcels upland of the shoreline areas. Snipes, Canada geese, and . some passerine birds have been observed using these sparsely vegetated areas. Osprey nesting in the area could be impacted by the remediation activities. However, the osprey successfully nested on the adjacent active mill site in 1997, indicating that high levels of activity and construction-level noise would not necessarily impact osprey nesting in this area. The occasional use of the osprey nest platform on the Puget Sound Energy cable station pole by bald eagles during the winter could be eliminated during remediation activities. As a result of this very limited use, remediation should not affect bald eagle foraging. The closest known bald eagle nest site is approximately '/4 mile west of the site; therefore, the project will not impact nesting bald eagles. Capping over the piped section of Gypsy subbasin drainage on the Baxter site would not preclude any mitigation potential the drainage may represent to future development after remediation. Gypsy subbasin drainage is not included or needed to reasonably mitigate remediation as proposed in Section 4.0. 3.2 Fisheries Impacts 3.2.1 Shoreline Disturbance Shoreline disturbances affecting fish habitat include complete removal of all vegetation along 660 feet of shoreline, removal of all nearshore woody debris along 1,045 feet of shoreline, 100 percent filling of Wetlands A and B, the two wetlands adjacent to the lake, and dredging of "Baxter Cove". Onshore capping activities are not expected to impact shoreline vegetation. February 17, 20(Y) ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC ACK/jh/1d K899I42A57 LD-D:11d12.00 - W2K Page 37 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 4.0 MITIGATION The wildlife habitat within the remediation area is primarily found along the shoreline. The goal S of the wildlife mitigation is to expand and enhance the plant communities and other habitat features (e.g., down woody debris) along the Quendall and Baxter shorelines. All wetlands on the Quendall and Baxter parcels are Class 3 wetlands (per City of Renton categorization) that require replacement at a 1: 1.5 (impact: restoration) ratio by the City of Renton. Wetland communities would be replaced with higher value Class 2 forested wetlands in two areas. The northern area would include the present location of Baxter Cove (Wetland E). The southern wetland mitigation site would be a large complex along the southern Quendall shoreline. Wetland hydrology would be primarily controlled by Lake Washington. Vegetation and logs would provide shoreline protection as found under current conditions. Water quality functions would be limited in these wetland systems due to the limited area that would drain into these wetlands, similar to existing wetland conditions. The biological support provided by the wetland mitigation areas is expected to be greater than currently provided by the five wetland areas (A through E) that would be impacted by the remediation because two large and enhanced wetland areas would be linked by a restored 100-foot vegetated shoreline. The resulting habitat would also support greater vegetative diversity and structure than current conditions, including an overstory conifer component. Conceptual mitigation actions are summarized in Figure 4-1 and discussed below for each remediation action. Wetland mitigation is not proposed along intact portions of the shoreline unaffected by remediation (for example, northern Baxter) or in areas of Quendall with extensive monitoring requirements under the cleanup action plan. Shoreline enhancement and restoration has been placed where the shoreline will be impacted by the remediation (Quendall shoreline north to Baxter cove). A trail north to south with perpendicular extensions to controlled outlooks landward of the OHWM is expected with subsequent development of the site. A trail is not proposed as part of the remediation mitigation. Nonetheless, mitigation enhancement for the remediation is considered to constrain any future trail and public access as follows: The main north to south trail would be landward of the buffer. Perpendicular trail extensions to controlled Lake Washington outlooks would be allowed to extend into the buffer, with buffer widths extended to make up the area lost to the trail. All access would be controlled to within the trail and outlook system, using some combination of dense or thorny native vegetation or fencing. Signs would be posted indicating the wildlife value of the buffer, indicating ownership, and restricting access. The buffer perimeter may be averaged. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC ACK/flilid - J(899142A57 - W.D:02-0 - W2K Page 41 C) 0 z C) m -u —4 C Cl) I 0 m r z z 'ii —I z D —4 6) 0 z z FI 0 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum O 4.1 Plants and Animals 4.1.1 Disturbance to Quendall Shoreline and Loss of Wetland C The goal of the Quendall shoreline mitigation is to replace existing vegetated shoreline areas (including Wetlands A & B) and Wetland C with similar or enhanced vegetatedlhabitat conditions. The following actions will be conducted to mitigate for shoreline wildlife habitat impacts: Establishment of an averaged 100-foot-wide zone of native plant communities along the impacted shoreline that is currently only poorly vegetated or lacking vegetation. Shrub species will be established along most of the revegetated shoreline (Figure 4- 2). Trees will be established along at least 50 percent of the shoreline and cover at least 50% of the wetland restoration areas (Figure 4-3). Plant diversity will be increased from current conditions. A list of plants proposed for the restoration plantings are provided in Table 4-1. Wetlands A, B, and C will be replaced with enhanced functions on a 1:1.5 area (impact:restoratiOfl) in one wetland complex associated with Lake Washington in the current location of Wetland A, totaling approximately 1.11 acres (Figure 4-4). The length of the wetland complex along the shoreline will at least equal current shoreline wetland area (approximately 395 feet). The creation of one larger system comprised of more diverse cormnunities (e.g.. conifers) will increase wetland value. Wetland hydrology will be controlled by lake level during the summer and stormwater release from the developed project during the winter, and is thus guaranteed. Vegetation species composition and diversity will be increased in the wetland buffer from the current condition. The wetland buffer will be expanded from 25 feet to 50 feet because the newly created wetlands associated with the lake would be classified by the City as Class 2 wetlands, rather than having the existing Class 3 status. The increase in buffer width reflects Renton's requirements for the improved wetland values. Woody debris will be placed in all re-created shoreline habitats, including replacement of logs as necessary along the shoreline. Wetland and buffer slopes would average 4:1 or less in most areas, although some banks may rise more steeply to provide diversity in limited areas so long as erosion risk can be avoided. If contaminated material removal coincides with wetland placement, one or two snags could be installed where clean fill is placed. February 17, 2O'X1 ASSOCIATED EARTh! SCiENCES, INC. ACKJjh/Id- X59914ZA57 W.DIlii24X). WZK Page 43 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandwn Table 4-1. Plant Species Proposed for Planting within the Wetland and Shoreline Buffers SCIEI'mFIC NAME I COMMON NAME, Shallow Emergent Wetland Cares obnupta slough sedge Care.x stipata saw-beaked sedge Eleocharis ovata ovid spike-rush Juncus oxymeris pointed rush Sagittaria laufolia broadleaf arrowhead Scirpus microcarpus small -fruited bulrush Veronica Americana american brooklime Deep Emergent Wetland A lisma plantago-aquatica water plantain Scirpus acutus hardstem bulrush Scirpus validus softstem bulrush Scrub-Shrub Wetland Cornus sericea red-osier dogwood Lonicera involucrate black twinberry Physocarpus capitatus Pacific ninebark Pyrus fits ca western crabapple Rhamnus purshiana cascara Ribes lacustre swamp gooseberry Rosa nutkana Nutka rose Rosa pisocarpa pea-fruit rose Rubus spectabills salmonberry SaiLs lucida vat. lasiandra Pacific willow Sal,x sitchensis Sitka willow S 0., February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTh! SCIENCES, INC 5 ACKJ1h/ld - K899142A57 - W-O:1dI2-00 - W2K Page 44 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 41. Plant Species Proposed for Planting within the Wetland and Shoreline Buffers (continued). SCIENTIFIC NAME I COMMON NAME Forested Wetland Fraxinus latifolia Oregon ash Picea sitchensis Sitka spruce Populus trichocarpa black cottonwood Thuja plicata western redcedar Upland Forest (trees and shrubs) Acer circinatum vine maple Acer inacrophyllum bigleaf maple Arbutus menziesii Pacific madrone Berberis [Maltonia] spp. Oregon grape Cornus nut a/Ill Pacifc dogwood Gaultheria shallon salal Oemleria cerasformis Indian plum Pinus contorta shorepine Populiss tremuloides quaking aspen Prunus ernarginala bitter cherry Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir Thuja plicata western redcedar Tsuga heterophylla western hemlock Upland Shrub Acer circinatum vine maple Amelanchier alnfolia serviceberry Corylus cornuza hazelnut Rosa spp. rose Rubus parv:florus thimbleberry Salbspp. willow Syinphoricarpos albus snowberry 5 February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCiENCES, INC ACK/JhJtd - K899142A57- LD-D:%1d12-00 - W2K rage S S S . S CD to CD I o LFT hbsi. [ ] Shorel -------------- ine Edge S S S dstr.oJ.cgG142 1h) - Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 4.1.2 Excavation of Baxter Cove (Wetland E) and Loss of Wetland D S The following actions will restore wetland habitat in an area centered around Baxter Cove: Turtles currently existing in Baxter Cove will be live-trapped and removed to nearby areas in Lake Washington containing suitable habitat. Dispersal areas will be identified in conjunction with County and WDFW wildlife biologists. When remediation has been completed and Baxter Cove has been replanted, attempts will be made to capture turtles from the dispersion areas and return a small population (6-12 individuals) to Baxter Cove. Dredged areas will be filled with clean material of a similar grain size and to elevations similar to current conditions. This will recreate a hydrologic regime that supports open water and emergent vegetation components. The area will be replaced with suitable clean fill material. The Baxter Cove wetland area will be expanded by excavating additional areas (to a total of approximately 0.46 acre) to provide a 1:1.5 forested wetland replacement for the Baxter Cove wetland (Wetland E) and Wetland D. Logs will be partially buried and/or anchored along the lake shoreline at the mouth of Baxter Cove to stabilize the shoreline and provide resting platforms for turtles and waterfowl. Logs will be floated across the open water mouth of Baxter Cove. Large down logs will be placed in the wetland perimeter. Shallow and deep emergent wetland species will be planted to establish an emergent plant community with greater diversity than is currently found in Baxter Cove; a bench to appropriate depth for shallow emergents will be constructed during regrading with clean fill after the excavation is complete. Obligate and facultative wetland tree and shrub species will be planted at the wetland perimeter. A 50-foot forested and shrub upland buffer will be planted, with a slope of 4:1 or less throughout most of the buffer. Trees will comprise at least 50 percent of native canopy cover in areas where tree and shrub communities are established. An osprey nest platform will be erected in the buffer if the cable Station nest platform is removed during remediation. 4.1.3 Dredge Offshore Areas with Greater Than 50 Percent Wood Chips No mitigation action required. The remediation will improve the existing condition and restore the lake bottom to its original contours. • February 17, 200) ASSOCL4 TED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. 4CKiJhItd - KB99142A57 - LD-D:11d12-00 - W2K Page 49 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 4.1.4 Dredge Offshore PAR Areas No mitigation action required, other than replacement to original contours with clean material of a similar gram size. 4.1.5 Upland Soil and Excavation and Capping Wildlife habitat impacts will be compensated by habitat created along the shoreline. This will include: Replacement of Wetlands C and D on a 1:1.5 area basis in the two wetland complexes associated with the shoreline restoration (as discussed above); Enhancement of the vegetation species composition and diversity of the wetland and wetland buffer from the current condition (Table 4-1 and as discussed above); Placement of woody debris in wetland and associated buffers. As a result of these mitigations, the following improvements would result: 1.05 acres of existing degraded Class 3 wetland replaced by 1.58 acres of replaced Class 2 forested wetland hydrologically supported by Lake Washington; Approximately 53,500 ft2 of degraded shoreline vegetation (including wetlands and buffers replaced/enhanced by approximately 115,000 ft2 of shoreline vegetation and buffers; an average 100-foot Lake Washington enhanced shoreline buffer, in excess of the Renton minimum code requirements of 50 feet (commercial) or 25 feet (residential). 4.2 Fisheries Mitigation Fish habitat mitigation for remediation impacts would take place along the shoreline and is closely integrated with wetland mitigation activities. Mitigation planning was directed towards creating a high quality nearshore rearing environment as the first priority. Physical shoreline characteristics and the final mitigated condition are shown in Table 4-2. 4.2.1 In-Water Work Timing To minimize impacts to sensitive fisheries resources, the timing of work in Lake Washington and along the shoreline below the ordinary high water mark will avoid the annual migration of juvenile sahnonids (see Section 3.2.2). To protect the juvenile runs from physical disturbance and short- term turbidity, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife recommends no in-water work in southern Lake Washington during the period from February 1 through June 15. Therefore, February 17, 20(0 ASSOCIATED EARTh' SCIENCES, INC 4CK/JW1d - VJ99141457 - LD-D:02.00- W2K Page 50 Quendall and Baxter Properties i4itiganon Analysis Me,norandwn dredging and clean sediment replacement on the lake bottom and all work below the OHWM along the shoreline, including Baxter Cove, would be conducted between June 16 and January 31 Water quality protection measures are described in Section 4.3. Additional details required to protect species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act will be provided as necessary during the biological review process for those species. 4.2.2 Shoreline Disturbance Vegetation removal resulting from the remediation activities would be mitigated by replanting the nearshore environment as described in Section 4.1. The riparian width would vary, but would average 100 feet. A minimum of 50 percent of the remediation shoreline buffer would be planted with low growing native groundcovers and shrubs. Together with the existing shrubbery remaining outside the remediation area, the total linear distance of shrubs would include 1,490 feet of shoreline. Plants along the shore would be selected to maximize overhanging vegetation and provide bank stability. Compatible species would be planted in those areas converted to wetland from the existing conditions. A minimum of 50 percent of the remediation shoreline would be replanted with trees for a total of 1,135 feet (tree planting would be concurrent with other shrub and groundcover vegetation). Trees close to the waterline would be selected to provide similar functions to those described for the shrubs. Mitigation for loss of nearshore wetlands was described in Section 4.1. Enhanced wetland habitat along the Baxter shoreline will replace areas with relatively poor fish habitat conditions (e.g., vertical dirt banks, abandoned structures, rip-rap) with a vegetated gently sloped shoreline. Wetland replacement would result in increased low-gradient shoreline and a more diverse shoreline structure. Reductions in the extent of vertical dirt bank, rip-rap, log bollards, and several industrial structures would be accomplished (Table 4-2). 4.2.3 Dredge Offshore (PAH and Wood Chips No direct habitat mitigation is proposed for offshore dredging undertaken to remove PA}I and wood chip contamination except for re-establishing and enhancing the Baxter Cove shoreline. 4.2.4 Upland Soil Excavation and Capping Potential upland soil excavation and capping impacts would be mitigated to the greatest extent practicable with implementation of an erosion and sediment control plan. No other mitigation is proposed. February JZ 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACKJJM4 - K899142A57 - LD.D:IO2-0- wx Page 51 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 4-2. Mitigated Lake Washington Shoreline Characteristics (3,130 ft. surveyed April 11, 1997) 0 OZ7 CUYlStk ExiitIng conaiuons - Retnedlated Condstlonv COflditiO Goat - MWgited Cosdxtiou 4+ Coverage Change G1 Mftigaled: Conis1ooa Ce Remédlatad Change Existing Vegetation none 800 269a' 1460 47% +83% - 75 2% -95% -91% blackberry 1425 469o' 1000 32% -30% - 540 175 1 -467a -62% shrubs 905 29% 670 21% -26% + 1490 48% +122% +65% trees 770 1 259o' 425 149ro' 45% + 1135 36% +167% +47% wetland 535 17% 255 8% -52% =1+ 1070 34% +320% +100% Bank type s Protection beach 805 267. 485 15% 40% -4- 1120 36% +131% +39% vertical dirt 930 30% 750 24% -19% - 660 21% -12% -29% riprap 415 13% 335 11% -19% - 335 11% +0% -19% bulkhead 0 0% 0 0% +0% - 0 0% +0% +0% log bollard 515 16% 435 14% -16% - 285 9% -34% 45% pier 55 2% 35 1% -36% - 35 1% +0% -36% building 35 1% 35 1% +0% - 35 1% +0% +0% log skid 35 175 20 1% 43% - 0 090, -100% -100% undercut 110 4% 110 4% +0% =1- 80 3% -27% -27% inlet 820 26% 690 22% -16% 1+ 820 26% +19% +0% logs 2550 81% —_1505 48% —_41% + 2550 81% +69% +0% Substrate2 mudisilt - 755 24% 325 10% -57% =1- 325 10% +0% -57% sand 1685 54% 1080 35% -36% =(- 1080 35% +0% -36% gravel 690 2296' 1725 55% +150% rI+ 1725 55% +07. +150% wood was& 500 16% 0 0% -100% - 0 07. +0% -100% Depth2 0-11 1775 57% 1775 57% +0% =1+ 1775 57% +0% +0% 1-2 870 28% 870 28% +0% =/+ 870 28% +0% +0% >2 485 15% 485 15% +0% - =1- 485 159. +09. +0% Bank type assumes capping does not affect existing bank. Measured or sampled approximately five feet out from shoreline; Woodwasse = areas where chips and bark exceed 50% surface coverage. Reinediated coilinon asumcs lake bed capped to original elevation with material sized similar to existing conditions. Mitigated condition assumes 50% of dredged shoreline would be replanted with trees, 50% with shrubs, and wetland areas would be recreated as beach. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARIW SCIENCES, INC. ACKJ1WZd - K899142A57- LD.W1dL2-OO - wx Page 52 S Quendall and Baxter Properties 'vfizigarion Analysis Memorandum 4.3 Water Quality Water quality impacts will not accrue from the proposed remediation and mitigation in the long term. These combined actions are expected to improve water quality over the existing condition. However, impacts in the short-term from implementation of the remediation action could occur if proper temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) measures are not taken. A synopsis of likely TESC measures that would be proposed as part of the Consent Decree under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) is provided in Table 4-3. 4.4 Mitigation Implementation Schedule 4.4.1 Baxter Property Based on the current projected schedule, the remediation activities could start on the Baxter property sometime in the fourth quarter of 2000. Upland excavation activities, including soil treatment, are projected to be completed within an 80-day period. Baxter Cove remediation activities are estimated to take approximately one month. Capping activities on the Baxter site should be completed within a 90-day period. Under a start date of the fourth quarter of 2000, the Baxter Cove excavation and fill activities would need to be completed prior to January 31, 2001 to accommodate the recommended fisheries window for in-water work of June 16' to January 31. This would allow for completion of remediation activities on the Baxter site to be completed by the first quarter of 2001. The wetland restoration I mitigation activities in Baxter Cove would begin with the excavation of the areas adjacent to Baxter Cove that would be converted to wetland habitat. This excavation would at least include over-excavation of the planned grade for topsoil placement or whatever depth may be necessary to accommodate remediation excavation. Backfill of Baxter Cover and the adjacent wetland expansion area would include a least 12 inches of topsoils. If remediation is initiated in the last quarter of 2000, the wetland mitigation area and shoreline areas disturbed by remediation activities on the Baxter parcel would be planted in the spring of 2001. If the remediation is conducted under an alternative schedule the area should be planted late fall, winter, or early spring, if possible. Temporary watering of the plantings would be conducted as necessary to establish the plants. Long-term watering would not be required for these plantings. 4.4.2 Quendall Property Remediation activities on the Quendall property would likely begin after June 16, 2000. Remediation of the Quendall site involves much more extensive in-water dredging than the Baxter site, where in-water dredging is limited to Baxter Cove. Upland excavation activities are also more extensive on the Quendall site than the Baxter site. The materials dredged from Lake Washington would be transported to the upland areas of the Quendall property to be treated on-site or off-site. These materials would likely be brought onto the site just south of Wetland A. February 17, 20(X) - ASSOCL47ED EARZII SCIENCES, INC 4CKIjh/ld. f(99141457. LD-D:IO2-00 - W2K Page 53 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 4-3w Mitigation of Short-Term Impacts Related to Site Cleanup OeamtpAcdvlty Po€sible Mitigation Approach Genera] Site Controls Where possible a vegetative buffer will be left between upland activities and the lake. In all places, silt fencing will be installed to prevent sediment from entering the lake. In addition, the site will be graded, as necessary, to prevent stormwater discharge to the lake (Chapter 173-201A WAC establish water quality criteria). Measures recommended in the 1999 draft Volume 11 Stormwater Manpeement in Washington State will be considered representative of 'typical" best management practices (BMPs) for much of the upland site work. Excavation and Dewatering Excavations will be dewatered, as necessary, to prevent handling of saturated soil excavated from below the water table. Water will be treated and preferentially discharged to the local sanitary sewer with prior permission. If lake discharge is necessary. specific testing regimes and criteria for lake discharge would be agreed with the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). Surge capacity will be provided by the use of rented storage tanks. Excavated soil will be stockpiled and provided with appropriate erosion and sedimentation controls. Dredging - Baxter Cove Baxter Cove will be hydraulically isolated from the lake using steel sheet piles or similar. Free water will be pumped off for discharge to the sanitary sewer. Excavation will be performed using land-based Dredging - Quendall Silt curtains or screens will be used to control the spread of turbidity from dredging. Turbidity criteria under WAC 173-201A-030 can be modified to allow a temporary mixing zone during dredging of lake bottom sediments, however the point of compliance would not be further than 150 feet from the dredging activity pursuant to WAC 173-201 A-i I0(3)(d). Dredging will be performed using specialized equipment (e.g., CableArm"), techniques, and dredge rates that limit the potential for generating turbidity and that do not cause exceedances of surface water quality criteria outside the work area. Most chemicals present on-site will be strongly associated with sediment particles. Surface water quality monitoring will be performed during dredging to ensure no impacts are occurring beyond the work area. This plan would be developed as a part of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) permitting. Sediment Transport and Haul barges for mechanically dredged sediment would be welded water tight to prevent discharge of free Offloading - Mechanical water back into the lake. Offloading will occur by placing the haul barge as near to shore as possible. (Spillage Preventiow Offloading will occur with a clamshell or similar. A spill apron barge may be used under the crane swing_ area _to_collect_any_incidental_spillage. Sediment Transport and Any sediment dredged hydraulically will be pumped directly to the upland portions of the site using a Offloading - Hydraulic pipeline. (Spillage Prevention) Sediment Staging and Dredged sediment will be contained in barges or upland dewatering cells or ponds. Free water will be Dewatering collected and treated prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer. Dewatering from hydraulic dredging would require discharge to Lake Washington after treatment due to the large volumes it would generate. Upland cells or ponds will be lined, will have a water collection system, and will be constructed with berrns to prevent run-on or run-off. Off-Site or On-Site Hauling Entry points to the site will be upgraded with crushed rock or quarry spalls. All trucks leaving the site will proceed through a wheel wash and any soil tracked onto public roads will be addressed through occasional street washing. Process waste water could be controlled and kept separate from storm water. Soil Capping A clean soil cap will be placed over large portions of the site. The soil will consist of imported clean or treated soil. As for general site activities, a vegetative buffer will be left between the soil cap and shoreline to the maximum extent practicable. Other erosion and sedimentation controls, noted above under general site controls, will remain in place until redevelopment activities commence. Water Treatment Any water collected from soil or sediment dewatering will be treated using some combination of equalization, free-phase hydrocarbon separation coagulationlflocculation (for example, polymer treatment), or filtration. Discharge water would conform to standards required by its receiving location. If discharged to Lake Washington, Chapter 173-201A WAC would apply. If discharged to the sanitary sewer. King County/Metro standards would apply. Permitting Treated dewatering water and srormwaier discharge will be permitted under a Consent Degree in conformance with MTCA (Chapter 70-105D WAC). Under RCW 90.48.039, remediation actions do not require a separate National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) construction-phase permit; however, there must be compliance with substantive requirements of an NPDES permit. A detailed Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be developed prior to implementation of the final cleanup plan. S Februarj 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTh! SCIENCES. INC. .lCKfJhIId - K899142A57 - LD-D:11dI2-00' W2K Page 54 Quendall and Saxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum If all of the remediation activities on the Quendall site are completed within a single fish window opening (June 16, 2000 to January 31, 2001), the wetland mitigation and shoreline plantings could . be conducted in the second quarter of 2001 (assuming a June 16, 2000 start date). If the remediation dredging activities cannot be completed within a single fish window period, the dredging activities would be halted from February V through June 15' and be completed in the following fish window opening. Wetland mitigation could not be completed until the dredging activities are completed since the materials would be brought onto the site in the proposed wetland mitigation area (southern Quendall shoreline). If the remediation activities in the northern portion of Quendall are completed in the first season, the shoreline mitigation plantings, north of the wetland mitigation area, could be implemented in the first or early second quarter of 2001, and the wetland mitigation implemented after the dredging is completed the second year (project first / second quarter of 2002. If not, all wetland and shoreline mitigation activities would be initiated when all remediation activities are completed. Again, plantings would be irrigated on a temporary basis as needed to successfully establish the plants. 4.5 Monitoring and Contingency This section outlines post-construction performance standards, a monitoring schedule, maintenance requirements, and contingencies for the proposed buffer and wetland enhancement project. As proposed, monitoring to document plant survival would occur five times over a 10-year period. Each monitoring survey would be conducted by a qualified biologist. 4.5.1 Performance Standards The success of the remediation mitigation effort would be based on the following standards: Survival of 90 percent of the tree and shrub species plantings and 10 to 15 percent cover for emergent wetland plantings after one growing season. Percent survivorship would be calculated through a direct count of all dead rooted and severely stressed stock plantings within permanent sample plots. If necessary, the reason for the failure of plantings would be determined (i.e., soil conditions, herbivory, moisture conditions, etc.), and recommendations to rectify the problem(s) provided. Survival of 80 percent of the tree and shrub plantings and 30 percent cover of emergent wetland plantings after two growing seasons within the representative permanent sample plots. Fifteen percent cover for the tree and shrub plantings and 60 percent cover of emergent wetland plantings within the representative sample plots after three growing seasons. February 17, 2000 ASSOCL4TED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACIC//hhld - K899142A57.. W-D.•102-00 . wx Page 55 Quend.alI and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Thirty to 40 percent cover for the tree and shrub plantings and 75 percent cover of emergent wetland plantings within the representative sample plots after five growing seasons. 0 Forty to 55 percent cover for the tree and shrub plantings and 75 percent cover of emergent wetland plantings within the representative sample plots after 7 and 10 years. For all years less than or equal to 5 percent cover of non-native, invasive herbaceous species. 4.5.2 Maintenance A goal of this plan is to establish communities of native plant species that require little planned scheduled maintenance to become established, and require no routine maintenance after the plants have become successfully established. The planting contractor would be responsible for maintaining all plantings for a one-year period after installation before the final project acceptance is issued to the contractor. A temporary irrigation system would be used as needed during plant establishment. No permanent irrigation system would be required once the plants have successfully become established. 4.5.3 Monitoring During the first monitoring survey, randomly selected 5-meter radius plots would be permanently established within the restored habitats to provide a representative sampling of the tree and shrub plantings. One-meter square plots would be established to monitor the emergent wetland plantings. The entire area would be visually inspected at the time of sample plot establishment to ensure that the plots are representative of site conditions. Information on survivorship and percent cover would be collected from inside the permanent sample plots to judge the success of the restoration plantings. Information collected during each monitoring survey would not be of sufficient quantity or complexity to provide a statistical analysis for the project. However, it would be sufficient to adequately assess the success of the restoration efforts. Photo documentation stations would be permanently established either at the center of the permanent sampling plots, or at other locations that provide representative views of the mitigation areas. Photographs taken at these photo stations would be used to document the establishment of planted materials and to illustrate plant community changes within the restored areas. Percent survivorship for the project would be calculated through a direct count of all dead and severely stressed plantings within the permanent sample plots. Plant vigor would be evaluated using the following categories: live; stressed; tip die-back; and dead. Live plants would be judged to be those with healthy, vigorous stems, and adequate succulent foliage. Plants having sparse or desiccated foliage, significantly damaged twigs, sunburn or sunscald, etc. would be assigned to the stressed category. Plants suffering from significant stem mortality, especially the leader and/or - 0 Fel,ruary 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTh! SCIENCES. INC ACK/jh/1d- KJ99142.457 W-D:S1d12-00- W2K Page 56 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum main stem, would be placed within the tip die-back category. Plants found to support no foliage or live stems would be assigned to the dead category. Severely stressed plants and plants with tip die-back and no healthy basal sprouts or side branches would be considered dead for that monitoring period. During the first year following restoration, monitoring would occur during early spring before lake water levels rise and late summer before lake water levels are lowered. The focus of the initial spring monitoring survey would be to assess the suitability of the planting location selected for a particular plant species in relation to the lake water levels during the early growing season. Additionally, general observations of wildlife use of the enhanced habitat would also be noted. Photographs would be taken at each of the permanent photo stations during each monitoring survey, and current photographs from these photo stations would be included in the report prepared for that particular monitoring survey. 4.5.4 Monitoring Schedule All monitoring surveys would be conducted by a qualified biologist. Monitoring and reporting would be conducted over a 10-year period as follows: Immediately after plant installation to provide an as-built plan. The as-built review would include the establishment of the photo stations and documentation of the distribution of plant materials. Early spring (i.e., March, April) and late summer (e.g., September) of the first 0 growing season. Late summer of the second growing season. Late summer of the fifth growing season. Late summer of the seventh growing season. Late summer of the tenth growing season. 4.5.5 Monitoring Reporting The as-built report for the restored habitats would be submitted to the reviewing agency when completed, and all subsequent written reports would be submitted to the reviewing agency no later than October 15' of the monitoring year for review and approval. The written reports would include: 10 Condition of plants, including survivorship, percent cover, health, and vigor. Rationale for poor condition of plants, if present, would be determined and recommendations to rectify these conditions would be provided in the report. A February 17, 2000 ASSOCL4 TED EARTIf SCIENCES. INC. ACXJJM4-K899!42457- W-D:02.(0- W2K Page 57 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Aiza5'sis Memorandum discussion of the natural establishment of species not included in the planting plants (desirable and weedy species) would also be provided. 0 Observations of wildlife use. Photo documentation from the permanently established photo stations. Overall condition of the restored habitats and nearshore habitat, including indications of erosion, human disturbance, etc. 4.5.6 Contingency Plans Appropriate contingency plans would be developed as necessary to correct problems identified during the monitoring (i.e., planting failures, shoreline erosion, etc.). If plant survivorship does not meet the established criteria, replanting would be conducted only after the reason for failure has been identified (e.g., poor planting stock, incorrect moisture regime, herbivory, disease, shade/sun conditions, hydrologic conditions, vandalism, plant competition, etc.). Any replanting effort required would occur between October 15' and March 15th, or the following spring. All contingency plans would be submitted to the reviewing agencies for their approval prior to implementation. Therefore, timing of implementation would be dependent upon agency staff availability and scheduling. A report would also be submitted to the reviewing agencies following the implementation of any contingency plans. O - 0 Fthruwy 17, 2000 ASSOCL4TED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACKIJWId - 1(899142457- LD-D:102 W2K Page 58 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 5.0 REFERENCES Bennett, J. and Cubbage, J. 1992. Effects of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from Lake Washington on freshwater bioassay organisms and benthic macro invertebrates. Ecology Report, 28 p. plus appendices. Burgner, R.L. 1991. Life history of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka). Pages 3-117 in: Groot, C. and L. Margolis, eds. 1991. Pacific salmon life histories. UBC Press, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Entranco. 1995. Gypsy subbasin analysis, technical memorandum No. 2. Prepared for the City of Renton, Washington. David Evans and Associates, Inc. 1997. Wetland determination report on the JAG Development Property, Renton, Washington. Prepared for CNA Architecture Group, Bellevue, WA. Fisher, L., Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Personal communication to Andy Kindig (Beak), June 6, 1997. Heiser, D. W. and E. L. Finn, Jr. 1970. Observations of juvenile chum and pink salmon in marina and bulkheaded areas. Supplemental progress report, Washington State Department of Fisheries. September 1970. 28 p. S King County. 1993. Sainmamish River corridor conditions and enhancement opportunities. King County Surface Water Management, Seattle, WA. 54 p. plus appendices. Larson Anthropological/Archeological Services, 1997. Cultural Resonance Assessment JAG Development, King County, Washington. Technical Report 97-7, March 27, 1997. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. 1997. Draft summary of Lake Washington studies completed by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe in the vicinity of the Port Quendall project. Provided by Rod Malcom, habitat biologist. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Environmental Division, Auburn, WA. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro). 1989. Quality of local lakes and streams 1987- 1988 status report. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Water Resources Section, Water Pollution Control Department, Seattle, WA. Norton, 1991. Distribution and Significance of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Lake Washington Sediments Adjacent to Quendall Terminals/ J.H. Baxter site. Ecology Report, 73 p. Norton, 1992. Results of Sediment Sampling in the J.H. Baxter Cove, Lake Washington - June 1991. Ecology Technical Document, 18 p. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EA.R271 SCIENCES, INC ACKJJhfld- K899142A57.LD-D:11d2-00- W2K Page 59 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation AnoJysis Memorandum Pfeifer, B. and J. Weinheimer. 1992. Fisheries investigations of Lakes Washington and Samrnamish, 1980-1990. VI Warmwater fish in Lakes Washington and Sammamish (draft report). Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA. 0 Ratte, L. D. and E. 0. Salo. 1985. Under-pier ecology of juvenile pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) in Commencement Bay, Washington. Final report prepared by the University of Washington, Fisheries Research Institute for the Port of Tacoma. FRI-UW-8508. December 1985. Shepard, M.F. and J.C. Hoeman. 1979. Some comparisons of benthis biota in control areas and areas affected by sewage effluent in Lake Washington, 1977 - 1978. U.W. College of Fisheries, Wa. Coop. Fish. Res. Unit, Seattle, WA. citation from EVS Consultants, 1990. Aquatic Resources of Lake Washington. Report prepared for Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Seattle, WA. November 19, 1990. Thermoretec (RETEC). 1997. Sediment quality memorandum. Consultant report prepared for Port Quendall Company. April 29, 1997. Remediation Technologies, Inc., Seattle, Washington. University of Washington. 1996. U.W. Lake Washington Sockeye Workshop. Notes from presentations by Roger Tabor (USFWS), Roland Viera (U.W.) and Tom Sibley (U.W.) at U.W. conference held November 19, 1996. Washington Department of Ecology. 1995. 1994 Washington state water quality assessment, [305(b)] report companion document. Olympia, WA. Washington Department of Ecology. 1996. 303(d) Department of Ecology draft decision matrix for surface waters listed under section 303(d) included in 305b Report of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA). Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Western Washington Treaty Indian Tribes. 1994. 1992 Washington State salmon and steelhead stock inventory, Appendix 1, Puget Sound stocks, South Puget Sound volume. WDFW, Olympia, Washington. Wydoski, R.S. and R.R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishes of Washington. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA. 220 p. February 17, 2000 ASSOCL4TED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACKJfh/d-KR99!42A57-LD.O.Id2 W2K Page 60 APPENDIX H 1990 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH co •• rn z F 0 I1c (I, - 0 '0 I '4 '4 CD CD CD Cl) 0 C-) CD CD 0 I CD 0 - >-Q (no> CD CD C CD . n= CD Cl) - 3 CL - tJ•D CD - CD 0 -' -D -. x S S Sep 03, 2009 130pm cdavdson K 'Johs\060059QUENDALL\Q6fl05901\03905901 HF 02 dj AP H 041 iL 45 I- ___ - - - - -I I : ' I 1- 1 - / 1 :S S 6 0 LARSON A NT H R 0 RO 10 G J CAL AR C H AE 0 10 G I C A 1 SERVICES P.O. B6X'7006 S€ATTE WASHINGTON 98107 .rc,. •,, VL)j /OZ UIöO FAX: [2061 783 24.59 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment INTRODUCTION Larson Anth.ropologicãl/Archaeological Services (LAAS) was retained by CNA Architecture in December 1996 to conduct a cultural resource assessment of the proposed JAG Development Project. The proposed JAG Development Project would occupy a 60-acre parcel on the eastern shore of Lake Washington, west of Interstate 405 at Exit 7, NE 44th Street, North Renton. The proposed JAG Development project area is comprised of four properties: the Barbee Mill, the Port Quendall Log Yard, the Pan Abode Cedar Homes property, and the Baxter Property. The Baxter Property has been divided into the South Baxter Property and the North Baxter Property. The North Baxter Property contains the northernmost portion of the Baxter property along the shore of Lake Washington and a small wedge of property east of the shoreline properties, called the north Baxter Property East Wedge. The project area is in Sections 19 and 32, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, Bellevue South Quadrangle, King County, Washington (Figures 1 and 2). The cultural resource assessment consisted of an archival and literature review, field reconnaissance, consultation with the Muckleshoot Tribe and the Duwamish, and preparation of this report. Published and unpublished environmental, ethnographic, historic, and archaeological documents were gathered and reviewed. Environmental, ethnographic, and historic information was collected from Special Collections, Allen Library, University of Washington; Renton Historical Society and Museum: and the Renton Library. Archaeological site forms and project reports were obtained from the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Field reconnaissance consisted of the excavation of subsurface shovel probes to determine the potential for buried archaeological deposits in the proposed JAG Development project area. No cultural resources were identified that may be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. However, fill and development of the area precluded investigation of at least 90 percent of the project area, Because ethnographic literature suggests portions of the project area have a high probability for cultural resources, we recommend that a professional archaeologist monitor subsurface activities, e.g. geotechnical testing, reinediation of hazardous and dangerous waste, and construction, clearing, grading, and excavation in areas of the proposed JAG Development Project with a high probability for cultural resources. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed JAG Development would be a mixed-use area containing office space, conference facilities, restaurants, a marina, recreational spaces, retail shops, a hotel, parking areas, and residential properties (CNA Architecture 1997). The proposed development is projected to begin by 1999 and be completed by approximately 2010 (CNA Architecture 1997). 2 I. I E S a M -TU 0 1000 N Feet /. . / Project Area Boundaries ; 7. / Shovel Probe #1 Location North Baxter Property '\ '•South Baxter 85 Log Yard Silo Ti i I.; Pan Abode 1 • ' ; Cedar Homes Property I.-• .. I ( i /:/; • Barbee Mll / / •. . -. 1 J ..:'7 • Base Map orn USGS Bellevue d. Figure 2. Project area map showing individual properties and shovel probe locations. 3 S S :j6 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment ENVIRONMENT The proposed JAG Development project area is on the eastern shore of Lake Washington in a small valley where May Creek enters the lake. Prior to historic manipulation of the channel, May Creek dropped from a narrow meandering stream in upland locations to a braided stream at the mouth which formed a delta. Historic and modern maps of the area show that the mouth of May Creek naturally moved over time but was also altered to its present course by 1940 (Figure 3) (Kroll Map Company 1940), Most of the proposed JAG Development project area was probably inundated or subject to periodic flooding prior to the completion of the Lake Washington Ship Canal in 1916 (Chrzastowski 1983). The mean water level of Lake Washington was almost nine feet higher than its current level before the Lake Washington Ship Canal was built (Chrzastowski 1983:3). The mean water level of the lake probably fluctuated as much as seven feet, however, due to seasonal and periodic fluctuation in rainfall, prior to completion of the Lake Washington Ship Canal (Chrzastowski 1983:3). An article in the Town Crier (1917) describes archaeological and botanical remains along the shoreline of Lake Washington at the mouth of May Creek after the Lake Washington Ship Canal was completed and the water level had dropped. This corroborates Chrzastowski's (1983) statement regarding the lake's fluctuation long before the Lake Washington Ship Canal was built. S Periodic advance and retreat of glaciers over the last 37,000 years is largely responsible for the topograjhy and soils present in the Puget Sound basin. The glacial event responsible for the current topography of the Seattle area was the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation (Mullineaux 1970:27). The Vashon glacier originated in British Columbia and brought rocks and minerals typical of that area southward into the Puget Sound area (Mullineaux 1970:27) The Vashon glacier began a retreat approximately 14000 BP (years before present) and allowed marine waters into Puget Sound (Crandell 1963). The glacier had fully retreated approximately 13000 BP leaving deposits collectively known as the Vashon Drift (Galster' and Laprade. 1991:252). Lake Washington is one of several glacially scoured lakes in the Seattle area (Gaister and Laprade 1991:247). The Lake Washington vicinity was a glacially scoured trough prior to 14000 BP. Marine water filled what was to become Lake Washington as the Vashon Stade retreated northward around 13500 BP. The Cedar River deposited an alluvial fan across the south end of the marine embayment to form Lake Washington by 13400 BP (Dragovich et al. 1994; Leopold et al. 1982; Mullineax 1970). The shoreline of Lake Washington also fluctuated several times over the past 7,000 years because of earthquakes (Karlin and Abella 1992, 1993). Large earthquakes triggered underwater slumping on steep submerged trough walls and landslides on shoreline bluffs, Over 14 earthquake events were identified in cores from the lake bottom (Karlin and. Abella 1992, 1993). The sediment record coincides with dates obtained from submerged forests that slid into the lake as part of landslide debris. A forest that slid into Lake Washington during an 1100 B? earthquake along the Seattle Fault, is off the southeast corner of Mercer Island, just west of the proposed JAG Development project area. The landslides and underwater slumping 51 Shoreilne Boundary 1 1 Ø8 I (United States Surveyor General 1864) Jj J May Creek (United States Surveyor General 1864) : 1 (United States Surveyor General 1864) / 4\• / k• ShoreUne Boundary 0 k (United States Army Corps of Engineers 1920) \. - ; May Creek (United States Army Corps of Engineers 1920) Former Railroad .•r - ,j.__L a (United States Army Corps of Engineers 1920) / .( •, e ',- Present May Creek •. I Marsh /rJp1jji_ii: (United States Army Corps of Engineers 1920) 1-4 f / - 1920 Shore Ii ne,7 - it /u1I I 1864 Shoreline Fk ( i n 'May Creek ii t I\ h n in 1920 Marshui 1920 St 6> 6-M May Creek in 1864 May Creek 1864 Trail ;/;••, / ( •. • I• o 1000 Base ,M P98Brue h • Figure 3. Historic features, shoreline changes, and former beds of May Creek in proposed SAG Development Project vicinity. 5 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment caused large amplitude changes in the lake level (Karlin and Abella 1992:1619). Sudden landslides coupled with ground subsidence from an earthquake probably produced large waves that scoured the Lake Washington shoreline, causing additional landslides and depositing sediment. Large waves and earthquake- induced elevation changes iii ground surface elevations probably modified the outfall' of Lake Washington at the Black River, south of the proposed JAG Development project area. The proposed JAG Development project area is approximately three miles south of the Seattle Fault and would have been uplifted during an earthquake about 1,100 years ago. The geological history of the proposed JAG Development project area is complex. Changing ground surface elevations and fluctuating leyels of Lake Washington caused the project area to be exposed above the Lake Washington shoreline, washed by waves, and/or inundated by rising lake levels. Hunter-fisher-gatherer sites in the area were alternately raised and/or inundated. Cultural deposits were probably covered by landslide debris and/or silt during periods of submergence. The contemporary ground surface of the project area is probably at a higher elevation than prior to 1,100 years ago, when the area was uplifted during an earthquake. This suggests that pre- 1100 BP shorelines may exist inland from the contemporary shoreline in the eastern portion of the project area. Pre-1 100 BP hunter-fisher- gatherer occupations may occur in the eastern portion of the project area and may be buried beneath landslide debris or alluvial deposits. Prior to European contact, the Puget Sound basin was home to animals typical of the Pacific Nbrthwest inland forest environment such as deer (Odocoileus spp.), elk (Cervus canadensis), black bear (Ursus arnericanus), coyote (Canis latrans), fox (Vulpes), mountain lion (Fells concolor), bobcat (Lynx rufis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), mink (Mustela vison), river otter (Lutra canadensis), beaver (Castor canadensis), and muskrat (Ondatra zierhica). Various species of salmon were also abundant in the Puget Sound basin and were a large part of the diet of native inhabitants of the region. The Puget Sound basin is part of the Western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) physiographic zone. The overstory vegetation includes Douglas fir, bigleaf maple, Western red cedar and red alder. Understory vegetation of particular importance to the native inhabitants of the Puget Sound area included a variety of berries such as salmonberry, blackberry, strawberry, and red elderberry, camas and other lilies, ferns, and numerous other plants, used for economic purposes (Gunther 1981). CULTURAL BACKGROUND PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDIES Most of the property on Lake Washington has been privately owned for several decades, consequently, few archaeological studies have been conducted along the lake. An archaeological site has never been recorded on Lake Washington despite many references to Duwamish villages along the shores of the lake in historical documents (Harrington ca. 1909; F' JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment 0 Waterman Ca. 1920). Residential and commercial development of the Renton area has prompted several archaeological projects, however, and the data from those surveys and excavations offers evidence of the nature of hunter-fisher-gatherer archaeological sites in the region. The Sbabidid Site (45K15 1) is on the west side of Hardie Avenue SW in Renton along a remnant channel of the Black River and was recorded by the Office of Public Archaeology (OPA), University of Washington, as part of a survey for the Earlington Woods Planned Unit Development (Chatters 1981:1). The site contained the remains of at least three structures and midden deposits which dated from AD 1790 to AD 1856 although radiocarbon dates were not obtained for several portions of the site (Chatters 1981:1). Archaeological deposits were buried approximately one meter below the surface and backhoe trenches were excavated to help determine the depth of buried deposits (Chatters 1981:31), The precise naure of the site has been disputed (Butler 1990), but it appers that the site was either a Duwamish village or a fishing camp. Subsequent monitoring by Reid (1991:22) during the construction of the Eariington Woods Development revealed the presence of seven additional midden areas at the Sbabidid Site. The Ozbolt property, adjacent and north of the Sbabidid Site, was surveyed by LAAS in 1988 but no cultural resources were identified despite site maps for the Sbabidid site that suggest midden deposits were recorded on this property (Larson 1988:1,13). The survey was conducted using surface reconnaissance and shovel testing and Larson (1988:1,13) attributed the absence of cultural materials identified during this survey to their probable depth below the fill. BOAS conducted a cultural resource assessment of the Ozbolt property in. 1990 and produced a letter report that indicated the presence of a possible burial on the property (Stump 1990:1). Trade beads, buttons, twisted cedar thread, a fragment of cloth, fragments of woven cedar bark, cedar wood, and a human bone fragment were identified in a subsurface survey of the property (Stump 1990:1). LAAS later surveyed the Ozbolt property for a proposed apartment complex and relocated the northernmost midden deposits identified by Chatters (1981) and additional midden deposits in the eastern portion of the property (Lewarch et al. 1996:16). The Tualdad Altu Site (45K159) was recorded by OPA in 1980 when archaeologists surveyed the planned development of the Black River Corporate Park located downstream from the Sbabidid Site on the former Black River (Chatters 1988:2). Chatters (1988:50) believed the site was occupied approximately 1600 BP (before present) but corrected radiocarbon dates for the Tualdad Altu Site suggest that the site was occupied approximately 1400 B? (Lewarch et al. 1996:3-5). The Tualdad Altu Site is buried below more than one meter of sterile alluvium (Chatters 1988:37, 47). Chatters (1988:134) believed that the pattern of artifacts, heartbs, and midden deposits at the Tualdad Altu. Site represented a similar way of life to that of the occupants of the Sbabidid Site despite approximately 1600 years between occupations. 451<1439 was recorded by LAAS in 1994 and is approximately 200 feet east of the Sbabidid Site on the east side of Hardie Avenue SW in Renton (Lewarch et al. 1994:Appendix 2). The site was identified in backhoe trenches and is approximately one meter below the surface 40 (Lewarch 1994:1). Four hearths containing fire modified rock, midden deposits three to eight :. JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment centimeters thick, calcined bone, charcoal, and historic period midden deposits were identified in three trenches (Lewarch 1994:7). The site was identified in association with archaeological montioring of the proposed location of a Fred Meyer Corporation store (Lewarch 1994:1). The site is deeper than proposed construction would have taken place so no impacts to the site were expected and no further evaluation of the site was undertaken (Lewarch 1994: 10). The Marymoor Site (45K19) is on. the Saxrimamish River one half mile from its source at the north end of Lake Samniamish (Greengo 1966:6). The Sammarnish River and Lake Sammamish were occupied by the Sammámish band of the Duwamish (Greengo 1966:2). The Marymoor Site was excavated by Robert Greengo (1966) and students from the University of Washington in 1964 (Greengo 1966:vi). Th site contained numerous lithic tools recovered from two layers of midden deposits. A Cascade Phase lith.ic assemblage with leafshaped Cascade points, large stemmed points, and basalt cobble tools was mixed with later' cultural materials such as small projectile points. Two radiOcarbon dates from the site had corrected age ranges between 1648 and. 2741 RP (Lewarch et al. 1995:Table 1.2). Site deposits were probably mixed during one or more earthquake events that liquefied sand beneath cultural strata and forced the sand through cracks to the ground surface (Lewarch et at. 1995:1-23). Marymoor occupations probably date between 3500 BP and 1000 BP based on stratigraphy, radiocarbon dates, and diagnostic artifacts (Lewarch et al. 1995:1-23). The Marymoor Site may have been a hunting camp whose inhabitants also lived along the shore of Lake Washington at other times of the year (Forsman and Larson 1995:7). Other archaeological surveys have been conducted near the proposed JAG Development project area that failed to identify archaeological sites. OPA conducted a survey of an extension of sanitary sewers along May Creek which terminated at May Creek's intersection with Interstate 405. No archaeological remains were identified but Lorenz (1976:1) noted that an ethnohistoric village was reported at the mouth of May Creek. Archaeological and Historic Services (AHS), Eastern Washington University, conducted a pedestrian survey of State Road 900 in the upper May Creek Valley but no archaeological resources were identified (Robinson 1990:1). AHS conducted two surveys for highway development along Interstate 405 in the Bellevue area but determined that prior disturbance due to original highway construction had significantly disturbed native soils and no intact archaeological deposits would be encountered (Robinson 1 982a, 1982b). AHS also conducted a survey of a proposed park and ride lot in northeast Renton approximately .7 miles southwest of May Creek but no archaeological resources were identified (Robinson 1983:3). The Sbabidid Site, the Tualdad Altu Site, and 45K1439 are within five miles of the.propôsed JAG Development project area and were probably occupied by the Duwamish, Sites such as these and the May Creek village location, Sbaltu, were identified by Harrington (Ca. 1909) and Waterman (Ca. 1920) along the shores of Lake Washington and in upland locations in several places. Archaeological features and artifacts such as those found at the Sbabidid Site, the Tuladad Altu site, 451(1439, and the Marymoor Site may also be present within the proposed JAG Development project area and may be deeply buried below the surface. JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment ETHNOGRAPHY The proposed JAG Development project area is within the territory of the Duwamish, a Salish- speaking group who lived in the general vicinity of Seattle. The Duwamish lived in a series of villages, loosely allied through kinship and political alliances, that consisted of individual or multiple cedar longhouses on Elliott Bay, Lake Washington, Lake Union, Salmon Bay, and on the Duwaiflish, Green.(fonnerly White), and Cedar Rivers (Duwamish et al, 1933; Harrington Ca. 1909; Larson 1986; Waterman Ca, 1920). The Duwamish, who were named for a group that lived on the Cedar River known as the Dua'b, prospered by efficiently procuring food resources from the rivers, lakes, and marine waters within their territory. The DuwamiSh were primarily dependent on salmon for food and 'seasonally harvested and processed various salmon species as the t'Ish returned to local bays, lakes, streams, and rivers during spawning migrations. Salmon were harvested in these waters with nets, weirs, traps, hook. and line, seines and spears. Some of the salmon were consumed fresh, but most were dried in smokehouses for winter storage or trade. Other marine fishes such as trout, flounder, octopus, and cod were taken for similar purposes. Lake Washington hosted an especially abundant variety of freshwater, non-salmonid species including chub, squawfish, bass, perch and suckers. Shellfish, such as clams, mussels, and crabs, were also taken from local Puget Sound shorelines; and freshwater mussels were gathered from lakes and streams. Waterfowl were snared in aerial duck nets or hunted from canoes. Plant resources, especially berries and roots, were harvested in the warmer months and processed for winter consumption. Wapato and camas were two important plant resources used by the local native groups living on or visiting Lake Washington (Indian Claims Commission 1955:16, 25; Lewarch et al. 19963.16). Wapato is a potato-like tuber that lows in flooded areas and camas is a lily-like flowering bulb that grows in prairie environments. A visitor to Lake Washington witnessed Duwamish canoers carrying strings of dried clams aiid cakes made from roots while he was transported across Lake Washington in 1871 (Cawley 1994:3). This observation demonstrates the accuracy of later ethnographic research and shows the tenacity of local native culture several decades after initial contact with non-Indians. The Duwamish focused their late summer and fall seasonal food gathering and preservation activities towards support of their extended residenôe in the winter houses. Winter ceremonials, social events, repair and maintenance of fishing equipment, and leisure were the main activities reserved for the winter season. Several of the winter settlements on Lake Washington were inhabited by people that spoke the Duwamish language and intermarried with the neighboring Duwamish villages. Despite the cultural similarities this group maintained a separate identity from their Duwamish kin and neighbors (Smith 1940:16) and have been collectively referred to as: the S'Ke'tehl'inish, meaning people of the Skateibs village near the former outlet of Lake Washington at its southerly end (Gibbs 1877; Larson 1986); the Xa'tco'abc meaning "Lake Washington Indians" (Ballard 1929:38; Harrington ca. 1909:Fraine 314; Smith 1940:17); or simply the Lake Indians (Paige 1856b). The Duwamish JAG Development Cultural Resource Asessmerit of Lake Washington lived in winter houses at Kirkland, Juanita, Yarrow Point, Mercer Slough, Union Bay, Thornton Creek, Byn Mawr, May Creek and McAleer Creek (Duwamish et al. 1933; Harrington Ca. 1909:314,421; Larson 1986:31-37; Waterman Ca. 1920). The original shoreline of Lake Washington and the original mouth of May Creek are within the proposed JAG Development project area (United States Surveyor General 1864), May Creek was known to the Duwaznish of Lake Washington as Sba1tU meaniflg "place where things are dried" (Waterman 1922:191). The name referred to the "great quantities of redfish" that were harvested at a point of land which was the mouth of May Creek (Waterman 1922:191). "Redfish" were the run of sockeye salmon that were taken here each year. It is unclear if the "redfish" noted by Waterman (1922:191) are the resident "lake salmon" recorded by Smith (1940:236) or a "select race" of sockeye salmon that migrated to outside marine waters (Williams et al, 1975:8.601). May Creek was the site of a Duwamish village consisting of "two medium houses" known as Shub-alugh each measuring "8 by 16 fathoms" (48 feet by 96 feet) (Duwamish et at. 1933). This name, which is an anglicized approximation of the term bal)tu recorded by Waterman (1922:191), originates from testimony given by Duwamish informants for the Indian Claims Commission in 1927 (Duwamish et at. 1933). Harrington (ca. 1909:Frame 421) recorded a group of Duwamish called the Subaltuabs, who took their name from May Creek, an obvious reference to the people who lived in the May Creek village. The Subaltuabs probably caught the sockeye and the smaller resident salmon using a combination of traps, wçirs, and dipnets. The marine run of sockeye salmon were probably smoked in the customary way, either in a cedar planked smokehouse or dried on racks using a combination of sunlight and a small, smoky fire (Smith 1940:238). "Lake salmon" spawned in the small drainages of Lake Washington, such as May Creek (Smith 1940:236). They were cleaned with the backbone left in, smoked and stoked for later use. The Subaltuabs of May Creek had strong contacts with the neighboring villages of Skateibs, Tuwe'b-qo and the other Duwamish villages at the confluence of the Black and Cedar Rivers. This connection is also suggested by a historic trail from the Black River to the mouth of May Creek, documented by U.S. territorial government surveyors in 1864 and 1865 (Figure 3) (United States Surveyor General 1864, 1865). The largest concentration of Duwamish villages was on the Black and Cedar Rivers, giving the May Creek villagers incentive to maintain the trail as an overland route between villages for economic and social purposes. The trail was also part of a system that included the trail over Naches Pass used by the Klickitat and other plateau groups for trade missions with the Duwamish and other Puget Sound groups. The Puget Sound grOups also used the trail to gain access to upland hunting and berrying grounds (Prater 1981:9-11). The Subaltuabs lived at their homes on May Creek confinuously until events related to the increased Euroamerican settlement of the Seattle area began to affect aboriginal settlement patterns. Introduced diseases, such as smallpox, were the first effects of non-native contact felt by the Duwamish. In addition, settlers began to occupy gathering sites and fishing place, 10 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment 0 . causing the Duwamish great concern about the increasing population of non-natives in their territory (Lewarch et aL 1996:5.162). The United States Government attempted to address their fears by negotiating treaties with the Duwamish and other Puget Sound tribes in 1855, The Treaty of Point Elliot was signed in January of 1855 by Chief Seattle for the Suquamish and Duwamisb. Tribes (Lane 1975:22-23). Original surveys of the area record the village on the Black River but fail to note any houses on May Creek (United States Surveyor General 1864, 1865). The absence of houses at May Creek in the 1860s suggests that the Subaltuabs had moved from their winter village and perhaps resettled at other Duwamish villages or on nearby reservations such as the Muckleshoot or Port Madison Indian Reservations. The Subaltuabs and the other "Lake Indians" were considered part of the larger Duwamish Tribe by the United States Government. The Treaty assigned the Duwamish to live on the Port Madison Indian Reservation on the Kitsap Peninsula, far from their aboriginal territory. Some Duwamish moved to the Port Madison Indian Reservation while others found the notion of living in Suquamish territory unsatisfactory and stayed in their homes on the Cedar and Black Rivers. The treaty terms and occupation of usual and accustomed fishing and gathering places motivated some of the more aggressive tribal groups to engage in skirmishes with regular army troops and volunteers. These were called the Indian War of 1855-56. Federal officials were fearful that the Duwamish would engage in hostile activities. They were especially concerned about the Duwamish on Lake Washington, because they had marital and trade ties to the plateau groups like the Yakama, who maintained a strong stance against the military. Indian agency officials attempted to restrain the Duwamish from joining the conflict through removal to a temporary reservation in Seattle and by monitoring their movements. It appears that the Subaltuabs remained at or near their village at May Creek for several months after the Indian War ended according to the local Indian Agent in his December 1856 letters. He stated that "on the eastern shore of the Lake there are three large houses containing 3. persons" (Paige 1856a) and "the band of Lake Indians are encamped on the east side of the Lake near the South end" (Paige 1856b). Most of the Subaltuabs and the other "Lake Indians" eventually moved to either the Port Madison or Muckleshoot Indian Reservations with other Duwamish people. Relocation to the reservations was probably complete by 1930, after it became obvious to the remaining Duwamish that a reservation was not going to be established for their exclusive use. Today, the Muckleshoot Tribe exercises Treaty fishing rights in Lake Washington as successors to the aboriginal rights of the "Lake Indians" and other Duwamish groups. The types of hunter-fisher-gatherer resources expected in the JAG Development project area would primarily relate to food gathering activities and permanent winter settlement. Remnants of weirs, traps, smokehouses, and drying racks built for harvesting the annual sockeye runs may be preserved beneath the ground surface. Middens and fire hearths from fish processing and consumption of marine and freshwater resources may also be present. The project area may also contain house posts, post molds, depressions and other remnants of former winter 0 11 1 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment houses. Projectile points, scrapers, debitage., and adze blades related to hunting and processing land game, fish processing, and winter house maintenance and construction may also be expected. HISTORY Isaac Ebey was the first non-native to observe Lake Washington while he ascended the Duwamish River in 1850, in search of a homestead (Bagley 1929: 127). After following the Black River into Lake Washington, Ebey described the lake as "surrounded principally with woodland1 consisting of cedar, fir, ash, oak, etc.. .the water is clear and very deep" (Bagley 1929:1:27). Ebey named the body of water Lake Geneva, a short-lived appellation (McDonald 1979: 15-9). - Lake Washington was permanently renamed Lake Washington in 1854 (McDonald 1979: 15-19). Lake Washington was also known as Lake Dawarnish (sic) in early United States territorial surveys (United States Surveyor Gnera1 1864 1865). Ebey may have passed May Creek, called Honeydew Creek in the 1 860s (United States Surveyor General 1864), during his investigation of Lake Washington. The proposed JAG Development project area was first settled by James Madison Colman in 1875 (Bagley 1929:1:413; Fawcett 1979). Colman, who is also listed as James Manning Colman by a local historian (McDonald 1979:75), should not be confused with James Murray Colman, who was a prominent Seattle sawmill operator, railroad financier and coal mine developer. James Murray Colman originally came to Puget Sound in 1861 to operate the Port Madison Mill (Bagley 1929:2:48-55). James Murray Colman was very active in the development of the Columbia and Pu get Sound Railroad, a line that went from Seattle to the Newcastle coal mines 2.2 miles east of the project area. The historical occurrence of two J. M. Colmans in close proximity to each other has caused the men to be mistakenly identified. The J. M. Colman of May Creek will be referred to as S. Madison Colman to avoid further confusion. J. Madison Colman, who was born in Kentucky., came to Seattle from his home in Georgia by ship with his wife Clarissa in approximately 1875 (Pawcett 1979; McDonald 1979:75). Shortly after his arrival, S. Madison Colman acquired a 160-acre parcel of land bisected by May Creek, formerly the homestead of Jeremiah Sullivan, who, in turn, had acquired the property from the United States Government in 1873 (Reinediati.on Technologies, Incorporated 1996:1,1). He cleared one acre of his property and built a house where he lived with his wife and four children (McDonald 1979:75-77). J. Madison Colman was elected to a position as King County Commissioner in 1880 and 1882 (McDonald 1979:77). He was murdered in 1886 while rowing to Seattle to testify in a land claim dispute. The suspect in the murder was a neighbor that Colman had accused of illegally obtaining title to his lands. The suspect was tried three times and finally convicted, however, his sentence was later overturned (Bagley 1929:1:413-414; McDonald 1979:77-78). Coleman Point at Kennydale, approximately one- half mile south of the project area, was named for J. Madison Colman (McDonald 1979:75) 12 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment 0 J. Madison Colman's widow, Clarissa, maintained ownership of the homestead after his death but the property remained unused for several years. Lands near the northern boundary of the project area were used for access to coal fields in the Newcastle Hills. The 1864 survey of the area in which the JAG Development project area is located shows an unfinished wagon road one-quarter mile northeast of the project boundary. The road runs east to west from the shoreline of Lake Washington parallel to the northern boundary, but is entirely outside the project area. This road was built to haul coal to Lake Washington from Newcastle for shipment to Seattle (Bagley 1929:1:285; United States Surveyor General 1864). In 1902, the timber on the Colman property, which still encompassed the entire project area, was sold (Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:1.1). A year later, the Northern Pacific Railroad acquired a right-of-way through the Colman property for construction of a railroad spur along the eastern shore of Lake Washington that connected Woodinville and Renton. The Lake Washington Belt Line Railroad had attempted to build the same spur in 1890, but this railroad was only partially completed (McDonald 1979:53). The Lake • Washington Belt Line Railroad was intended to unite iron ore from the Cascades with coal from near the Carbon River for processing purposes. The railroad route along the eastern shore was later built by the Northern Pacific Company around 1905 (O'Hare 1905; Slauson 1976:182; Way 1989:37 38) with five stations along Lake Washington: Kirkland, Hoaghton, Northrñp, Wilburton. and May Creek (Scott and Turbeville 1983:53). The Colman family began selling parts of their 160-acre homestead after 1908. In 1916, Peter Reilly purchased a waterfront portion of the original Colman property (Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:1.1). This parcel of land became the Quendal! Terminals Property where Reilly established the Republic Creosote Company in 1917; later, the company was known as the Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation (McDonald 1979:78; Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:3.1). Lake Washington was lowered just a few months after Reilly purchased his parcel when the Lake Washington Ship Canal and the Hiram Chittenden Locks were constructed in the summer of 1916. The project was initiated to provide improved navigation to Puget Sound, to help control flooding, and to provide moorage for Naval ships (Ballard News Tribune 1988:88; Chrzastowski 1983:7). Lowering Lake Washington's water level expanded Reilly's holdings to over 29 acres (Kroll Map Compan, 1926). The Quendall area received its name from a mistaken creosote order from England addressed to a plant at Port Quendall and a variation of the name is still used on modern maps and by current owners (McDonald 1979:78). The Reilly Tar Company used the tar by-products generated by the Lake Uuion.. Gas Works to produce creosote and other refined products (McDonald 1979:78; Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:3.2). The plant was operational from 1917 to 1969. Another parcel of the Colman property, which was eventually owned by the Baxter Company, was sold in approximately 1914 for establishment of a shingle production facility (Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:4.1). The property was owned by Sound Timber Company in 1926 which owned and operated the shingle mill (Kroll Map Company 1926). The shingle mill was just outside the project area and was demolished between 1936 and 1946 (Retnediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:4.1). The remaining property was owned by 13 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment Peter Reilly and two other individuals, a Mr,. Falk and Emil Gaupholm, who built residences on the property, according to Remediation Technologies, Incorporated (1996:2.1). The property was owned by I. B. Polk in.1936 (Metsker 1936) but was sold to Mr. Rydeen by 1940 (Kroll Map Company 1940), The property may have changed hands many times over the years or county atlases were not frequently or reliably updated reulting in the contradictions between title records and county atlases. The property was finally leased to the Baxter Company in 1955 which established a wood treatment facility where logs were debarked and treated for use for telephone poles and pilings (McDonald 1979: 78; Remediation Technolozn gies, Incorporated 1996:4.2). A few years later the Baxter Company purchnsed the property. The majority of facility operations has recently been transferred to another site in Arlington, Washington. The last parcel of the Colman property within the proposed JAG Development project area was held by the Colman family through 1940. From 1926 to 1936 the land was owned by James Colman, possibly one of I. Madison Colmàn's descendants, or the name is a reflection of the persistence of the deceased Colman's name in land records (Kroll Map Company 1926). In 1940, the land was owned by George Lathrop Coleman (sic), a son of J. Madison Colman (Fawcett 1979). The land was sold by the Colmans to the Barbee Marine Yards in 1943, a company that built ships for the military during World War II (Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:2.2). A sawmill was built on-site to process wood for shipbuilding. After the war ended, the Barbee Mill abandoned shipbuilding and concentrated on sawmill operations. The Barbee Mill is in operation today. Most of the remaining lands around the project area were sold by the Coirnans to C. D. Hiliman, a real estate developer who established the Garden of Eden tracts in the early 1900s. The Garden of Eden tracts were the stimulus for the development of Kennydale, named for Hiliman's brother-in-law and best salesperson (Kroll Map Company 1926; McDonaldS 1979:78; Slauson 1976:180-181), Hillman's development attracted several families which established homes and small farms. Many others were employed in logging local timber that was transported to Lake Washington on the May Creek Lumber Company's log railroad along May Creek (Slauson 1976:180-181), The first road along the lake shore was built in 1918 and is now known as Lake Washington Boulevard (Slauson 1976:181). Interstate 405 was completed in the early 1960s as part of the expanding interstate highway network. Historic archaeological resources which may be expected in the JAG Development project area would be associated with early residential and industrial development. Types of resources would be structural remnants of early creosote refinery-structures and equipment, remains of the first Northern Pacific Railway tracks, evidence of the May Creek Lumber Company's logging railroad, and/or other early sawmill activity. Indications of these occupations would be railroad timbers and trackage, historic refuse, machinery parts and components, and roadbeds. Evidence of early residential development would be indicated by house foundtions root cellars, structural remnants, and historic artifact assemblages. 14 JAG Development Cultural Resource Asessment FIELD RECONNAISSANCE FIELD METHODS The proposed JAG Development properties are currently developed as the Barbee Mill, Port Quendall Log Yard, the Baxter Property, and the Pan Abode Cedar Homes Property. The Baxter Property is divided into two parcels; one of the parcels contains two areas. The North Baxter Property includes the northern end of the Baxter Property and a small wedge of property east of Ripley Lane (Hazeiwood Lane) and west of Interstate 405 called the North Baxter Property East Wedge (Figure 2). The South Baxter Property contains the area where the Baxter Wo'od Treating facility was located (Figure 2). These properties were historically occupied and recently modified to such an extent that few surfaces or exposures of native soil were available throughout the proposed JAG Development site for field investigation. The Pan Abode Cedar Homes Property and the Barbee Mill Properties are paved with asphalt and subsurface investigation was only possible at the extreme margins of the properties. The Baxter Property is currently undeveloped but the southern portion of the property was a wood treating plant between 1955 and the early .1960s (Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:4-2). Contamination of the soil on the South Baxter Property from creosote forbade subsurface archaeological investigation (Mike Paulson, personal communication 1997). Creosote and other chemicals were manufactured on the Port Quendall Property between the late 1910s and late 1960s and could not be shovel-probed due to contamination of the soil (Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:3-5; Mike Paulson, personalcommunication. 1997). The North Baxter Property and the North Baxter Property East Wedge were the only large parcels that were available for subsurface investigation. The field reconnaissance was conducted by LAAS archaeologist Bradley Bowden on. March 4, 5, and 7, 1997, Joe Gibbons and Mike Paulson of Remediation Technologies, Incorporated, monitored Bradley Bowden's movements throughout the project area to insure that no potentially hazardous materials were encountered during the field reconnaissance. Joe Gibbons monitored fieldwork on March 4, between 8:30 a.m. and 10:30 a.m. and on March 5, between 8:00 a.m., and 2:30 p.m., and Mike Paulson monitored fieldwork on March 4, between 10:30 a.m. and 4:30 p..m. and on March 7, between 8:30 a.m. and 2:30p.m. Shovel probes were placed in areas of the proposed JAG Development parcels that appeared to exhibit minimal disturbance based on historic maps and information relating to the previous and current use of the properties. Reconnaissance was focused primarily on the eastern portion of the JAG Development project area because most of the western portion of the properties was under water prior to the construction of the Lake Washington Ship Canal and because no soil contamination was in these areas. Shovel probes were approximately 35 centimeters in diameter and were an average of 80 centimeters deep. Two shovel probes were excavated to depths below one meter and two shovel probes were terminated between 20 and 30 centimeters below the surface because large cobbles related to fill episodes were encountered. The shoveled portion of the probes was 15 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment - terminated at approximately 65 centimeters below the surface and a five and one qua1ter..jnc (13 centimeter) diameter auger was used to complete the probe. All sediments excavated in the shovel probes were passed through 114" and 1/8" screen, Field notes, photograph records, and photographs are stored in LAAS project files. FIELD RESULTS One cobble-sized, possibly fire modified rock (PMR), was identified in Shovel Probe #9 on the Pan Abode Cedar Homes Property (Figure 2). This rock was recovered in pebble-sized stream deposits and may have been broken naturally. The possible FMR was recovered from soils buried 90 to 100 centimeters below the, surface. No other cultural materials were identified in Shovel Probe #9. Shovel Probe #12, at the southeast corner of the Port Quendall Log Yard, contained small charcoal deposits within the soil at a depth of 90 to 100 centimeters that may have been related to human activities in the area. No other cultural materia's or archaeological sites were identified during the field reconnaissance, Fill was encountered in all but two of the shovel probes and was between 30 and 90 centimeters in depth. The most shallow fill episodes were noted in the eastern portion of the North Baxter Property near the railroad tracks. The deepest fill episode was in the southeastern portion of the Port Quendall Log Yard, near the old channel of May Creek. Four of the 12 shovel probes were terminated because the fill was impenetrable. Approximately 10 percent of the proposed JAG Development Project area was shovel-probed for buried archaeological deposits. The remaining 90 percent of the project area was not field assessed because access to buried deposits was not possible. The Barbee Mill and the Pan Abode Cedar Homes Properties were mostly paved with asphalt or contained existing structures. Three shovel probes were successfully excavated in these areas, comprising 27 acres of the 60-acre JAG Development Project area. The Port Quendall Log Yard and the South Baxter Property were identified as having hazardous and dangerous materials on and below ground surface by Remediation Technologies, Incorporated (Mark Larsen, personal communication 1997). Access to the majority of these properties was not possible due to contamination of soils below the surface. One shovel probe was excavated at the extreme southeast corner of the Port Qtiendall Log Yard within one meter of a Remediation Technologies, Incorporated, soil probe that was free of contaminants (Mike Paulson, personal communication 1997). The Port Quendall Log Yard Property and the South Baxter Property comprise 20 acres of the 60-acre JAG Development project area. The North Baxter Property is divided into two parcels; the larger is adjacent to the South Baxter Property and is 19 acres in area. Three of four shovel probes in this parcel encountered impenetrable fill and were terminated before native soils could be observed. The smaller North Baxter Property is the North Baxter Property East Wedge, a one-acre wedge-shaped parcel east of Ripley (Hazeiwood) Lane and west of Interstate 405 (Figure 2). Three shovel probes were excavated in this area and native soils were encountered in all three shovel probes 16 JAG Development Cultural Resource As.essment 1 0 Soils that appeared to be native and undisturbed ranged from sand to loam and contained abundant waterworn pebbles and cobbles. The soil identified in shovel probes in the eastern portion of the project area tended to be a mixture of sandy loam and sandy silts and contained moderate amounts of pebbles and small cobbles. These soils appeared to be remnant alluvial I deposits from flooding and movement of May Creek. Soils in the western portion of the proposed JAG Development project area tended to be fine to coarse sands with abundant waterworn pebbles and cobbles. These deposits were suggôstive of beach deposits associated with the changing shoreline of Lake Washington. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS No cultural resources eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places were identified in the proposed JAG Development project area durixg archival review or field reconnaissance. Literature review indicated that the mouth of May Creek was in the Port Quendall Log Yard portion of the proposed JAG Development Project area prior to modern channelization. Waterman (Ca. 1920) identified the Duwamish site baltu at this location, a village with two winter houses known as a good place for fishing and drying redflsh (sockeye or kokanee salmon). The village was recorded by two anthropologists shortly after the turn of the century and was occupied at least until the Treaty of Point Elliot was signed in 1855. No Duwamish village occupations or any type of archaeological sites have been recorded on Lake Washington. Environmental factors and the location of archaeological sites south of Lake Washington on the old Black River channel suggest that archaeological remains are probably extant under fill and or pavement associated with the proposed JAG Development. However, fiid reconnaissance of proposec[JKcTDevelopment project area was limited by modern and historic changes to the area, including fill episodes, asphalt and concrete paving, and potentially hazardous materials on and below the ground surface, Lake fluctuations from earthquakes and historic modifications have alternately submerged and uplifted the Lake Washington shoreline, burying and/or eroding hunter-fisher-gatherer deposits over time. In addition, the mouth of May Creek has moved across the landscape leaving alluvial deposits or scouring earlier surfaces. Predicting the location of high probability areas for cultural resources becomes a challenge. Nevertheless, it is entirely likely that archaeological remains are extant on the proposed JAG Development project area. MONITORING Monitoring for archaeological materials is recommended in all future subsurface activities in high probability areas within the proposed JAG Development project area. Monitoring should be included in any future activities relating to the cleanup of the potentially hazardous materials in high probability areas of the project area as well as during any construction activities related to the proposed JAG Development. High probability areas are those that are most likely to contain archaeological deposits (Figure 4). A professional archaeologist should be on-site to monlior any subsurface activities to insure that no intact archaeological materials 17 11 1000 BM; N /.••i Project Area Boundanes / I Shoreline Recommended Cultural Resource Monitoring Locations F •/j 'South Baxter ' Property - / - f cry / F, \j J! 1 0:1 J North Baxter Property ..D ;i /1 • ( fT -'--- - L I 1 2 North Baxter Property East Wedge Port Quendall Log Yard S I I 1!i LLPI I '.iT •Th 4-0 (BM StT \ / .. .... . ... jBarbee Mill I Pan Abode - Cedar Homes Property I tfl.k i. —i t1jf 1! i\ . Base Map From USGS Bellevue South, Washington, 1983 Figure 4. Recommended monitoring areas in the JAG Development project area. 18 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment or features are adversely affected during such activities. If any archaeological materials or features are identified during monitoring of subsurface activities, the activity should be halted immediately in areas large enough to maintain the integrity of the remains to allow the archaeologist to determine the integrity and significance of the materials and/or features. If the archaeologist determines that a probably significant archaeological site is present, a testing strategy for evaluation should be developed through consultation with the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and the Muckleshoot Tribe, If human remains are identified during subsurface activities, construction must halt in an area large enough to maintain integrity of the remains and the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and the Muckleshoot Tribe contacted immediately. UIGH PROBABILITY AREAS Areas that are most likely to contain archaeological deposits within the JAG Development project area are those that border old channels of May Creek, areas that border the trail shown on the U. S. Surveyor General map from 1864, areas adjacent to the 1864 shoreline and areas near the current shoreline in the May Creek mouth vicinity that may have been exposed and inundated repeatedly over time because of water level fluctuations. High probability areas in the JAG Development project area include all of the Port Qundall Log Yard, a portion of the South Baxter Property, the central portion of the North Baxter Property, and northern portions of the Pan Abode Cedar Homes and Barbee Mill Properties (Figure 4). The Port Quendall Log Yard contains the old channel of May Creek visible on the 1864 GLO map and the 1920 DNR map (United States Army Corps of Engineers 1920; United States Surveyor General 1864). It also contains the end of the historic trail shown on the 1864 GLO map. The 1920 DNR map shows a marsh in the eastern portion of the Port Quendall Log Yard where the area was inhabitants of the Duwamish village bal' tu to gather plants such as wapato and to fish. The South Baxter Property borders the Port Quendall Log Yard on the north and was probably also occupied by hunter-fisher-gatherers. The 1920 DNR map of the project area shows two small promoritories that were probably formed when stream-born alluvial deposits entered the lake (Pigure 3). The early historic period shoreline shown in. the 1864 United States Surveyor General Map traverses the North Baxter Property and may have been used by hunter-fisher- gatherers after 1,100 years ago. Non-village, lacustrine sites may be adjacent to the shoreline. It is likely that an old channel of May Creek was in the southern portion of the South Baxter Property and, that native inhabitants of the JAG Development project area used the area for fishing and gathering. The northern portion of the Barbee Mill also borders the Port Quendall Log Yard and may contain archaeological resources related to the activities mentioned previously. The northern portion of the Pan Abode Cedar Homes Property contains old channels of May Creek that were several meters east of fluctuating lake shorelines. The property was probably not subject to inundation and may have been occupied when lake levels were high and the Port Quendall Log Yard was under water, The historic trail shown on the 1864 GLO map intersected with May Creek in the northern portion of the Pan Abode Cedar Homes Property which suggests that an archaeological site may be in the immediate vicinity. 19 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment Low PROBABILITY AREAS The North Baxter Property and the North Baxter Property East Wedge were successfully shovel probed below fill and contained no archaeological deposits, however, areas near the early historic period shoreline may have undiscovered cultural deposits. Likewise, the southern portion of the Pan. Abode Cedar Homes Property was successfully shovel probed and contained no archaeological deposits. These areas may have been slightly outside the use area of the hthabitants of the Duwamish village .baltu, The North Baxter Property East Wedge1 portions of the North Baxter Property away from the early historic period shoreline, and the southern portion of the Pan Abode Cedar Homes Property are considered to have a low probability of containing archaeological deposits. Shovel probes were attempted in the southern portion of the Barbee Mill but were completely inundated with ground water and appeared to contain several feet of fill, This portion of the project area may have been under water prior to historic use of the JAG Development project area and is considered to be a low probability area as well. The current shoreline of the JAG Development project area is fill material that was placed from 100 to 1,000 feet west of the 1864 shoreline (Figure 3). Contemporary offshore bathymetry with water depth in two meter contours (Figures 1 and 3) shows a broad submarine platform west of the project area to a depth of 10 meters. below the low water elevation of Lake Washington. This is probably the submarine portion of the May Creek delta. Higher elevations of this offshore platform may have been exposed during low stands of Lake Washington during the past 1,100 years, but were probably not available for hunter-fisher-gatherer use before then, when the landform *as probably uplifted during an earthquake. The current shoreline is therefore considered low probability in all areas of the JAG Development project area. In areas that are considered to be high probability and have shoreline portions, e.g. the Port Quendall Log Yard, the South Baxter Property, and the northern portion of the Barbee Mill Property, a 100 foot (approximatel' 30 meter) area from the shoreline east should be considered to be low probability. 20 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment BJBLIOGIAPHY Bagley, Clarence B. 1929 Histoiy of King County. 4 vols. S.J. Clarke Publishing Company, Seattle. Ballard News Tribune 1988 Passport to Ballard: The Centennial Stoy. Ballard News Tribune: A Division of Newspaper Enterprises of Washington State Company, Seattle. Ballard, Arthur C. 1929 Mythology of Southern Puget Sound. University of Washington Publications in Anthropology 3(2): 131-150. University of Washington Press, Seattle. Butler, Virginia L. 1990 Fish Remains from the Black River sites (45K159 and 45K15 I -D). Archaeology in Washington 2:49-65. Carter, M. J. 1917 Lake Washington's New Beach Line. Town Crier 14 April, 1917. Cawley, Martinus 1994 Indian Journal of Rev. R. W. Summers, Guadalupe Translations, Lafayette, Oregon. Chatters, James C. 1981 Archaeology of the Sbabadid Site 451U51, King County, Washington. Office of Public Archaeology, Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Washington. On file Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. 1988 Tualdad Altu (45K159), a 4th Century Village on the Black River, King County, Washington. First City Equities, Seattle. Chrzastowski, Michael 1983 Historical Changes to Lake Washington and Route of the Lake Washington Ship Canal, King County, Washington. Water Resources Investigation Open-File Report 81-1182. CNA Architecture 1997 Port Quendall Planned Action EIS Information, Proposed Conditions. CNA Architecture, Seattle. 21 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment Crandell, Dwight R. 1963 Surficial Geology and Geomorphology of the Lake Tapps Quadrangle, Washington. Geological Survey Professional Paper 388-A. Department of the Interior. Washington, D.C. Dragovich, Joe D., Patrick T. Pringle, and Timothy J. Walsh 1994 Extent and Geometry of the Mid-Holocene Osceola Mudflow in the Puget Lowland: Implications for Holocene Sedimentation and Paleography. Washington Geology 22(3) :3-26. Dtiwaniish et al. Tribes of Indians v. The Ilpited States of America 1933 Testimony before the Court of Claims of the United States. Proceedings of the Indian Court of Claims, No. F-275. Fawcett, Clarissa M. 1979 Colman Family History. Letter from Clarissa M. Fawcett to Renton Museum, 3 March. On file at the Renton Historical Society, Renton, Washington, Forsman, Leonard and Lynn Larson 1995 Regional Wastewater Services Plan Cultural Resource Management Overview Draft Technical Memorandum. LAAS Technical Report 95-12. Submitted to CH2M Hill, Bellevue, Washington. Gaister, Richard W. And William T. Laprade 1991. Geology of Seattle Washington, United States of America. Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists, Volume XXVIII, Number 3:235-302. Gibbs, George 1877 Tribes of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon. ContrWutions to North American Ethnology 1(2): 157-361. John Wesley Powell, editor. U. S. Geographical and Geological Survey of the Rocky Mountain Region. Reprinted. Shorey Books, Seattle, 1970. Greengo, Robert E. 1966 Archaeological Excavations at the Marymoor Site (45K19). A Report to the National Park Service Region 4, Order Invoice Voucher 34-703 Sammarnish Flood Control Project. Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle. Gunther, Erna 1981 Ethnobotany of Western Washington, the Knowledge and Use of Indigenous Plants by Native Americans. UnIversity of Washington Press, Seattle. 22 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment Harrington, John P. Ca. John P. Harrington Papers, National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian 1909 Institution. Reel 15, 1907-1957, on microfilm at Suzzallo Library, University of Washington, Seattle, Indian Claims Commission 1955 Defendant's Request for. Findings of Fact, Objections to Findings of Fact requested by Petitioner, and Brief, Docket No. 109, The Duwamish Tribe of Indians V. The United States of America. Indian Claims Commission, Washington, D.C. Frederick W. Post collection, Box 23. On file Suquamish Tribal Archives, Suquamish, Washington. Karlin, Robert E. and Safly B. Abella 1992 Paleoearthquakes in the Puget Sound Region Recorded in. Sediments of Lake Washington, U.S.A. Science 258:1617-1620. 1993 A History of Past Earthquakes Recorded in Lake Washington Sediments. Paper presented in the U.S. Geological survey and Quaternary Research Center, University of Washington Conference on Large Earthquakes and Active Faults in the Puget Sound Region. Kroll Map Company 1926 Kroll's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Seattle. 1940 Kroll's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Seattle. Lane, Barbara 1975 Identüy and Treaty Status of the Duwamish Tribe of Tndians. Report prepared for the US Department of the Interior and the Duwamish Tribe. Ms. on file at Special Collections, Allen Library, University of Washington, Seattle. Larson, Lynn L. 1986 Ethnographic and Historic Duwamish Land Use. On file, at Larson Anthropological! Archaeological Services, Seattle. 1988 Cultural Resource Investigation of a Proposed Warehouse in Renton, King County, Washington. Submitted to Public Storage, Incorporated, Renton, Washington. Letter report on file Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Leopold, Estella B., Rudy J. Nickman, John I. Hedges, and John R. Ertel 1982 Pollen and Lignin Records of Late Quaternary Vegetation, Lake Washington. Science 218: 1305-1307. 0 23 JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment Lewarcji, Dennis E. 1994 Cultural Resources Field Assessment of the Fred Meyer Corporation Building Project Area, Renton, King County, Washington. Submitted to Fred Meyer Corporation1 Portland, Oregon. Letter report on file Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Lewarch, Dennis E., Lynn L. Larson. and Leonard A. Forsman 1995 Introduction. In The Archaeology of West Point, Seattle, Washington, 4,000 Years of Hunter-Fisher-Gatherer Land Use in Southern Ptget Sound, 2 vols, pp. 1-1-1-39. Edited by Lynn L. Larson and Dennis E. Lewarch. Larson Anthropological! Archaeological Services, Seattle. Submitted to the King County Department of Metropolitan Services, Seattle. Lewarch, Dennis E., Lynn L. Larson, Leonard A. Forsman, Guy F. Moura, Eric W. Bangs, and Paula Mobr Johnson 1996 King County Departhient of Natural Resources, Water Pollution Control Division, Alki TransferlCSO Project Allentown Site (45KT431) and White Lake Site (4511438 and 45K1438A) Data Recovery. .LAAS Technical Report #95-8. Larson Anthropological/Archaeological Services, Seattle. Submitted to HDR Engineering, Bellevue, Washington and King County Department of Natural Resources, Water Pollution Control Division, Seattle. Lorenz, Thomas H. 1976 Archaeological Assessment, Army Corps of Engineers, Permit Number 071-0 YB-I - 002916, Phase .17 May Creek Interceptor, METRO/King County Water District Number 107. Letter report submitted to Moore, Wallace and Kennedy, Incorporated, Seattle On file Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Ol'mpia. McDonald, Lucile 1979 The Lake Washington Story. Superior Publishing Company, Seattle. Metsker, Charles 1936 Metsker's Atlas of King County. Metsker Map Company, Seattle. Mullineaux, Donald R. 1970 Geology of the Renton, Auburn, and Black Diamond Quadrangles, King County, Washington. Geological Survey Professional Paper 672, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. O'Hare, Daniel 1905 State of Washington. Compiled from the Official Records of the General Land Office and other sources. In. Early Washington Atlas, 1981, Ralph Preston, Binford and Mart, Portland, Oregon. 24 SAG Development Caltural Resource Assessment Paige, George 1856a Report to Isaac I. Stevens, Superintendent of Indian Affairs, Washington Territory. December 29, 1856, Fort Kitsap, Washington Territory. On microfilm, U.S. National Archives, Records of the Washington Superintendency of Indian Affairs, Letters received from Puget Sound, Microcopy 5, Roll 10. 1856b Report to Isaac I. Stevens, Superintendent of Indian Affairs, Washington Territory. December 31, 1856, Fort Kitsap, Washington Territory. On microfilm, U.S. National Archives, Records of the Washington Superintendency of Indian Affairs. Letters received from Puget Sound, Microcopy 5, Roll 10. Prater, Yvonne 1981 Snoqualraie Pass, From Indian Trail to Interstate. The Mountaineers, Seattle. Reid, Al 1991 Archaeological Monitoring at Sbabadid Site (45K151) During the Earlington Woods Development Project, 1990. Submitted to the Holly Corporation, Tacoma, Contract Job No. 947001. Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996 Review of Historical Information and Environmental Records for the Baxter, Quendall and Barbee Mills Properties. Prepared for JAG Development Corporation, Bellevue, Washington. Robinson, Joan 1982a SR 405: Factoria to Northup Wcty-HOV, Archaeological and Historical Services, Eastern Washington University, Cheney, Prepared for Washington State Department of Transportation, Seattle. Letter report on file Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia, 1982b SR 90: Bellevue Access Study, Archaeological and Historical Services, Eastern Washington University, Cheney. Prepared for Washington State Department of Transportation, Seattle. Letter report on file Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. 1990 A Cultural Resources Survey of SR 900: Junction SE May Valley Road, King County, Washington. Archaeological and Historical Services, Eastern Washington University, Cheney. Prepared for Washington State Department of Transportation, Seattle. Letter report on file Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Scott, James W. and Daniel Turbeville III 1983 Whatcom County in Maps 1832-1837. Center for Pacific Northwest Studies and the 40 Fourth Corner Registry, Beliingharn, Washington. 25 5 JAG Development Culturpi Resource Assessment Slauson, Morda C. 1971 One Hundred Years Along the Cedar River. Maple Valley Historical Soolety, Maple Valleys Washington. 1976 Renton, From Coal to Jets. Renton Historical Society, Renton, Washington. Smith, Marian W. 1940 The Puyallup-Nisqually. Columbia University Contributions to Aiithropology, Volume 32. Columbia University Press, New York, United States Army Corps of Engineers 1920 Survey of Lake Washington Shoreline at May Creek, On file at Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia. United States Geological Survey 1983 Bellevue South, Washington 7.5 Quadrangle, United States Geological Survey, Reston, VA. United States Surveyor General S 1864 General Land Office Map, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia. 1865 General Land Office Map, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia. 1864- General Land Office Surveyor's Notes, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, 1865 Willamette Meridian. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia. Waterman, T. T. Ca. Puget Sound Geography. Unpublished manuscript on file Pacific Northwest 1920 Collection, Allen Library, University of Washington, Seattle, 1922 Geographic Names Used by Indians of the Pacific Coast. Geographical Rev,ew 12:175-194. Way, Nancy 1989 Our Town Redmond. Publishers Press, Salt Lake City, Utah, Williams, R. Walter, Richard M. Laramie, and James J. Ames 1975 Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume 1, Pu get Sound Region. Washington State Department of Fisheries, Olympia. 26 Appendix 1 Agencies and Individuals COntacted S 0 Agendes and Individuals Contacted Jim Spitze, Director, CNA Architecture, telephone, 9 January, 1997, 17 January, 1997, 21 January, 1997, 11 March, 1997, 12 March 1997. Mark Larsen, Redevelopment Specialist, Remediation Technologies, Incorporated, telephone, 10, March 1997. Joe Gibbons, Hydrogeologist, Remediation Technologies, Incorporated, in person, 4 and 5 March, 1997. Mike Paulson, Environmental Scientist, Remediation Technologies, Incorporated, in person, 4 and 7 March, 1997. Stan Greene, Researcher, Renton Historical Society and Museum, in person, 7 and 8 March, 1997. Jason Wear, Administrative Assistant, Duwamish Tribe, telephone, 21 February, 1997. Walter Pacheco, Community Services Director, Muckleshoot Tribe, telephone, 26 March, 1997. S Appendix 2 Tribal Correspondence 0' S 0 tARS ON ANTH ROPOLOGCA1 ARCHAEQIOGICAt SE S January 17, 1997 Virginia Cross Chairperson Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 39015 172nd Avenue S.E. Auburn, WA 98002 Dear Ms. Cross: CNA Architecture Group, Incorporated, has retained Larson AnthropologicallArchaeological Services to conduct a cultural resource assessment for a Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement for JAG Development's proposed redevelopment of the Quendall Terminal Site. The project area is a 69 acre site on the southeastern shoreline of Lake Washington at May Creek, a quarter mile north of Kennydale, Washington (Figure 1). JAG Development has preliminarily proposed development of office buildings, residential housing, a, hotel/conference center, a marina, and restaurant space on the property to be phased over a 1015 year period. LAAS' cultural resource assessment includes identification of archaeological sites and potential traditional cultural use areas within the boundaries of the JAG Development. A field survey will be conducted on the 69 acre parcel to determine the existence or probability for significant cultural resources. LAAS is currently gathering existing archaeological, historic, ethnographic, and ethnohistoric data from the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, University of Washington Libraries, and pertinent local King County repositories. However, we believe that the Muckleshoot Tribe may have information gathered from elders and/or the Tribe may currently use areas for traditional cultural activities. We encourage a cultural representative from the Muckleshoot Tribe to contact LAAS if the Tribe has information that might be useful in the assessment. We understand that traditional cultural use areas.are private, but LAAS welcomes the opportunity to work with the Tribe regarding incorporation of this type of information in a secure and respectful maimer. Please phone Lynn Larson or Leonard Forsman at LAAS at your earliest convenience if you would like to discuss the matter further. Otherwise, Leonard Forsman will phone your cultural representative within a week of your receipt of this letter. Sincerely, Lynn L. Larson Principal Investigator LLL/LF enclosure cc: Walter Pacheco, Community Service Coordinator - o aox 101Oó SEATTLE WA S HI NC TON 9R 107 A A S S lARSON AN THROPOIOG!CAL ARCHA .EOLOGICAL SEVCE5 January 17, 1997 Cecile Maxwell-Hansen Chairperson Duwamish Indian Tribe 212 Wells Avenue South1 Suite C Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms. Maxwell-Hansen: CNA Architecttixe Group? Incorporated, has retained Larson Anthropological/Archaeological Services to conduct a cultural resource assessment for a Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement for JAG Development's proposed redevelopment of the Quendail Terminal Site. The project area is a 69 acre site on the southeastern shoreline of Lake Washington at May Creek, a quarter mile north of Kennydale, Washington (Figure 1). JAG Development has preliminarily proposed development of office buildings, residential housing, a hotel/conference center, a marina, and restaurant space on the property to be phased over a 10-15 year period. LAAS' cultural resource assessment includes identification of archaeological sites and potential 5 traditional cultural use areas within the boundaries of the JAG Development. A field survey will be conducted on the 69 acre parcel to determine the existence or probability for significant cultural resources. LAAS is currently gathering existing archaeological, historic, ethnographic, and ethnohistoric data from the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, University of Duwamish Tribe may have information gathered from elders and/or the Tribe may currently use areas for traditional cultural activities. We encourage a cultural representative from the Duwamish Tribe to contact LAAS if the Tribe has information that might be useful in the assessment. We understand that traditional cultural use areas are private, but LAAS welcomes the opportunity to work with the Tribe regarding incorporation of this type of information in a secure and respectfiul manner. Please phone Lynn Larson or Leonard Forsman at LAAS at your earliest convenience if you would like to discuss the matter ftirther. Otherwise, Leonard Forsmaii will phone your cultural representative within a week of your receipt of this letter. Sincerely, Lynn L. Larson Principal Investigator LLL/LF enclosure S cc: James Rasmussen, Tribal Council Member PQ BOX 70106 SE Ar TIE WAS 4I NGTON 00 IA1 Appendix 3 Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Cukural Resources Survey Cover Sheet a Cultural Resources Survey Cover Sheet Author: Bradla Bowden. Leonard A. Forsinan. Lynn L. Larson. Dennis E. Lewprch Title: Cultural Resource Assessment. JAG Development. King County, Washington Date: March27. 192 County: King Sections: 192 Township: 24N Range: 5E Quad: j1eme South. WaWng—ton (For Author's review) Total Pages:Acres:.Q Site No. This report: _X_ Describes the objectives & methods. X - Summarize the results of the survey. _X_ Reports where the survey records and data are stored. X_ Has a Research Design that: Details survey objectives Details specific methods Details expected results Details area surveyed Details how results will be feedback in the plannlng PKUunts OAHP Use Only NADB Document No: OAHP Log No: My review results in the opinion this survey report _____does -does not conform with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Identification. Signed: Date: 0 S S n Denis Law Mayor I. Cltyof(, Jfl)JUEI ' .'..-- •# - - S February 3, 2016 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Campbell Mathewson Century Pacific, L.P. 1201 Third Avenue #1680 Seattle, WA 98101: South End Gives Back Brad Nicholson, President 302 N.E. 23th Street Renton, WA 98056 SUBJECT: "Off Hold" Notice Quendall-Terminals / LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M, SM Dear Mr. Mathewson and Mr. Nicholson: The additional materials, requested in the September 2, 2015 letter from the City have now. been submitted by the applicant for the.subjëct project. Therefore, the Quendall Terminals project has been taken off hold and the City will continue review the project The EIS Appeal and Master Site Plan, Binding Site Plan, and' Shoreline' Permit have been tentatively scheduled to go before the Hearing Examiner on April 19, 2016 at 10 00 a m If, necessary the public hearing', may be continued to April 26, 2016 at 10:00 am: If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 430-7314 or vdolbee@rentonwa.gov. - Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee Current Planning Manager cc: Altino PrOperties, Inc. and JH Baxter & Co. / Owners Phil Olbrechts, City of Renton Hearing Examiner Hulls Clark Martin & Peterson PS., Amit D. Ranade and Ann M. Gygi Parties of Record Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady VIay RentonWashington 98057 rentonwa.gov S 10 0 9HCM P tC Hulls Clark Martin & Peterson PS. May 20, 2016 Phil A. Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, 'A 98057 Via Email (olbrechtsla w()grnaiL corn) Re: Requestfor Hearing Contirniance onQuendall Terminals Master Plan Application Packa,ge: Renton File # LUA09-151; EC'F; £4-M, SM, BSP Dear Hearing Examiner Olbrechts: On behalf of the Applicant, Quendall Terminals, we request a further continuance of the rescheduled hearing date for the above-referenced applications. On April 19, you approved the applicant's request for a hearing continuance, and rescheduled the hearing on the above- referenced Quendall Terminals applications to May 31, 2016. The applicant has since met with City staff and is in the process of preparing and evaluating site plan revisions and other project responses to address items raised in to the Staff Report issued on April 12. The applicant believes that with additional time we should be able to narrow the issues for hearing. Rather than request a specific date now, we propose to get back to the Examiner again in 45 - 60 days to request a new hearing date. We have coordinated with the City attorney on this request, and the City concurs with the applicant's request for a continuance. We respectfully request your approval of this request. Thank you. Very truly yours, 4_z~ _R, Ann M. Gygi A±vfG:kah E-Maih ann.gygihcmp.com Direct Diak (206) 470-7638 Fax: (206) 623-7789 cc: Larry Warren Vanessa Dolbee Jason Seth Campbell Mathewson 1221 Second Avenue, Suite 500 1 Seattle, WA 98101 I 206.623.1745 1 f: 206,623.7789 1 hcmp.corn t MERTAS L.] 11 S S 02 65 C.- Community & Economic Development Department May 23, 2016 C.E."Chip"Vince nistrator Campbell Mathewson Century Pacific, L.P. 1201 Third Avenue #1680 Seattle, WA 98101 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice Quendall Terminals / LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP SA-M, SM Dear Mr. Mathewson: On May 20, 2016 the Planning Division of the City of Renton and the City's Hearing Examiner, Phil Olbrechts, received a request for further continuance of the public hearing scheduled for May 31, 2016 for the subject project. The request was received from Hulls Clark Martin & Peterson P.S. on behalf of the applicant (enclosed). The Hearing Examiner granted the requested in an e-mail dated May 20, 2016, to an indefinite date, canceling the hearing scheduled for May 31, 2016. In the enclosed letter the applicant has indicated that they are in the process of preparing and evaluating site plan revisions and other project responses to address items raised in the Staff Report issued on April 12, 2016. The applicants have requested 45 - 60 days prior to re-scheduling a new hearing. Staff concurs with the applicant request for additional time and requests that any new and/or updated materials be submitted to the Planning Department prior to August 29, 2016 so that we may continue the review of the subject application. At this time, your project has been placed "on hold" until further notice. Please contact me at (425) 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee Current Planning Manager Enclosure: Request for Hearing Continuance dated May 20, 2016 cc: Altino Properties, Inc. and JH Baxter & Co. / Owners Phil Olbrechts, City of Renton Hearing Examiner Hulls Clark Martin & Peterson P.S., Amit D. Ranade and Ann M. Gygi/ Parties of Record Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way . Renton, Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov S 12 S Denis Law Mayor October 28, 2016 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Campbefl Mathewson Century Pacific, L.P. 1201 Third Avenue #1680 Seattle, WA 98101 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice Quendall Terminals / LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M, SM Dear Mr. Mathewson: On May 23, 2016 the Planning Division of the City of Renton and the City's Hearing Examiner, Phil Olbrechts, received a request for further continuance of the public hearing scheduled for May 31, 2016 for the subject project. The Hearing Examiner granted the requested in an e-mail dated May 20, 2016, to an indefinite date, canceling the hearing scheduled for May 31, 2016. Following the Hearing Examiner's approval, the city sent an "On Hold" letter requesting materials from the applicant prior to August 29, 2016. On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 the City received an e-mail requesting an extension of the previously approved project hold deadline of August 29, 2016. The e-mail indicated that they have made "good progress and would appreciate another extension". The applicant requested an additional 60 days. Staff concurs with the applicant's request for additional time and requests that any new and/or updated materials be submitted to the Planning Department prior to December 19, 2016 so that we may continue the review of the subject application. At this time, your project remains "on hold" until further notice. Please contact me at (425) 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, p Vanessa Dolbee Current Planning Manager cc: Altino Properties, Inc. and JH Baxter & co. / Owners . Phil Olbrechts, City of Renton Hearing Examiner Hulls clark Martin & Peterson P.S., Amit D. Ranade and Ann M. Gygi/ Parties of Record 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. rentonwa.gov S cI 0 Denis Law Mayor U;R Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator March 16, 2017 Campbell Mathewson Century Pacific, L.P. 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101 SUBJECT: "Off Hold" Notice Quendall Terminals / LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M, SM, DA Dear Mr. Mathewson: The applicants for the subject project have requested that the City consider entering into a Development Agreement, which would establish an Enhanced Alternative proposal, in combination with the already applied for Land Use applications. The original Quendall Terminals proposal for a Mixed-Use Development, including the Preferred Alternative Development Plan has completed State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. To date, the City has issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), EIS Addendum (establishing the Preferred Alternative), and a Final EIS and associated Mitigation Document; however, these documents did not specifically evaluate the proposed Development Agreement establishing an Enhanced Alternative. The proposed Development Agreement and associated Enhanced Alternative primarily include the following: The addition of 1.3 acres of public parking space; Additional retail/restaurant/office space and street activation (fountains, artwork, etc.) The addition of either a public dock/pier and/or an alternative approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to allow for public access to Lake Washington; Building SW4 would be 4-stories, building SW3 would 5-stories, and all the remaining buildings would be 6-stories; Extension of Land Use Permit approval term to 10-years with possible extension opportunities in which development regulation vesting would be maintained. The above-referenced changes to the Preferred Alternative and the associated Development Agreement are required to go through SEPA Review. As such, the Development Agreement and Enhanced Alternative is scheduled to be considered by the City's SEPA Responsible Office, the Quendall terminals "0ff-Hold" Notice Page 1 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 . rentonwa.gov Environmental Review Committee (ERC) for a Consistency Determination with the already issued ElS documents on March 20, 2017. Therefore, per the applicant's request, the Quendall Terminals project (LUA09-151) has been taken Off-Hold and the City will continue review of the project. The Development Agreement, Master Site Plan, Binding Site Plan, and Shoreline Permit have been tentatively scheduled for a public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner on April 18, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 430-7314 or vdolbee@rentonwa.gov. Since rely, Vanessa Dolbee Current Planning Manager cc: Altino Properties, Inc. and iN Baxter & co. / Owners Hulls Clark Martin & Peterson P.S., Amit D. Ranade and Ann M. Gygi Parties of Record Quendall terminals "0ff-Hold" Notice Page 2 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. rentonwa.gov