Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupplemental Wetland Report - 6-3-14 - SN - optimized for e-mail WETLAND DETERMINATION RESERVE AT TIFFANY PARK Preliminary Plat City of Renton, Washington Prepared for: Barbara Yarington Henley USA, LLC 11100 Main Street, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98004 Prepared by: C. Gary Schulz Wetland / Forest Ecologist 7700 S. Lakeridge Drive Seattle, Washington 98178 206-772-6514 June 3, 2014 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction .....................................................................................................................................2 Background Site Description Project Description Purpose Methodology Wetland Determination ...................................................................................................................6 Soils Hydrology Wetland Description Wetland Buffer Impacts & Mitigation .........................................................................................11 Wetland Buffer Impacts Wetlands A, C, & D: Buffer Averaging Wetland Buffer Functions References .....................................................................................................................................17 List of Figures Vicinity Map (Figure 1) ...................................................................................................................4 Wetland E Buffer Exhibit (Figure 2) .............................................................................................13 Wetland Delineation Map (Figure 3) .................................................................................. Attached List of Tables City of Renton Wetland Rating Criteria (Table 1) .........................................................................10 Appendix A ....................................................................................................................................18 Wetland Data Plot Forms 2 INTRODUCTION Background A wetland investigation was conducted on the Reserve at Tiffany Park Property (Renton School District Property) with site visits during the month of June 2013. The Property is comprised of several vacant parcels having a total area of 21.66 acres (Parcels #’s 2123059044, 9051, 9154, & 9061). The site is situated near the top of the plateau that borders the Cedar River valley located north and east. The Property is located near Tiffany Park north of S.E. 160th Street between S.E. 158th Street and Pierce Avenue S.E. in the city of Renton, Washington. An earlier wetland study was conducted by Grette Associates during 2008 and identified wetland areas on the project site (Renton School District Property - Grette Associates 2008). Much of the information provided in the Grette Associates study was reviewed and verified for this report. Wetland boundaries were field-delineated and surveyed during 2013. Recent site inspections were conducted with the City’s wetland peer review consultant - OTAK. Several site visits occurred in April and May 2014 to address comments from OTAK (Technical Memorandum- Reserve at Tiffany Park Wetland Delineation Review, 4/3/14). As a result of the peer review one additional wetland (Wetland E) has been recently delineated, surveyed, and mapped for a revised site development plan. This investigation includes five distinct wetland areas (A - E) that have been delineated on the Property. Wetland data plots have been installed on the site to confirm existing conditions. The current wetland boundaries are shown in the professional survey prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. The current wetland survey (Figure 3) is attached to this report (Sheet 13 of 13 Wetland Delineation Map - Reserve At Tiffany Park, Barghausen Consulting Engineers 6/3/14). The site plan for development has been recently revised from previous submittals to the City. Therefore, this wetland report is also revised and replaces the previous wetland report that was submitted to the City in 2014 (Wetland Determination Reserve At Tiffany Park - Preliminary Plat City of Renton, Washington, Schulz 2/28/14). Site Description The Tiffany Park Property is undeveloped land that is predominantly forest habitat. The tree cover is comprised of an overstory canopy of mature deciduous and conifer native trees throughout most of the site. The forest habitat is diverse in plant species and includes a tree over story, younger tree sub-canopy, shrub under story, and dense groundcover layer. 3 Existing residential development is located adjacent to or near the site’s boundaries. The Property is easily accessed by trails on the Mercer Island water pipeline that runs along its east boundary and the Cedar River water pipeline along the south boundary. The Property includes flat and undulating topography with moderate elevation changes present throughout. The coniferous tree cover is predominantly Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and Western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). There are also several small groves of western red cedar (Thuja plicata). The deciduous tree cover is dominated by big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum). Also throughout the site are red alder (Alnus rubra), black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), and bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata) trees. Shrub cover in forested areas is comprised of salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), vine maple (Acer circinatum,), Western hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), and Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis). The groundcover includes a dominant cover of sword fern (Polystichum munitum) and Pacific blackberry (Rubus ursinus) with scattered cover of salal (Gaultheria shallon), Oregon grape (Mahonia nervosa), bleeding heart (Dicentra Formosa), and bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum). Project Description The Reserve at Tiffany Park is a proposed subdivision to provide new single-family, residential housing that includes developing 97 lots on a 21.66-acre site. The critical areas tracts will be established for wetlands and wetland buffers. The critical areas (Tracts B, G, K, & M) have a total area of 118,494 square feet (2.72 acres). The total native open space that will preserve native forest habitat including the wetlands and buffers is an area of 175,199 square feet (4.02 acres). The proposed native habitat preservation equals 18.6 percent of the site. The proposed roadway layout is designed to access the site from existing streets, provide necessary traffic circulation, and avoid wetland impact. Surface water runoff will be collected and treated in an underground stormwater detention vault located on the western portion of the Property (Tract A). Tract A will be developed to be a stormwater facility for detention and water quality treatment and also be a passive open space area. Figure —1 5 Purpose The purpose of this report is to provide a wetland determination study for the proposed property development. In addition, this study includes wetland buffer mitigation measures intended to meet or exceed City of Renton’s wetland regulations included in their municipal code (Title 4 – Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts). Methodology Typically defined, wetlands are ... "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration 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". Through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the Growth Management Act (GMA), and local critical areas regulations, the City reviews proposals that potentially impact wetland and other critical areas. Because of observed site conditions, combined with jurisdictional wetland regulations, wetland presence and extent must be determined for site feasibility or the permitting process. The methodology used for wetland determination was based on the presence of dominant hydrophytic vegetation (i.e. plant species adapted to, or tolerant of, growing in saturated soil conditions), hydric soils, and observed wetland hydrology as described in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and consistent with the Regional Supplemental to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (US Army Corps of Engineers 2010). The On-site Determination Method was Routine for areas greater than five acres. Four wetland data transects were installed to investigate the site. The wetland transects are generally located south to north on Transect 1 and west to east on Transects 2 to 4. A total of 25 wetland data plots, approximately 0.01 acres in size, were installed throughout the Property. In general wetland data plots were installed to determine and document wetland boundaries and potential wetland areas. The wetland data plot forms are included as Appendix A. In addition, cursory soil excavations were conducted to verify upland conditions where there was significant cover of hydrophytic vegetation. The technical criteria for vegetation, soils, and hydrology are mandatory under normal conditions and must all be met or present for an area to be identified as wetland. Determination of wetland area was based on observed plant species, topographic relief, soil profiles, and hydrology. Pink plastic flagging was used to mark the site's wetland boundaries and data plot locations. Professional base topographic and wetland surveying was used to prepare the drawing attached to this report. The wetland data plot forms are also attached to this report as Appendix A. The wetlands were rated using the Renton Municipal Code (Title 4 – Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts). The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) (USDA 1973), King County Area Soil Survey, was used to reference soil mapping and classification. 6 WETLAND DETERMINATION The City of Renton’s environmental overlay mapping does not identify wetlands on the site. The initial wetland investigation was conducted during June 2013 without the benefit of observing active wetland hydrology. However, additional wetland investigations were conducted during April and May 2014. Wetland areas were reviewed and verified by the City’s wetland peer review consultant in May 2014. Wetland hydrology indicators are present and five distinct wetland areas have been delineated on the site. The wetland areas have been professionally surveyed as shown on Sheet 13 of 13 (Wetland Delineation Map - Reserve at Tiffany Park, Barghausen Consulting Engineers June 3, 2014). Wetland ratings and standard buffer setbacks are based on the City of Renton regulations (Title 4 – Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts). Soils The SCS (USDA 1973) Soil Survey - King County Area has mapped two soil series on the subject property. The soil map units are Alderwood and Kitsap (AkF) and Alderwood gravelly sandy loam - 15 to 30 percent slopes (AgC). The Alderwood and Kitsap series is comprised of about 50 percent Alderwood sandy loam and 25 percent Kitsap silt loam. The drainage and permeability vary. These soils formed in glacial outwash deposits and are associated with conifer forests. The soils are on uplands but have inclusions of the Indianola series and other soils that are not large enough to map. The Alderwood series is also formed under conifers in glacial deposits associated with uplands. These soils are moderately well drained that have a weakly consolidated to strongly consolidated substratum at a depth of 24 to 40 inches. The hydric (wetland) soils included within this soil mapping include the poorly drained Norma, Bellingham, Seattle, Tukwila and Shalcar soils found in depressions. Certain soil inclusions of poorly drained soils found in depression areas and drainage ways on till and outwash plains are listed in the Hydric Soils of Washington (Soil Conservation Service 1985). Hydric soils are generally associated with wetland habitats. Investigation of portions of the upland area confirmed soil that closely resembles the Alderwood series throughout most of the Property. The northernmost area has soils that closely resemble the Kitsap silt loam series. 7 Hydrology The Property is located in the lower Cedar River drainage basin. All of the site’s wetlands have seasonal hydrology and were dry during the June 2013 site investigation. However, hydrology indicators of seasonal inundation and saturated soil are present. The site's wetlands have influence from rainfall and shallow groundwater. There are no streams on or connected to the Property. However, there is evidence that surface water runoff can flow onto the site from developed land located on the north and east sides. Because the wetlands appear to be closed depressions and not connected to any downstream aquatic habitats, they could be determined as “isolated” wetlands. Wetland Description The on-site wetlands are described and rated as follows. For reference the City’s wetland rating criteria are listed after the descriptions (Table 1). Wetland A Wetland A is a small depression area located on the north side of the Property. It has a dense shrub cover with a few Western crabapple (Malus fusca) trees. The wetland appears supported by shallow groundwater and rainfall. Soil excavations found hydric (wetland) soil coloration as low chroma value (10YR 2/1) to a depth of 13 inches. The shrub cover is dominated by salmonberry and red osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera). Emergent vegetation cover is low to absent. The area of wetland is 3,326 square feet (0.08 acres). Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) habitat classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland is classified as palustrine, scrub-shrub, and seasonally flooded. In accordance with Renton’s wetland regulations (RMC 4 Chapter 3, Section M.1.a.ii. (d)), the wetland is rated a Category 2 because it a relatively undisturbed area and does not meet Category 1 or Category 3 criteria. The standard wetland buffer width for Category 2 wetlands is 50 feet. Wetland B Wetland B is a very small depression located on the south side of the Property. It is likely this wetland has groundwater influence and seasonal surface water flows from the surrounding upland. Soil excavations found hydric (wetland) conditions as low chroma values - very dark brown, mineral soil (10YR 2/1). 8 The wetland has dominant shrub cover. There are red alder trees around it but no trees or groundcover growing in the wetland. The shrub cover is dominated by Douglas’ spirea (Spiraea douglasii) and black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata). Emergent vegetation cover is absent. The total area of wetland is 505 square feet (0.01 acres). Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) habitat classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland is classified as palustrine, scrub-shrub, and seasonally flooded. In accordance with Renton’s wetland regulations (RMC 4 Chapter 3, Section M.1.a.iii (b) (2) (c)), the wetland is rated a Category 3 because it appears isolated, and although not disturbed is considered as “smaller, high quality wetlands”. Wetland B does not meet Category 1 or Category 2 criteria. The standard wetland buffer width for Category 3 wetlands is 25 feet. Wetland C Wetland C is located just east of Wetland B. It is the largest wetland on the site and is a local depression and swale area. The Cedar River pipeline is located at the lower, southern wetland boundary. The seasonal surface water flowing into the wetland appears to be blocked or impounded by the elevated pipeline road. Wetlands B and C are located near the lowest elevations on the Property. Wetland C is forested with an open canopy of black cottonwood and a midstory layer of scouler willow (Salix scoulerana) trees. It has a dense shrub cover dominated by spirea and red osier dogwood. A scattered emergent vegetation cover includes creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens) and speedwell (Veronica sp.). The wetland appears supported by shallow groundwater and rainfall runoff. Soil excavations found hydric (wetland) soil with low chroma value (10YR 2/1) in the upper layer. The area of wetland is 5,349 square feet (0.12 acres). Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) habitat classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland is classified as palustrine, forested, scrub-shrub, and seasonally flooded. In accordance with Renton’s wetland regulations (RMC 4 Chapter 3, Section M.1.a.ii. (d)), the wetland is rated a Category 2 because it is a relatively undisturbed area and it does not meet Category 1 or Category 3 criteria. The standard wetland buffer width for Category 2 wetlands is 50 feet. Wetland D Wetland D is located adjacent to the Mercer Island water pipeline. It is a relatively small depression wetland with seasonal hydrology. Wetland D has a dense shrub cover dominated by salmonberry, black twinberry, and red osier dogwood. The emergent vegetation cover observed includes lady fern (Athyrium felix-femina) and piggy back plant (Tolmeia menziesii.). 9 The wetland appears supported by shallow groundwater and rainfall runoff. There is a small concrete culvert under the pipeline road that drains into the wetland. Soil excavations observed a silt loam hydric soil with low chroma value (10YR 2/1) in the upper layer. The area of wetland is 3,381 square feet (0.08 acres). Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) habitat classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland is classified as palustrine, scrub-shrub, and seasonally flooded. In accordance with Renton’s wetland regulations (RMC 4 Chapter 3, Section M.1.a.ii. (d)), the wetland is rated a Category 2 because it is a relatively undisturbed area and it does not meet Category 1 or Category 3 criteria. The standard wetland buffer width for Category 2 wetlands is 50 feet. Wetland E Wetland E is a very small depression located on the northwest side of the Property. The wetland is situated adjacent to S.E. 18th Street and a developed lot to the west. It is likely this wetland has groundwater influence and seasonal surface water flows from the surrounding upland. Soil excavations found hydric (wetland) conditions as low chroma values - very dark brown, mineral soil (7.5YR 2/1) and redoximorphic features (mottling) within 10 inches below the surface. The wetland has sparse shrub cover but salmonberry is dominant. There are red alder trees around it but no trees or groundcover were observed growing in the wetland. The shrub cover is dominated by salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) with some vine maple and Himalayan blackberry around the edge. Emergent vegetation cover is absent. The total area of wetland is 665 square feet (0.015 acres). Significant trash from dumping was observed in the wetland. Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) habitat classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland is classified as palustrine, scrub-shrub, and seasonally flooded. In accordance with Renton’s wetland regulations (RMC 4 Chapter 3, Section M.1.a.iii (b) (2) (c)), Wetland E is rated a Category 3 because it has limited human disturbance and is considered as “smaller, high quality wetlands”. Wetland E does not meet Category 1 or Category 2 criteria. The standard wetland buffer width for Category 3 wetlands is 25 feet. 10 City of Renton Wetland Rating Criteria (RMC Chapter 3, Section M.): Table 1. M. WETLANDS: 1. Applicability: The wetland regulations apply to sites containing or abutting wetlands as described below. Category 3 wetlands, less than two thousand two hundred (2,200) square feet in area, are exempt from these regulations if they meet exemption criteria in subsection C of this Section. a. Classification System: The following classification system is hereby adopted for the purposes of regulating wetlands in the City. Wetlands buffer widths, replacement ratios and avoidance criteria shall be based on the following rating system:i. Category 1: Category 1 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) The presence of species listed by Federal or State government as endangered or threatened, or the presence of essential habitat for those species; and/or (b) Wetlands having forty percent (40%) to sixty percent (60%) permanent open water (in dispersed patches or otherwise) with two (2) or more vegetation classes; and/or (c) Wetlands equal to or greater than ten (10) acres in size and having three (3) or more vegetation classes, one of which is open water; and/or (d) The presence of plant associations of infrequent occurrence; or at the geographic limits of their occurrence; and/or ii. Category 2: Category 2 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that are not Category 1 or 3 wetlands; and/or (b) Wetlands that have heron rookeries or osprey nests, but are not Category 1 wetlands; and/or (c) 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; and/or (d) Wetlands having minimum existing evidence of human-related physical alteration such as diking, ditching or channelization; and/or iii. Category 3: Category 3 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that are severely disturbed. Severely disturbed wetlands are wetlands which meet the following criteria: (1) Are characterized by hydrologic isolation, human-related hydrologic alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; and (2) Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or compaction of soils; and (3) May have altered vegetation. (b) Wetlands that are newly emerging. Newly emerging wetlands are: (1) Wetlands occurring on top of fill materials; and (2) Characterized by emergent vegetation, low plant species richness and used minimally by wildlife. These wetlands are generally found in the areas such as the Green River Valley and Black River Drainage Basin. (c) All other wetlands not classified as Category 1 or 2 such as smaller, high quality wetlands. 11 WETLAND BUFFER IMPACTS & MITIGATION This section addresses wetland buffer impacts, reductions, and mitigation measures. The project has several locations where temporary wetland buffer impacts may occur adjacent to new construction activities. The majority of these locations are directly related to the construction of retaining walls. One location of permanent wetland buffer impact is anticipated with the required construction of new roadway that will extend from the existing S.E. 18th Street right-of-way. The Wetland E Buffer Exhibit (Figure 2) shows the details of permanent buffer impacts associated with Wetland E and S.E. 18th Street. The proposed project includes wetland buffer reduction and buffer addition through the use of buffer averaging. The standard buffers for Wetlands A, C, and D may be reduced through averaging the buffer width per the criteria identified in RMC 4 Chapter 3, Section M.6.f. Wetland Buffer Impacts Temporary Buffer Impacts In general, potential buffer impacts from urban development are variable. Potential impacts may be mitigated or prevented through code requirements, best management practices, and/or plat conditions. Minor intrusions or disturbance from construction activities adjacent to wetland buffers will be restored with appropriate grading, soil amendments, and planting of native species. The minimum buffer distance of 25 feet will be maintained or restored as necessary to provide buffer functions (RMC 4 Chapter 3, Section M.6. f. v.) There are two locations on the project site where temporary buffer impacts could occur during lot and roadway construction activities. The larger area is along the north boundaries of proposed Lots 1 through 6. Due to the slope gradient in this area the slope will be cut and graded to create residential lots. The estimated area of buffer disturbance at this time in the design is 2,825 square feet. The identified impact for Lots 1 to 4 is within a buffer addition area for Wetland A and would not impact the standard 50-foot buffer as depicted on the attached Wetland Delineation Map (Figure 3). The second location of potential temporary buffer impact would be from constructing a retaining wall for the new roadway adjacent to the buffer of Wetland D. The impact area shown is about 8 feet wide and 150 feet in length. The area for this temporary impact is 1,203 square feet with about one-half located within a buffer addition area and the other half in the standard 50-foot buffer (Figure 3 attached). All temporary wetland buffer impacts have been based on the preliminary plat design. It is anticipated that more detailed information will be provided at the 60% design stage. 12 The mitigation for temporary impacts to buffers will be restoration with new tree and shrub plantings designed to replace site-specific plant community habitat. Permanent Buffer Impacts This portion of the wetland report is provided to identify existing and proposed permanent buffer impacts associated with Wetland E and to request a Letter of Exemption. Wetland E’s standard buffer is 25 feet. The minimum wetland buffer allowed by code is 25 feet and any reduction or loss of buffer requires a Letter of Exemption. The city’s code section describing a Letter of Exemption begins in RMC 4-3-050 C. 4. The appropriate criteria for requesting the Letter of Exemption are located in RMC 4-3-050 C. 5. (Specific Exemptions – Critical Areas and Buffers). Section RMC 4-3-050 C. 5 includes a table that lists the identified uses and conditions that qualify for a Letter of Exemption. Wetland E’s standard 25-foot buffer has been impacted (cleared, graded, and paved) from the past construction of S.E. 18th Street and the adjacent sidewalk. The Wetland E Buffer Exhibit (Figure2) shows the calculated area of existing buffer impact to be 219 square feet. The Tiffany Park project will require the extension of S.E. 18th Street. Current roadway standards will require the extension to be 1.5 feet wider than the current right-of-way. In order to construct the new portion of S.E.18th Street to current standards a very minor portion of Wetland E buffer would also be impacted. The standard 25-foot buffer would have an impact of 14 square feet (Figure 2). Per the Table listed in RMC 4-3-050 C. 5. e. (Specific Exemptions – Critical Areas and Buffers), Exempt Activity - Roads, Parks, Public and Private Utilities allows for the use of a Letter of Exemption where impacts are unavoidable and not allowed by the standards. Subsection e. in the Table states “…the construction of new trails, streets, roads, rights-of-way, and associated appurtenances, facilities and utilities where no alteration or additional fill materials will be placed other than the minimum alteration and/or fill needed…”. The proposed area of new impact to the Wetland E buffer is necessary to construct the S.E. 18th Street extension into the new residential project. The area of new buffer impact is minimal and would be allowed by code with a Letter of Exemption. Figure—2 14 Wetland Buffer Averaging Wetlands A, C, and D are proposed to have limited reductions in buffer width. Wetland B is within the 50-foot buffer of Wetland C. Because Wetlands B and C have buffers that are integrated and overlap, the proposed buffer averaging is combined to compensate for buffer reduction. The standard buffers for Wetlands A, C, and D may be reduced through averaging the buffer width per the criteria identified in RMC 4 Chapter 3, Section M.6.f. as listed below: f. Averaging of Buffer Width: Standard wetland buffer zones may be modified by averaging buffer widths. Upon applicant request, wetland buffer width averaging may be allowed by the Department Administrator only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. That the wetland contains variations in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or near the wetland and buffer; and ii. That width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland function and values; and iii. That the total area contained within the wetland buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer prior to averaging; and iv. A site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Management of Wetlands, McMillan 2000, or similar approaches have been conducted. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. v. In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced by more than fifty percent (50%) of the standard buffer or be less than twenty five feet (25') wide. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance per subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-250B; and vi. Buffer enhancement in the areas where the buffer is reduced shall be required on a case-by- case basis where appropriate to site conditions, wetland sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. vii. Notification may be required pursuant to subsection F8 of this Section. The criteria listed in Section M.6.f. for wetland buffer reduction through averaging are met as described below. Please refer to Figure 3 (Wetland Delineation Map) for additional details. The on-site wetlands currently have physical improvements in or near wetland and buffer areas. There are 2 pipeline corridors and trails in wetland buffers (M.6.f.i.). The buffer areas after averaging will have more area than the required standard buffer prior to averaging (net gain in buffer area). The buffer averaging plan provides additional buffer area at ratios that range from 1.6 to 1.0 to 9.5 to 1.0. Wetlands A, B, C, and D will have buffer areas significantly greater after buffer averaging than prior to averaging (M.6.f.ii & iii.). 15 A discussion of buffer adequacy and best available science is provided in the following section - Wetland Buffer Functions (M.6.f.iv.). The proposed buffer reductions are for a combination of planned residential lot and public roadway uses. All of the proposed buffer reductions are no greater than 50 percent of the standard buffer widths. The majority of the buffer reductions are about 36 percent of the standard buffer widths. There are a total of three buffer areas (Wetlands A, C, & D) with a standard 50-foot buffer that would be reduced to the minimum buffer setback of 25 feet. (M.6.f.v.). The proposed buffer averaging plan is shown on Sheet 13 of 13 (Wetland Delineation Map - Reserve At Tiffany Park (Barghausen Consulting Engineers 1/28/14). Using the buffer tables on Sheet 13, wetland buffer averaging is described as follows. Wetland A The proposed area of buffer reduction (3,740 square feet) will be mitigated with the addition of buffer area (35,583 square feet) that is contiguous with the standard buffer. This provides a buffer area that is greater than the reduction, greater than the standard buffer area, and meets the criteria of RMC 4 Chapter 3, Section M.6.f. Wetland B/C The Cedar River Pipe Line crosses through a portion of buffer on the south side of Wetland C causing a loss of buffer function in that location. The loss of buffer function has been an existing condition for many years. The proposed area of buffer reduction (2,644 square feet) will be mitigated with the addition of buffer area (11,890 square feet) that is contiguous with the standard buffer. This provides a buffer area that is greater than the reduction, greater than the standard buffer area, and meets the criteria of RMC 4 Chapter 3, Section M.6.f. Wetland D The Mercer Island Pipe Line crosses through a portion of buffer on the east side of Wetland D causing a loss of buffer function in that location. The loss of buffer function has been an existing condition for many years. The proposed area of buffer reduction (1,627 square feet) will be mitigated with the addition of buffer area (2,589 square feet) that is contiguous with the standard buffer. This provides a buffer area that is greater than the reduction, greater than the standard buffer area on the site, and meets the criteria of RMC 4 Chapter 3, Section M.6.f. 16 Wetland Buffer Functions In support of wetland buffer averaging on this project site the following is a discussion and review that is taken from the Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 1 – A Synthesis of the Science (Washington State Department of Ecology, March 2005 Pub. # 05-06-006). All of the on-site wetland buffers are described as forested with dense plant cover dominated by native species, have relatively flat topography, and have moderately well-drained soils. Buffers provide functions that include Removing Sediment, Excess Nutrients, and Toxics. Buffers Influence Microclimate and Provide Screening from adjacent disturbances. Buffers also Maintain Adjacent Habitat and Habitat Connectivity critical for the life needs of many species that use wetlands (Volume 1 – A Synthesis of the Science (Washington State Department of Ecology, Chapter 5, page 5-25 March 2005). The most frequently cited physical characteristics that influence the effectiveness of a buffer are: ● Vegetation characteristics (composition, density, and roughness – downed material) ● Percent slope ● Soils ● Buffer width and length (adjacent to source of impacts) The review of these characteristics is focused on water quality related to protection and improvement. A buffer’s ability to remove sediment, nutrients, toxics and to maintain microclimate is dependent on physical characteristics and the amount of input the buffer receives from runoff. Factors that can increase sediment and pollutant removal are: ● Flows are slowed sufficiently to allow particles to settle out, ● Physical filtering by vegetation and roots mechanically removes sediments from the water column, ● The slope of the buffer is of a low enough gradient to preclude formation of rills and scouring, ● There is large woody debris on the ground to create roughness, and ● The infiltration rate of the soils allows water to move through the soils rather than on the surface. Related to buffer width and the effectiveness in removing sediment (protecting water quality) the report states “the relationship between the width of the buffer and its effectiveness is non-linear. The largest particles and the greatest percentage of particles are dropped in the outer portions of the buffer (closest to the source of sediment). In these outer areas, the rate of surface flow begins to diminish as the water is slowed by vegetation and woody debris. Slower water movement allows particles to drop out of the water column” (Washington State Department of Ecology, Chapter 5, pages 5-28 to 5-30 March 2005). To summarize, the wetland buffers proposed for buffer reduction through averaging have the physical characteristics that can protect water quality and wetland hydrologic functions including flood storage. The factors (listed above) that can increase or provide sediment and pollutant removal will remain in the reduced buffer areas. The subject wetlands will be preserved and have the opportunity to improve water quality and reduce flooding and erosion. 17 REFERENCES Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 2014. Reserve At Tiffany Park, Preliminary Plat for Henley USA 6/3/14. City of Renton. 2006. City of Renton Municipal Code (Title IV – Development Regulations). Cowardin, L., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Service, United states Department of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79-31. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Grette Associates. 2008. Renton School District – Tiffany Park Area Wetland And Stream Assessment Report. Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist, M. Ownbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1977. Vascular Plants of the Pacific Northwest. University Press Seattle, Washington. Soil Conservation Service. 1985. Hydric Soils of the State of Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. US Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0). United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. Prepared in cooperation with Washington Agricultural Experiment Station. Washington State Department of Ecology. 2005. Wetlands in Washington State Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science. Ecology Publication # 05-06-006. 18 APPENDIX A WETLAND DATA PLOT FORMS US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Alnus rubra 30 yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = 30 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. Sambucus racemosa T no FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Rubus spectabilis 75 yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. n/a* - OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = 75 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. Dicentra formosa 15 no FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Polystichum munitum T no FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = 15 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 4/29/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 13 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Wetland A is on the north side of site. New plot outside Flag # A-5. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 13 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 6 10YR3/2 100 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 16 10YR4/2 100 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 2 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Alnus rubra 10 no FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. Acer macrophyllum 30 yes FACU 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = 40 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. Lonicera involucrata T no FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Rubus spectabilis 80 yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. Cornus stolonifera T no FACW OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = 80 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. Dicentra formosa 35 yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Galium aparine T no FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = 35 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 4/29/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 14 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Wetland A is on the north side of site. New plot outside #A-6. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 14 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 7 10YR2/1 100 sandy loam gravelly, saturated, many roots 16 10YR4/3 20 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 10YR4/2 80 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Acer macrophyllum 15 n/a* FACU Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. n/a* - Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. n/a* - Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. n/a* - OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. n/a* - Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Polystichum munitum T no FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Vegetation is disturbed due to human use of the area and trails. Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 4/29/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 15 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Wetland A is on the north side of site. New plot outside #A-1. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 15 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 6 10YR3/2 100 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 16 10YR4/2 100 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 7 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 2 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. n/a* - Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. n/a* - Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. n/a* - Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. n/a* - OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. Ranunculus repens 60 yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Grass spp. 35 yes FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Rubus ursinus 5 no FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Area is on top of the pipeline fill and has recently been mowed as maintenance. Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 4/29/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 16 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Northeast side of site on the pipeline right-of-way. New plot near Photo #2 of OTAK Tech Memo. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 16 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 6 10YR3/3 100 sandy loam gravelly, dry 14 10YR4/3 100 7.5YR4/6 1 C M sandy loam gravelly, dry 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. n/a* - Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 25 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. Acer circinatum 15 yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Rubus spectabilis 35 yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. Oemleria cerasiformis T no FACU OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = 50 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. Mahonia nervosa 15 yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Polystichum munitum 15 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Carex sp. T no FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = 30 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 4/29/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 17 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Wetland D is on the southeast side of site. New plot outside Flag #'s D-3 and D-4. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 17 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 13 10YR2/2 100 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 17 10YR4/3 100 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 8 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. n/a* - Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. n/a* - Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. n/a* - Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. n/a* - OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. Agrostis tenuis 40 yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Poa spp. 40 yes FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Ranunculus repens 5 no FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Taraxicum officinale 10 no FACU 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = 95 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Area is on top of the pipeline fill and has recently been mowed as maintenance. Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 4/29/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 18 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Northeast side of site on the Mercer Island pipeline right-of-way. New plot per Comment #6 of OTAK Tech Memo. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 18 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 13 10YR3/2 100 sandy loam gravelly, dry 16 10YR4/3 100 sandy loam gravelly, cobbles, dry 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. n/a* - Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. n/a* - Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. n/a* - Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. n/a* - OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. Agrostis tenuis 40 yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Poa spp. 40 yes FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Dactylis glomerata 15 no FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. n/a* - 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = 95 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Area is on top of the pipeline fill and has recently been mowed as maintenance. Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 4/30/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 19 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Southwest corner of site on the Cedar River pipeline right-of-way. New plot per Comment #10 of OTAK Tech Memo. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 19 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 3 10YR3/2 100 sandy loam gravelly, dry 8 10YR4/3 100 sandy loam gravelly, dry, compacted 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Alnus rubra 15 yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. Thuja plicata 5 no FAC 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = 20 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. n/a* - Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Rubus spectabilis 5 no FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. Cornus stolonifera 15 yes FACW OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = 20 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. Athyrium felix-femina 10 yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Rubus ursinus 5 no FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = 15 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 4/30/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 20 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Wetland B is on the west side of the site. New plot about 40 feet north of Wetland B. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 20 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 3 10YR2/1 100 organic O - layer 7 10YR3/3 100 sandy loam many roots, saturated 11 7.5YR4/6 100 sandy loam saturated 16 7.5YR4/4 100 sandy loam saturated 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 5 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 3 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Populus balsamifera 10 no FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. Acer macrophyllum 5 no FACU 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = 15 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. Oemleria cerasiformis T no FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Spiraea douglasii 60 yes FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. n/a* - OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = 60 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. Gautheria shallon 15 no FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. n/a* - Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = 15 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 4/30/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 21 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Wetland C is on the southwest side of site. New plot approximately 75 feet north of C. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 21 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 2 100 duff layer organic, many roots 6 10YR3/2 100 sandy loam saturated 14 10YR4/2 100 sandy loam saturated 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 6 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Salix scoulerana 30 yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. n/a* - 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = 30 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. n/a* - Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Spiraea douglasii 65 yes FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. n/a* - OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = 65 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. Gautheria shallon 10 no FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. n/a* - Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = 10 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 4/30/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 22 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: New plot between Wetlands B & C. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 22 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 2 100 duff layer organic, many roots 10 10YR3/2 50 sandy loam saturated 10YR2/2 50 16 10YR4/2 100 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 4 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Salix scoulerana 15 yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. n/a* - 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = 15 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. Lonicera involucrata 10 no FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Spiraea douglasii 30 yes FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. n/a* - OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = 40 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. n/a* - Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. n/a* - Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 4/30/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 23 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: New plot between Wetlands B & C. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 23 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 3 10YR3/2 100 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 11 10YR4/2 100 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 16 10YR2/2 100 sandy loam gravelly, saturated 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 4 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. n/a* - Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. Acer circinatum 12 no FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Rubus spectabilis 50 yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. Rubus discolor 15 no FACU OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = 50 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. n/a* - Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. n/a* - Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 5/1/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 24 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Wetland E is on the northwest side of site. New plot inside Flag # E-1. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 24 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 8 7.5YR4/1 100 M sandy loam gravelly, saturated 17 10YR4/2 50 7.5YR4/6 50 D M sandy loam gravelly, saturated 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 2 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. n/a* - Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) 1. n/a* - Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Rubus spectabilis 65 yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. Oemleria cerasiformis T no FACU OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = , 20% = 65 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1/100 acre) UPL species x5 = 1. Polysticum munitum 35 yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. n/a* - Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = 35 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park City/County: -Renton/King Sampling Date: 5/1/14 Applicant/Owner: Henley USA State: WA Sampling Point: 25 Investigator(s): Gary Schulz Section, Township, Range: 21,T23N,R5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood (AgC) and Kitsap (AkF) NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Wetland E is on the northwest side of site. New plot is located at Flag # E-1. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 25 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 8 10YR3/2 100 sandy loam dry 16 10YR5/3 80 sandy loam dry 10YR5/2 20 sandy loam moist at bottom 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: Renton School District - Tiffany Park FIGURE—3