The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3.26 - 30 Biological Assessment-Critical Areas Report Printed on 30% recycled paper. B I O L O G I C A L A S S E S S M E N T /CR I T I C A L A R E A S S T U D Y Valley Medical Center – Renton, WA Prepared for: Daniel Pedersen, CHFM Construction Project Manager Valley Medical Center 400 South 43rd Street Renton, WA 98055 Prepared by: October 2016 The Watershed Company Reference Number: 160113 The Watershed Company Contact Person: Ryan Kahlo, PWS Ecologist Cite this document as: The Watershed Company. October 2016. Critical Areas Report: Valley Medical Center, Renton, WA. Prepared for Valley Medical Center. i TABLE OF C ONTENTS 1 Introduction ......................................................... 1 1.1 Background and Purpose ............................................................................. 1 1.2 Description of Project Area ........................................................................... 2 1.2.1 Panther Creek .................................................................................................. 3 1.2.2 Panther Creek Buffer ...................................................................................... 3 2 Project Description ............................................. 6 2.1 Mitigation Sequencing ................................................................................... 7 2.1.1 Avoidance ........................................................................................................ 7 2.1.2 Minimization..................................................................................................... 7 2.1.3 Mitigation ......................................................................................................... 8 3 Buffer Modification Criteria ................................ 9 4 Endangered Species Assessment ................... 12 5 Mitigation Plan Details ...................................... 13 5.1 Mitigation Plan Overview ............................................................................. 13 5.2 Mitigation Goals and Objectives ................................................................. 13 5.3 Performance Standards............................................................................... 13 5.4 Techniques and Plans ................................................................................. 14 5.4.1 Construction Notes and Specifications ...................................................... 14 5.5 Monitoring Program ..................................................................................... 15 5.5.1 Monitoring Methods ...................................................................................... 15 5.5.2 Site Maintenance Requirements .................................................................. 17 5.6 Contingency Plan......................................................................................... 17 5.7 Site Protection ............................................................................................. 18 6 Summary ............................................................ 18 L IST OF E XHIBITS Figure 1. Vicinity Map for Valley Medical Center. ........................................................... 2 ii Figure 2: Approximate Project Location .......................................................................... 3 Figure 3: Existing gravel parking lot to be converted to expanded parking garage. ........ 4 Figure 4: Buffer reduction area, does not include forest in background. ......................... 4 Figure 5: Buffer addition area, includes forest in background and a portion of the gravel parking lot in the foreground. .................................................................... 5 Figure 6: Buffer enhancement area. ............................................................................... 5 Figure 7: Temporary buffer impact area due to grading. ................................................. 6 A PPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B The Watershed Company October 2016 1 C R I T I C A L A R E A S R E P O R T VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER – RENTON, WA 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background and Purpose The purpose of this report is to document potential critical area impacts on Panther Creek and its associated buffer adjacent to the proposed parking garage expansion at Valley Medical Center. The property is located at 3915, 3917, and 3921 Talbot Road S. in the City of Renton (Parcels #302305-9111, 885767-0050, - 0040, -0010, & -0100). The project area is currently composed of the existing gravel and paved parking areas along with some landscape trees and shrubs. The northernmost portion of the project area is located within the standard buffer for Panther Creek, although this portion of the buffer is primarily within existing impervious areas. As summarized in the Wetland and Stream Delineation Report (Appendix A) prepared for this property (The Watershed Company, March 2016), Panther Creek requires a 115-foot standard buffer width. The applicant proposed reducing the standard buffer width through a combination of buffer averaging and buffer reduction with enhancement to accommodate the proposed expansion. Buffer reduction with enhancement will be utilized in all areas where a reduction of the standard buffer to the minimum-allowed 90 feet. For those areas where it is necessary to reduce the standard buffer to less than 90 feet (up to the minimum- allowed 75 feet), buffer averaging is proposed. Additional stream buffer areas within the reduced buffers will be temporarily impacted by necessary grading activities. Proposed buffer modifications and temporary impacts are summarized in Table 1 below and on the mitigation plan (see Appendix B). Table 1. Wetland buffer modification and impact summary Type of Modification Area of Impact Mitigation Proposed Buffer Reduction 1,948 square feet 2:1 ratio of enhancement in degraded buffer Buffer Averaging 3,422 square feet 1:1 ratio of buffer addition with enhancement Temporary Buffer Impacts 6,271 square feet Restoration and enhancement of disturbed area Biological Assessment/Critical Areas Study: Valley Medical Center 2 Proposed buffer impacts will require buffer modification and wetland/buffer restoration. This will require City approval of this critical areas report. This report fulfills the criteria of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC) specific to stream buffer modifications and presents a detailed discussion of the habitat and vegetation on-site and how the proposal can be implemented with no net loss of on-site or off-site critical area functions and values. 1.2 Description of Project Area The project area is located on the Valley Medical Center (VMC) campus near the intersection of Talbot Road S and S 177th Street, between Talbot Road S and Highway 167. The specific project location is adjacent to an existing parking garage and is situated atop existing gravel and paved parking lots. The site is located in Sections 30 & 31, Township 23 North, Range 5 East; Black River Drainage Basin; Duwamish-Green Watershed Resource Inventory Area (WRIA 9). Figure 1. Vicinity Map for Valley Medical Center. The Watershed Company October 2016 3 Figure 2: Approximate Project Location 1.2.1 Panther Creek Panther Creek is located at the bottom of the ravine, approximately 100-115 feet north of the project area. The creek enters the VMC property via a culvert beneath Talbot Road S. and flows in a generally western direction. Panther Creek is documented to contain coho and chum salmon and cutthroat trout. As a documented fish-bearing stream that is not considered a shoreline of the state, Panther Creek is classified as Type F, per RMC 4-3-050.G.2. 1.2.2 Panther Creek Buffer The general buffer areas on the VMC property are situated on a modestly steep slope that slopes downhill from the project north towards Panther Creek. The buffer is mostly forested with well-established bigleaf maple, black cottonwood, and western red cedar trees with an understory dominated by Himalayan blackberry, salmonberry, and English ivy. Diversity is very limited in the buffer, although the trees are large and provide significant shade to Panther Creek, helping maintain lower water temperatures and providing detritus and organic materials into the creek. The large trees also provide erosion control on the steep slopes. Biological Assessment/Critical Areas Study: Valley Medical Center 4 Figure 3: Existing gravel parking lot to be converted to expanded parking garage. Figure 4: Buffer reduction area, does not include forest in background. The Watershed Company October 2016 5 Figure 5: Buffer addition area, includes forest in background and a portion of the gravel parking lot in the foreground (to be restored). Figure 6: Buffer enhancement area. Biological Assessment/Critical Areas Study: Valley Medical Center 6 Figure 7: Temporary buffer impact area due to grading. Within the project area, however, the proposed buffer reduction areas are almost entirely composed of the existing gravel parking lot. The proposed grading activities (temporary buffer impacts) will extend into an area north of the proposed garage expansion that was a concrete patio prior to 2009. The patio and the house it was once associated with were removed in 2008-2009. Following removal of the patio, black cottonwood saplings and a dense Himalayan blackberry thicket colonized the area. Much of the proposed buffer addition area is similar in character to the majority of the Panther Creek buffer in the project vicinity. This area is generally forested with established bigleaf maple and western red cedar trees in the canopy, with an understory of osoberry and English ivy. A portion of the buffer addition area also includes an existing gravel parking lot that will be abandoned, and restored with a native plant community. 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project includes a seven story, 360,000 square-foot expansion of the existing parking garage. Associated improvements include staff access ramps, a revised fire lane, upgraded landscaping, and stormwater improvements through the use of a 35,000 cubic-foot retention vault. The Watershed Company October 2016 7 Stormwater management for this project is based on the City of Renton’s requirements for the watershed. Detention will be provided to meet Level 2 flow control. The detention facility is sized such that discharge will meet the pre- development rate of runoff for the forested land condition. The Western Washington Hydrology Model has been used to size the detention facility. Water quality will be preserved by using the Modular Wetland System, an enhanced water quality BMP as approved by Washington Department of Ecology. The discharge point will not change from the existing discharge location, into the municipal stormwater system along the primary access road. The project will completely avoid direct and indirect stream impacts. No in- water work or stormwater discharges are proposed in Panther Creek. The project will incur unavoidable stream buffer impacts. Direct buffer impacts will be temporary in nature and are required to accommodate grading activities at the top of the steep slope to the north. Permanent buffer impacts will be avoided through buffer modification (reduction with enhancement and averaging). The buffer modification is necessitated, since the standard buffer protrudes into the existing gravel parking lot, where the expansion is proposed. All buffer modification will be offset through enhancement of the existing standard buffer at a 2:1 ratio and buffer addition with enhancement at a 1:1 ratio. 2.1 Mitigation Sequencing Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050.H.2, this project must demonstrate appropriate mitigation sequencing. Applicants are required to first avoid stream and buffer impacts, then minimize unavoidable impacts, and lastly provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts. 2.1.1 Avoidance The majority of site development is located outside of the 115-foot stream buffer. The project will completely avoid all direct and indirect stream impacts. No construction activities or stormwater discharges are proposed in Panther Creek. Following modification of the standard stream buffer, all direct stream buffer impacts will be temporary, as a result of the proposed grading activities. 2.1.2 Minimization Minimization techniques were utilized during the design process in order to limit the extent of wetland and buffer modification necessary to fulfill the project purpose. Minimization measures included:  Reducing the total size of the expansion to avoid buffer impacts beyond those allowed using buffer reduction with enhancement and buffer averaging. Biological Assessment/Critical Areas Study: Valley Medical Center 8  Using a stormwater detention vault in place of an above ground detention pond, limiting the amount of buffer modification required.  Relocating the pedestrian ramp to allow for the buffer addition area to be more continuous with the standard buffer.  Best management practices will be followed during construction to maintain identified clearing limits and avoid incidental disturbance.  Silt fencing will be placed at the edge of the clearing limits between work areas and Panther Creek to minimize the potential of sediment entering the creek.  The buffer modification is the minimum necessary to accommodate the proposed structure. Buffer reduction through enhancement is the preferred option and is proposed wherever feasible given the minimum-allowed buffer width of 90 feet for this option. Buffer averaging, with enhancement of the addition area, is only proposed for areas where reducing the standard buffer to less than 90 feet is necessary to accommodate the proposed structure. At no point, is the standard buffer reduced to less than 75 feet. 2.1.3 Mitigation All temporary stream buffer impacts require mitigation; mitigation areas and actions are summarized in Table 1 above. All proposed mitigation actions will occur on-site. The temporarily impacted buffer will be restored and enhanced at the impact site in accordance with RMC 4-3-050.H.2.d. The buffer enhancement area is located just west of the project area and composed of a Himalayan blackberry monoculture. The invasive species will be cleared, and the area will be planted with a dense, native tree, shrub, and groundcover community appropriate for the landscape. Similarly, the buffer addition area located just east of the project area includes both existing forest and existing gravel parking lot. The forested portion contains large trees, but the understory is relatively sparse and contains substantial English ivy. Even in its current condition, the forested buffer addition area provides greater buffer function than the buffer reduction area, which is a gravel parking lot. In order to farther improve buffer function, the English ivy will be removed, and the understory will be enhanced with additional native trees, shrubs, and groundcovers. The buffer addition area that is, itself, a gravel parking lot represents a net equivalent to the reduction area in its present state. However, this portion of the buffer addition area will be cleared of gravel, decompacted, and planted with a dense native, tree, shrub, and groundcover community. This will represent a substantial lift in buffer function compared to the existing condition. The affected buffer areas will be permanently protected with a split rail fence and NGPA signs. The Watershed Company October 2016 9 To ensure a net improvement in ecological function buffer reduction through enhancement will occur at a ratio of 2:1, exceeding the minimum required 1:1 ratio. Buffer addition with enhancement (buffer averaging) will maintain the required 1:1 ratio. To mitigate for temporary buffer impacts, in-place buffer restoration is proposed at a 1:1 ratio. The temporary grading impacts are located partially within the existing gravel parking areas and within an area dominated by black cottonwood saplings and dense Himalayan blackberry. Most of the vegetated area is situated atop a former concrete patio, and it lacks structural and species diversity. Replacing this area with a dense, native plant community will represent a substantial improvement in buffer function from the existing condition. The proposed restoration will provide a compensatory level of protection for the critical area and will offset the disturbance associated with modification of the standard stream buffer. 3 BUFFER MODIFICATION CRITERIA The following discussion identifies how the proposed project complies with the stream buffer modification requirements in under RMC 4-3-050.I.2.a – Criteria for Reduction of Degraded Stream Buffer Width with Enhancement: A reduced buffer will be approved in a degraded stream buffer only if: i. It will provide an overall improvement in water quality; The buffer area which will be reduced is located in an area composed of a gravel parking lot. As an effectively impervious surface with regular vehicular traffic, the gravel parking lot is considered a pollution-generating surface. Urban stormwater can have significant detrimental impacts on salmonids. Sediments, heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), pesticides, and nutrients can enter waterbodies through bank erosion, road run-off, landslides, or overland flow. Heavy metals and PAHs, which are both associated with cars and runoff from roads and parking lots, are disruptive to salmonid physiology and behavior. Therefore, stormwater generated through impervious surfaces with vehicular use is among the highest water quality concerns for salmonids. With the adjacent buffer area sloping steeply downhill towards Panther Creek, the stormwater has the potential to reach the stream. Replacing the existing gravel parking lot that has no stormwater controls with the parking garage that will retain and treat stormwater represents an overall improvement in water quality. Similarly, the buffer enhancement area, which is 50 percent larger than Biological Assessment/Critical Areas Study: Valley Medical Center 10 the reduction area, is currently composed of a Himalayan blackberry monoculture. Blackberry typically has shallow roots and is not proficient at trapping and filtering sediments and pollutants. Replacing the blackberry with a dense native tree, shrub, and groundcover community will increase root depth, general complexity, and vertical structure, all of which improves water quality functions provided by the buffer. ii. It will provide an overall enhancement to fish, wildlife, or their habitat; The existing gravel parking lot provides no habitat function related to Panther Creek and neither will the proposed parking garage. However, replacing the Himalayan blackberry monoculture with a mix of native trees, shrubs, and groundcovers will increase shade, future large woody debris recruitment, and allochthonous input of detritus, insects, and organic materials. This represents a net improvement in buffer habitat function. iii. It will provide a net improvement in drainage and/or stormwater detention capapilities; The buffer reduction area, in its current condition, is effectively impervious and is not subjected to significant stormwater controls. Once converted to a parking garage, runoff will be captured and detained, with a release rate that mimics the natural forested condition. The buffer enhancement area will experience improved drainage by increasing the degree of vertical structure that can slow runoff on the hillside above Panther Creek. This represents a net improvement in drainage and stormwater detention from the current condition. iv. It will not be materially detrimental to any other property or the City as a whole; The project is designed to meet all applicable code and zoning requirements of the City of Renton. No detrimental effects to other properties or the City are anticipated. v. It will provide all exposed areas with stabilized native vegetation as appropriated; All temporary buffer impacts will be restored with a native tree, shrub, and groundcover community. vi. The request is not made in conjunction with buffer reduction; This requirement is somewhat ambiguous, as implementation of this provision is, by definition, for the purpose of achieving buffer reduction. This ambiguity was discussed with City of Renton Senior Planner, Clark Close, and his interpretation was that this requirement was intended to prevent “double dipping” by using buffer reduction with enhancement in addition to buffer The Watershed Company October 2016 11 averaging within the same buffer segment (email communication, September 9, 2016). Mr. Close clarified that buffer reduction with enhancement is allowed in conjunction with buffer averaging, provided the two options are applied to different buffer segments. This proposal does not apply buffer reduction and buffer averaging to the same buffer segments and therefore, meets the intent of this code provision. vii. It will provide, as part of the buffer reduction request, buffer enhancement plan prepared by a qualified professional and fund a review of the plan by the City’s consultant. The plan shall assess habitat, water quality, stormwater detention, groundwater recharge, shoreline projection, and erosion protection functions of the buffer, assess the proposed modification on those functions; and address the six criteria above. A buffer enhancement plan is included as an appendix to this report (Appendix B). This report addresses the remaining criteria listed in this provision. The following discussion identifies how the proposed project complies with the stream buffer modification requirements in under RMC 4-3-050.I.2.b – Criteria for Approval of Averaged Stream Buffer: Buffer width averaging may be allowed only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. There are existing physical improvements in or near the water body and associated riparian area; The existing parking garage, gravel parking lot, and administrative buildings are all located within the standard Panther Creek buffer. ii. Buffer width averaging will result in no net loss of stream/lake/riparian function; The area proposed for buffer reduction is located within the existing gravel parking lot. The area proposed for buffer addition is partially located within the existing forested area and partially within another gravel parking lot. The entire buffer addition area will be enhanced under this proposal to ensure a net improvement of buffer function. iii. The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaging; The buffer addition area will offset the buffer reduction area at a 1:1 ratio, maintaining equivalent buffer area contiguous with the standard buffer. iv. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; Biological Assessment/Critical Areas Study: Valley Medical Center 12 The buffer averaging plan has been prepared according to the best available science as applied on numerous similar projects by The Watershed Company in both design and review capacities. v. Where the buffer width is reduced by averaging pursuant to this subsection, buffer enhancement shall be required. The entirety of the buffer addition area will be enhanced through removal of invasive species and conversion of gravel parking lot to a dense native tree, shrub, and groundcover community. The temporarily impacted buffer area, which is within the reduced buffer area, will also be enhanced following completion of grading activities. The area currently supports only dense Himalayan blackberry and black cottonwood saplings. Native diversity will be substantially increased upon completion of the restoration/enhancement. 4 ENDANGERED SPECIES ASSESSMENT Three salmonid-fish species are listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act in the Puget Sound area. These species include Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) of the Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment (DPS), steelhead (Onchorhyncus mykiss) of the Puget Sound DPS, and bull trout (Salvelinujs confluentus). According to WDFW Priority Species and Habitat Data (PHS Data), WDFW SalmonScape, and WRIA 8 Fish Distribution Maps, none of these species are present in Panther Creek. Furthermore, no in- water work is proposed as part of this project, and no indirect stream impacts are anticipated. Therefore, the proposed project will have no effect on Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Puget Sound steelhead, or bull trout. According to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Information for Planning and Conservation, other threatened or endangered species that should be addressed in the project area include marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus), streaked horned lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata), and yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus). None of these species have been documented in the project area per PHS Data. Furthermore, there is no suitable habitat for any of these species in the project vicinity. Nesting marbled murrelets require old- growth/mature coniferous forests in dense coastal stands; yellow-billed cuckoos require large, continuous riparian corridors populated by dense willow and cottonwood forests; and streaked horned larks require open grasslands, prairies, herbaceous balds, or sandy islands. None of these habitats is present in the project vicinity. Therefore, the proposed project will have no effect on marbled murrelets, yellow-billed cuckoos, or streaked horned larks. The Watershed Company October 2016 13 No other endangered, threatened, sensitive, or priority species are documented by PHS Data for the property. No such species were observed during site inspections, and no additional critical wildlife habitat is present. 5 MITIGATION PLAN DETAILS 5.1 Mitigation Plan Overview The proposed mitigation plan fulfills the requirements of RMC 4-3-050.H. In order to allow for the proposed parking garage expansion and associated grading activities, stream buffer modification and unavoidable temporary stream buffer impacts will occur. Buffer modification will take the form of reduction with enhancement and buffer averaging with enhancement. Temporary stream buffer impacts, will also be restored and enhanced in-place. As described above, buffer averaging will occur at a 1:1 ratio, and buffer enhancement will occur at a 2:1 ratio (enhancement area : reduction area). 5.2 Mitigation Goals and Objectives 1. Within the proposed restoration areas, establish dense native vegetation that is appropriate to the eco-region and site. 2. Where indicated on the plan, areas within the restoration area will remain substantially vegetated with a preponderance of native trees, shrubs, and groundcovers and will contain little invasive or noxious weed cover. 5.3 Performance Standards The standards listed below will be used to judge the success of the installation over time. If performance standards are met at the end of Year 5, the site will then be deemed successful and the performance security bond will be eligible for release by the City of Renton. 1. Survival: Achieve 100% survival of installed tree and shrub plantings by the end of Year 1. This standard can be met through plant establishment or through replanting as necessary to achieve the required numbers. Individual groundcover plantings cannot be feasibly counted. Therefore, groundcovers shall be monitored for areas of obvious mortality and appropriate replacement quantities recommended by the restoration professional to ensure satisfaction of the native cover standard (below). 2. Native Cover: Biological Assessment/Critical Areas Study: Valley Medical Center 14 a. Achieve 50% cover of native trees, shrubs, and groundcovers by Year 3. Native volunteer species (but not grasses) may count towards this cover standard. b. Achieve 80% cover of native trees, shrubs, and groundcovers by Year 5. Native volunteer species (but not grasses) may count towards this cover standard. Trees and shrubs must account for a minimum of 65% cover. c. Species diversity: Establish at least three native tree species, four native shrub species and one native groundcover species by Year 3 and maintain this diversity through Year 5. Native volunteer species (but not naturalized grasses) may count towards this standard. d. Invasive cover: Aerial cover for all non-native, invasive and noxious weeds within the buffer planting areas will not exceed 10% at any year during the monitoring period. Invasive plants are defined as those listed by the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board as Class A, B, or C. 5.4 Techniques and Plans 5.4.1 Construction Notes and Specifications General Work Sequence 1. Install silt fencing around all clearing limits. 2. Prepare the planting areas: a. Remove gravel, fill material, garbage, and debris; b. Clear all Himalayan blackberry and English ivy from the planting areas, making sure to remove the roots. c. Rototill to de-compact soils and incorporated three inches of compost into the upper nine inches of the soil. Do not rototill beneath the existing tree canopy. 3. All plant installation is to take place during the dormant season (October 15th – March 1st). a. Prepare a planting pit for each plant and install per the planting details. b. Apply a blanket application of woodchip mulch, four inches thick, across all planting areas. 4. Install a temporary, above-ground irrigation system capable of covering the entire planting area. 5. Install a split rail fence between developed areas and the planting areas per details. The Watershed Company October 2016 15 Specifications 1. Compost: Cedar Grove Compost or equivalent product. 100% vegetable compost with no appreciable quantities of sand, gravel, sawdust, or other non-organic materials. 2. Fertilizer: Slow release, granular PHOSPHOROUS-FREE fertilizer. Follow manufacturer’s instructions for application. Keep fertilizer in a weather-tight container while on site. Note that fertilizer is to be applied only in Years 2 through 5 and not in the first year. 3. Irrigation system: Automated system capable of delivering at least two inches of water per week from June 1 through September 30 for the first two years following installation. 4. Restoration Professional: The Watershed Company [(425) 822-5242] personnel, or other persons qualified to evaluate environmental restoration projects. 5. Wood chip mulch: Arborist chips (chipped woody material) approximately 1 to 3 inches in maximum dimension (not sawdust or coarse hog fuel). This material is commonly available in large quantities from arborists or tree-pruning companies. This material is sold as “Animal Friendly Hog Fuel” at Pacific Topsoils [(800) 884-7645]. Mulch must not contain appreciable quantities of garbage, plastic, metal, soil, and dimensional lumber or construction/demolition debris. 5.5 Monitoring Program 5.5.1 Monitoring Methods This monitoring program is designed to track the success of the mitigation site over time and to measure the degree to which it is meeting the performance standards outlined in the preceding section. An as-built plan will be prepared by the restoration professional (The Watershed Company [(425) 822-5242], or other persons qualified to evaluate environmental restoration projects) prior to the beginning of the monitoring period. The as-built plan will be a mark-up of the planting plans included in this plan set. The as-built plan will document any departures in plant placement or other components from the proposed plan. During the as-built inspection, the monitoring restoration specialist shall install monitoring transects in the wetland buffer restoration areas and establish photo points. Approximate transect and photo point locations shall be marked on the as-built plan. At least six, 50-foot transects shall be established in the planting areas, including at least two in each area – buffer enhancement area, buffer Biological Assessment/Critical Areas Study: Valley Medical Center 16 addition with enhancement area, and the temporary buffer disturbance/restoration area. Monitoring will take place twice annually for five years, including a spring maintenance inspection and a formal monitoring inspection to occur in the late summer or early fall. Year 1 monitoring will commence in the first fall subsequent to installation. Spring Monitoring The spring maintenance inspection shall include the following, reported in a brief memo submitted to the property owner and/or maintenance crews: 1) Conduct a weed and maintenance inspection in the spring to identify any maintenance needs necessary to prepare the site for the upcoming growing season. 2) Summarize findings in a spring maintenance memo for the responsible party. Late Summer/Fall Monitoring The formal monitoring visit shall record and report the following in an annual report submitted to the City of Renton: 1) Summary of the spring maintenance visit recommendations. 2) Visual assessment of the overall site. 3) Year 1 counts of live and dead plants by species. 4) Counts of dead plants where mortality is significant in any monitoring year. 5) Estimate of native cover using the line-intercept method along established transects. All planted areas not directly covered by transects will be visually assessed and noted as to how they are meeting the performance standards. 6) Visual estimate of native groundcover. 7) Estimate of non-native, invasive weed cover within planting areas using the line-intercept method and/or visual estimates are practical; estimate invasive cover in wetland restoration and buffer mitigation areas separately. 8) Tabulation of established native species, including both planted and volunteer species. 9) Photographic documentation from fixed reference points and/or transect ends. 10) Any intrusions into or clearing of the planting areas, vandalism, or other actions that impair the intended functions of the mitigation area. The Watershed Company October 2016 17 11) Recommendations for maintenance or repair of any portion of the mitigation area. 5.5.2 Site Maintenance Requirements The site will be maintained in accordance with the following instructions for five years following completion of the construction. 1) Follow the recommendations noted in the previous monitoring site visit and the spring maintenance memo. 2) General weeding for all planted areas: a. At least twice yearly, remove all competing weeds and weed roots from beneath each installed plant and any desirable volunteer vegetation to a distance of 18 inches from the main plant stem. Weeding should occur at least twice during the spring and summer. Frequent weeding will result in lower mortality, lower plant replacement costs, and increased likelihood that the plan meets performance standards by Year 5. b. More frequent weeding may be necessary depending on weed conditions that develop after plan installation. c. Do not weed the area near the plant bases with string trimmer (weed whacker/weed eater). Native plants are easily damaged or killed, and weeds easily recover after trimming. d. Ensure that established Himalayan blackberry canes outside of the planting areas are cut back at least 10 feet from the planting areas. 3) Apply slow release granular fertilizer to each installed plant annually in the spring (by June 1) of Years 2 through 5. 4) Replace mulch as necessary to maintain a 4-inch-thick layer, retain soil moisture, and limit weeds. 5) Replace dead plants found in the summer monitoring visits during the upcoming fall/winter dormant season (October 15 to March 1) or at the direction of the restoration professional. 6) Provide irrigation for the entire planted area with a minimum of one inch of water provided per week from June 1st through September 30th for at least the first two years following installation through the operation of a temporary irrigation system. 5.6 Contingency Plan If there is a significant problem with the mitigation areas meeting performance standards, a contingency plan will be developed and implemented. Contingency plans can include, but are not limited to: soil amendment; additional plant installation; and plant substitutions of type, size, quantity, and location. Biological Assessment/Critical Areas Study: Valley Medical Center 18 5.7 Site Protection Permanent split-rail fencing and critical area protection area (CAPA) signs will be installed between the restoration areas and all developed areas. 6 SUMMARY The proposed parking garage expansion will require modifications to the standard stream buffer associated with Panther Creek. Buffer modifications include reducing the standard 115-foot stream buffer to a minimum of 90 feet using buffer reduction through enhancement at a 2:1 ratio. Where it is necessary to reduce the buffer to less than 90 feet, buffer averaging is proposed to reduce the buffer to a minimum 75 feet. Buffer addition is proposed at a 1:1 ratio, and enhancement will be provided to the buffer addition areas. Other temporary buffer impacts resulting from grading activities will be restored and enhanced in kind. The buffer areas proposed for reduction are very poor quality, consisting of gravel parking areas. By replacing these areas with dense native buffer and enhancing existing buffer beyond the minimum required , the project will ensure an overall net gain in buffer function upon project completion. The Watershed Company October 2016 A P P E N D I X A Renton Valley Medical Center, Wetland & Stream Delineation Study March 1, 2016 Becky Hardi UW Medicine | Valley Medical Center Facilities Project Manager 400 S. 43rd Street Renton, WA 98055 Via email: Becky_Hardi@Valleymed.org Re: Wetland and Stream Delineation Report The Watershed Company Reference Number: 160113 Dear Becky: We are pleased to present to you the findings of our wetland and stream delineation study for the north end of the Valley Medical Center campus. On February 1 and 4, ecologists screened the study area for jurisdictional wetlands and streams. The study area included the approximately 3-acre northwest corner and north edge of the property, including the northwest portion of Parcel 885767-0100 all of Parcels 885767- 0060, -0050, and 302305-9034, and the south edge of the adjacent Parcel 3023059111. The encumbering boundaries of verified wetlands and streams were delineated and flagged on site. Wetland and Stream Delineation Report – Renton Valley Medical Center Hardi, B. March 1, 2016 Page 2 Figure 1 - Vicinity map showing the location of the subject property. Figure 2 – A 2013 aerial photograph of the study area with subject parcels called out. Parcel Vicinity Wetland and Stream Delineation Report – Renton Valley Medical Center Hardi, B. March 1, 2016 Page 3 Site History The City of Renton (COR Maps) depicts a large wetland area along the east side of Highway 167 that overlaps with the southwest corner of the study area. Washington State Department of Transportation also has a mitigation site in this area. This report assesses on-site and adjacent wetlands and streams and provides a summary of relevant regulatory implications. The following documents are included:  Wetland Determination Data Forms  Wetland Rating Forms and Figures  Wetland Delineation Figure Methods Public-domain information on the subject property was reviewed for this delineation study. These sources include USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil maps, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory maps, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife interactive mapping programs (PHS on the Web and SalmonScape), COR Maps, and King County’s GIS mapping website (iMAP). The study area was evaluated for physical wetland characteristics using methodology from the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Manual) (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [Corps] 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Version 2.0 (Regional Supplement) (Corps May 2010). Wetland boundary determinations are based on an examination of vegetation, soils, and hydrology. Soil, vegetation, and hydrologic parameters were sampled at several locations to determine wetland presence or absence. Data points on-site are marked with yellow- and black-striped flags. Wetlands were rated using the Western Washington Wetland Rating System 2014 Update (Ecology, Jan 2015). Findings The five parcels that form the study area lie within the Lower Green River sub-basin of the Duwamish-Green water resources inventory area (WRIA 9). The study area is located northeast of and adjacent to the corner of S 43rd St and Talbot Rd S. The portion of the study area containing the three northeast parcels (Parcels 885767- 0060, and -0050, and 302305-9034) are mostly comprised of existing buildings and parking lots. Parcel 3023059111 borders these areas to the north and contains a section of Panther Creek and forested area. Parcel 8857670010 includes a forested area containing Wetland A and a section of Panther Creek, which connects to a ditched stream in the northwest corner of the parcel. Wetland and Stream Delineation Report – Renton Valley Medical Center Hardi, B. March 1, 2016 Page 4 Two areas dominated by reed canarygrass, one along the south side of Panther Creek and along Stream B, were assessed for wetland characteristics (DP-1, DP-4). Although a hydrophytic plant community is present at these locations, hydric soil and wetland hydrology criteria are not satisfied. Wetlands Our investigation determined that the large wetland mapped by the City or Renton which includes WSDOT mitigation plantings extends into the study area at the northwest corner. Wetland A Wetland A is a large riverine, slope, and depressional wetland located on Parcels 3023059111 and 8857670060. Panther Creek flows westward through the wetland and then turns north, paralleling SR-167. Surface seeps as well as Streams B and C provide additional sources of hydrology along the south side of Wetland A. The wetland is approximately two kilometers long and extends approximately 1.8 kilometers north of the study area along the east side of Highway 167 (COR Maps). The eastern edge of Wetland A was delineated on-site. The south section of the wetland is entirely forested, although large emergent and scrub-shrub sections are present in the wetland north of the study area. The dominant trees present in this area are black cottonwood, red alder and willow species. There is a diverse understory with a shrub layer dominated by Himalayan blackberry, red-osier dogwood, salmonberry, and willow, with an emergent understory dominated by creeping buttercup, reed canarygrass, giant horsetail, and slough sedge. Rooting zone soil at a depth of 0-6 inches is a very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) sandy clay loam with dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/6) concentrations (redoximorphic features) located in the soil matrix (see Wetland Delineation Map; DP-3). Soil at a depth of 6-14 inches is entirely a black (2.5Y 2.5/1). Saturation was present to the soil surface, and the water table was present at a depth of six inches at the time of our study in February 2016. Wetland A is a Category II wetland. Under the 2014 Rating System, it scores seven points for water quality, seven points for hydrology, and seven points for habitat functions, for an overall score of 21 points. Streams Panther Creek Wetland and Stream Delineation Report – Renton Valley Medical Center Hardi, B. March 1, 2016 Page 5 Panther Creek enters the far east side of the study area through a culvert and flows west to the far west boundary of the study area. The creek is lined with Himalayan blackberry for the majority of the study area (Figure 4). A few mature coniferous and deciduous native trees provide sparse forested areas along Panther Creek in the eastern side of the study area (Parcels 3023059111 and 3023059034). According to WDFS SalmonScape, Panther Creek is used by coco and chum salmon species. Streams B and C Streams B and C enter the study area through culverts at the north end of the west parking lot. Stream C is a small tributary to Stream B and joins Stream B approximately 40 feet downstream of the culvert opening. Stream B flows north until joining with Wetland A, where a defined stream channel is no longer present. Stream B enters Wetland A approximately 100 feet south of where Panther Creek flows through the wetland. Streams B and C are hydrologically connected to Panther creek through Wetland A via sheetflow and inundated wetland areas, and there are no natural barriers to fish passage. These streams, therefore, have the potential to provide occasional fish habitat and are classified as Type F streams. Photos Figure 3 –Panther Creek enters study area through a culvert on the east side of the study area. Photo taken 2/1/2016. Wetland and Stream Delineation Report – Renton Valley Medical Center Hardi, B. March 1, 2016 Page 6 Figure 3 – Panther Creek looking west from culvert. Photo taken 2/1/2016. Figure 4 – Stream B looking northwest. Photo taken 2/1/2016. Wetland and Stream Delineation Report – Renton Valley Medical Center Hardi, B. March 1, 2016 Page 7 Local Regulations Critical areas in the City of Renton are regulated in the Renton Municipal Code (RMC), Title IV Development Regulations, Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Overlay District, 4-3-050 Critical Areas Regulations. In addition to critical area buffer setbacks, buildings and other structures must be set back 15 feet from the edges of wetland, stream, and habitat conservation area buffers. However, the City may impose or allow modifications to standard buffer widths of wetland and stream critical areas under certain circumstances. Wetlands According to RMC 4-3-050-G.9, wetlands are classified based on the 2014 Rating System (Hruby). Wetland buffers are measured from the wetland edge and are based upon the wetland rating, associated habitat score, and impact of land use. The adjacent land use would not be considered low intensity, therefore the buffer width for “all other land uses” applies. Wetland A is a category II wetland that rates as “moderate” for habitat functions, meaning it has a buffer width of 150 feet. Table 1. Wetland rating and associated buffer width. Wetland Name 2014 Ecology Wetland Rating Category Standard Buffer Width (ft) Water Quality Hydrology Habitat Total Wetland A 7 7 7 21 II 150 Wetland delineations are valid in the City of Renton for up to five years from the study date of completion. This period may be extended if it can be confirmed that on-site conditions have not changed. Alternate buffer widths may be approved by the City of Renton if a detailed wetland study is submitted with clear rationale for why the standard buffer widths are unnecessary and how the alternate buffer widths satisfy criteria identified based on best available science (RMC 4-3-050-G.9.d.ii). There are opportunities for buffer averaging and/or buffer reduction detailed in RMC 4- 3-050-I.3. A wetland buffer may be reduced if the reduced buffer will function better than the standard buffer, if it is never less than 75% of the standard buffer width, and if there are no slopes greater than 15%. Buffer averaging may be permitted such that the buffer is not reduced more than 25% of the standard buffer if it can be demonstrated that the proposed buffer is based on best available science. Reductions of greater than 75% require a variance. Buffer enhancement may also be necessary on a case-by-case basis. Wetland and Stream Delineation Report – Renton Valley Medical Center Hardi, B. March 1, 2016 Page 8 These modification options can be considered in more detail during design and impact assessment phases as the project progresses. Streams Streams are classified based on Washington State’s Permanent Water Typing System (WAC 222-16-030, RMC 4-3-050-G.7.a). Status as Shoreline of the State, permanence of flow, and presence of fish or fish habitat are considered to make the stream class determination. Stream buffers are measured from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Type F streams are regulated under RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas Regulations. A summary of stream types and buffer widths is provided in Table 2, below. Table 2. Summary of stream classifications and associated standard buffer widths. Stream Name Stream Type Standard Buffer Width (ft) Panther Creek Type F 115 Stream B Type F 115 Stream C Type F 115 If the stream buffer extends into a protected slope or a high landslide hazard, the stream buffer will be extended to the boundary of the protected slope or landslide hazard (RMC 4-3-050-G.2). The slopes of the ravine by the west side of Panther Creek in the study area are mapped as erosion hazard areas (not a protected slope or landslide hazard area) by King County iMap, although the standard wetland and stream buffers are more encumbering than the erosion hazard area. Further assessment by a geotechnical expert may be required in these areas. If a stream is adjacent to other high functioning critical areas, such as other streams or wetlands, the buffer may also be extended to the buffer of the other protected critical area to maintain contiguous vegetated corridors between streams and other critical areas (RMC 4-3-050-G.7.d.ii). There are options for buffer reduction or averaging listed in RMC 4-3-050-I.2. With buffer reduction, the minimum width possible for an F-type stream is 90 feet. Buffer averaging would also require enhancement and would need to preserve the original total area. The minimum buffer width at any point is 75 feet for F-type streams. Both buffer reduction and buffer averaging would need to be approved by the City of Renton. These modification options can be considered during design and impact assessment phases as the project progresses. All buffer reduction proposals must also first satisfy the mitigation sequencing criteria. This includes a showing of the steps that were taken to avoid the need for buffer reduction, including alternative proposals that were considered. Engineering feasibility, safety, and cost can all be considered as part of the justification for buffer reduction. If it can be demonstrated that a proposal cannot be redesigned to avoid buffer reduction, Wetland and Stream Delineation Report – Renton Valley Medical Center Hardi, B. March 1, 2016 Page 9 then it must be shown how the proposal minimizes the modification to the greatest extent feasible. State and Federal Regulations Wetlands and streams are regulated by the Corps under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Any filling of Waters of the U.S., including wetlands (except isolated wetlands), would likely require notification and permits from the Corps. Wetland A would not be considered isolated due to its connection to Panther Creek. Federally permitted actions that could affect endangered species (i.e. salmon or bull trout) may also require a biological assessment study and consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service. Application for Corps permits may also require an individual 401 Water Quality Certification and Coastal Zone Management Consistency determination from the Washington Department of Ecology and a cultural resource study in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. In general, neither the Corps nor Ecology regulates wetland buffers, unless direct impacts are proposed. When direct impacts are proposed, mitigated wetlands may be required to employ buffers based on Corps and Ecology joint regulatory guidance. The information contained in this letter or report is based on the application of technical guidelines currently accepted as the best available science and in conjunction with the manuals and criteria outlined in the methods section. All discussions, conclusions and recommendations reflect the best professional judgment of the author(s) and are based upon information available to us at the time the study was conducted. All work was completed within the constraints of budget, scope, property access, and timing. The findings of this report are subject to verification and agreement by the appropriate County, State and Federal regulatory authorities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Please call if you have any questions or if we can provide you with any additional information. Sincerely, Jasmine Palmer Ryan Kahlo, PWS Ecologist Ecologist Enclosures US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version 750 Sixth Street South Kirkland, Washington 98033 (425) 822-5242 watershedco.com WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Supplement to the 1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual Project Site: Renton Valley Medical Center Sampling Date: 2/1/2016 Applicant/Owner: Renton Valley Medical Center Sampling Point: DP- 1 Investigator: R.Kahlo, J. Palmer City/County: Renton Sect., Township, Range: S 30 T 23N R 05E State: WA Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Slope Slope (%): <5 Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? ☒ Yes ☐ No (If no, explain in remarks.) Are “Normal Circumstances” present on the site? ☒ Yes ☐ No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Are Vegetation☐, Soil ☐, or Hydrology ☐ significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation☐, Soil ☐, or Hydrology ☐ naturally problematic SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Is the Sampling Point within a Wetland? Yes ☐ No ☒ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Remarks: Click here to enter text. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 5m diam.) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet 1. Populus balsamifera 40 Y FAC Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4. 40 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3m diam.) 1. Prevalence Index Worksheet 2. Total % Cover of Multiply by 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1m diam.) Column totals (A) (B) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 20 Y FACW 2. Equisetum telmateia 15 Y FACW Prevalence Index = B / A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators 5. ☒ Dominance test is > 50% 6. ☐ Prevalence test is ≤ 3.0 * 7. Morphological Adaptations * (provide supporting 8. ☐ data in remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ☐ Wetland Non-Vascular Plants * 10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation * (explain) 11. 35 = Total Cover * Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ 1. Hedera helix 5 Y FACU 2. 5 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: Remarks: DP- 1 US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version SOIL Sampling Point – DP-1 HYDROLOGY Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-6 10YR 2/2 100 Clay loam 6-12 10YR 2/2 85 5YR 3/4 15 C M, PL Clay loam 12-15 2.5Y 3/2 70 5YR 3/4 30 C M, PL Loamy sand 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Loc: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3 ☐ Histosol (A1) ☐ Sandy Redox (S5) ☐ 2cm Muck (A10) ☐ Histic Epipedon (A2) ☐ Stripped Matrix (S6) ☐ Red Parent Material (TF2) ☐ Black Histic (A3) ☐ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ☐ Other (explain in remarks) ☐ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ☐ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ☐ ☐ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ☐ Depleted Matrix (F3) ☐ Thick Dark Surface (A12) ☒ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Type: ________________________________________ Depth (inches): _____________________________________ Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ☐ Surface water (A1) ☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☐ High Water Table (A2) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Drainage Patterns (B10) ☐ Saturation (A3) ☐ Salt Crust (B11) ☐ Dry-Season Water Table (C2) ☐ Water Marks (B1) ☐ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) ☐ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ☐ Sediment Deposits (B2) ☐ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ☐ Geomorphic Position (D2) ☐ Drift Deposits (B3) ☐ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ☐ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ☐ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ☐ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ☐ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ☐ Iron Deposits (B5) ☐ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ☐ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ☐ Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ☐ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ☐ Frost-Heave Hummocks ☐ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ☐ Other (explain in remarks) Field Observations Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Surface Water Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): Water Table Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): 16 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): 16 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Soil moist but not saturated US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version 750 Sixth Street South Kirkland, Washington 98033 (425) 822-5242 watershedco.com WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Supplement to the 1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual Project Site: Renton Valley Medical Center Sampling Date: 2/1/2016 Applicant/Owner: Renton Valley Medical Center Sampling Point: DP- 2 Investigator: R.Kahlo, J. Palmer City/County: Renton Sect., Township, Range: S 30 T 23N R 05E State: WA Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Terrace Slope (%): 3 Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? ☒ Yes ☐ No (If no, explain in remarks.) Are “Normal Circumstances” present on the site? ☒ Yes ☐ No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Are Vegetation☐, Soil ☐, or Hydrology ☐ significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation☐, Soil ☐, or Hydrology ☐ naturally problematic SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Is the Sampling Point within a Wetland? Yes ☐ No ☒ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Remarks: Click here to enter text. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 5m diam.) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet 1. Populus balsamifera 55 Y FAC Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 2. Salix lasiandra 80 Y FACW 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4. 135 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3m diam.) 1. Cornus sericea 70 Y FACW Prevalence Index Worksheet 2. Total % Cover of Multiply by 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 70 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1m diam.) Column totals (A) (B) 1. 2. Prevalence Index = B / A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators 5. ☒ Dominance test is > 50% 6. ☐ Prevalence test is ≤ 3.0 * 7. Morphological Adaptations * (provide supporting 8. ☐ data in remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ☐ Wetland Non-Vascular Plants * 10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation * (explain) 11. = Total Cover * Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ 1. Rubus armeniacus 5 Y FACU 2. 5 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: Remarks: DP- 2 US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version SOIL Sampling Point – DP-2 HYDROLOGY Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-6 10YR 3/2 100 Sandy loam 6-9 10YR 3/2 80 7.5YR 4/6 20 C M Loamy sand 9-14 10YR 3/2 85 7.5YR 3/4 15 C M Sandy loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Loc: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3 ☐ Histosol (A1) ☐ Sandy Redox (S5) ☐ 2cm Muck (A10) ☐ Histic Epipedon (A2) ☐ Stripped Matrix (S6) ☐ Red Parent Material (TF2) ☐ Black Histic (A3) ☐ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ☐ Other (explain in remarks) ☐ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ☐ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ☐ ☐ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ☐ Depleted Matrix (F3) ☐ Thick Dark Surface (A12) ☒ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Type: ________________________________________ Depth (inches): _____________________________________ Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ☐ Surface water (A1) ☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☐ High Water Table (A2) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Drainage Patterns (B10) ☐ Saturation (A3) ☐ Salt Crust (B11) ☐ Dry-Season Water Table (C2) ☐ Water Marks (B1) ☐ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) ☐ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ☐ Sediment Deposits (B2) ☐ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ☐ Geomorphic Position (D2) ☐ Drift Deposits (B3) ☐ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ☐ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ☐ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ☐ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ☐ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ☐ Iron Deposits (B5) ☐ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ☐ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ☐ Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ☐ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ☐ Frost-Heave Hummocks ☐ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ☐ Other (explain in remarks) Field Observations Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Surface Water Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): Water Table Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Damp, not saturated. Saturated at 14 inches. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version 750 Sixth Street South Kirkland, Washington 98033 (425) 822-5242 watershedco.com WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Supplement to the 1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual Project Site: Renton Valley Medical Center Sampling Date: 2/1/2016 Applicant/Owner: Renton Valley Medical Center Sampling Point: DP- 3 Investigator: R.Kahlo, J. Palmer City/County: Renton Sect., Township, Range: S 30 T 23N R 05E State: WA Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Depression Slope (%): <5 Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? ☒ Yes ☐ No (If no, explain in remarks.) Are “Normal Circumstances” present on the site? ☒ Yes ☐ No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Are Vegetation☐, Soil ☐, or Hydrology ☐ significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation☐, Soil ☐, or Hydrology ☐ naturally problematic SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Is the Sampling Point within a Wetland? Yes ☒ No ☐ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Remarks: Click here to enter text. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 5m diam.) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet 1. Populus balsamifera 10 Y FAC Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A) 2. Acer macrophyllum 20 Y FACU 3. Salix lasiandra 5 N FACW Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 7 (B) 4. 35 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 57% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3m diam.) 1. Oemleria cerasiformis 15 Y FACU Prevalence Index Worksheet 2. Rubus spectabilis 10 Y FAC Total % Cover of Multiply by 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 35 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1m diam.) Column totals (A) (B) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 60 Y FACW 2. Equisetum telmateia 20 Y FACW Prevalence Index = B / A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators 5. ☒ Dominance test is > 50% 6. ☐ Prevalence test is ≤ 3.0 * 7. Morphological Adaptations * (provide supporting 8. ☐ data in remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ☐ Wetland Non-Vascular Plants * 10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation * (explain) 11. 80 = Total Cover * Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ 1. Rubus armeniacus 5 Y FACU 2. 5 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: Remarks: DP- 3 US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version SOIL Sampling Point – DP-3 HYDROLOGY Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-6 10YR 3/1 90 10YR 3/6 10 C M Sandy Clay loam 6-14 10Y 2.5/1 100 Loamy sand 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Loc: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3 ☐ Histosol (A1) ☐ Sandy Redox (S5) ☐ 2cm Muck (A10) ☐ Histic Epipedon (A2) ☐ Stripped Matrix (S6) ☐ Red Parent Material (TF2) ☐ Black Histic (A3) ☐ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ☐ Other (explain in remarks) ☐ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ☐ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ☐ ☐ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ☐ Depleted Matrix (F3) ☐ Thick Dark Surface (A12) ☒ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Type: ________________________________________ Depth (inches): _____________________________________ Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ☐ Surface water (A1) ☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☒ High Water Table (A2) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Drainage Patterns (B10) ☒ Saturation (A3) ☐ Salt Crust (B11) ☐ Dry-Season Water Table (C2) ☐ Water Marks (B1) ☐ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) ☐ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ☐ Sediment Deposits (B2) ☐ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ☐ Geomorphic Position (D2) ☐ Drift Deposits (B3) ☐ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ☐ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ☐ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ☐ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ☐ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ☐ Iron Deposits (B5) ☐ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ☐ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ☐ Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ☐ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ☐ Frost-Heave Hummocks ☐ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ☐ Other (explain in remarks) Field Observations Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Surface Water Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): Water Table Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): 6 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): surface Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version 750 Sixth Street South Kirkland, Washington 98033 (425) 822-5242 watershedco.com WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Supplement to the 1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual Project Site: Renton Valley Medical Center Sampling Date: 2/4/2016 Applicant/Owner: Renton Valley Medical Center Sampling Point: DP- 4 Investigator: R. Whitson, J. Palmer City/County: Renton Sect., Township, Range: S 30 T 23N R 05E State: WA Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Hillslope Slope (%): <5 Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? ☒ Yes ☐ No (If no, explain in remarks.) Are “Normal Circumstances” present on the site? ☒ Yes ☐ No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Are Vegetation☐, Soil ☐, or Hydrology ☐ significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation☐, Soil ☐, or Hydrology ☐ naturally problematic SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ Is the Sampling Point within a Wetland? Yes ☐ No ☒ Hydric Soils Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Remarks: Click here to enter text. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 5m diam.) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet 1. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4. = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3m diam.) 1. Prevalence Index Worksheet 2. Total % Cover of Multiply by 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 35 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1m diam.) Column totals (A) (B) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 90 Y FACW 2. Poa sp. 30 Y FAC Prevalence Index = B / A = 3. Ranunculus repens 60 Y FAC 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators 5. ☒ Dominance test is > 50% 6. ☐ Prevalence test is ≤ 3.0 * 7. Morphological Adaptations * (provide supporting 8. ☐ data in remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ☐ Wetland Non-Vascular Plants * 10. ☐ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation * (explain) 11. 80 = Total Cover * Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ☒ No ☐ 1. Rubus armeniacus 5 Y FACU 2. 5 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: Remarks: DP- 4 US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version SOIL Sampling Point – DP-4 HYDROLOGY Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-3.5 10YR 2/1 100 Loamy sand 3.5-12 10YR 3/2 100 Sandy loam dry 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Loc: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3 ☐ Histosol (A1) ☐ Sandy Redox (S5) ☐ 2cm Muck (A10) ☐ Histic Epipedon (A2) ☐ Stripped Matrix (S6) ☐ Red Parent Material (TF2) ☐ Black Histic (A3) ☐ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ☐ Other (explain in remarks) ☐ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ☐ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ☐ ☐ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ☐ Depleted Matrix (F3) ☐ Thick Dark Surface (A12) ☐ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic ☐ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ☐ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ☐ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ☐ Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric soil present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Type: ________________________________________ Depth (inches): _____________________________________ Remarks: No redox. Some large gravel at bottom of pit. Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ☐ Surface water (A1) ☐ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) ☐ High Water Table (A2) ☐ Water-Stained Leaves (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) ☐ Drainage Patterns (B10) ☐ Saturation (A3) ☐ Salt Crust (B11) ☐ Dry-Season Water Table (C2) ☐ Water Marks (B1) ☐ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) ☐ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ☐ Sediment Deposits (B2) ☐ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ☐ Geomorphic Position (D2) ☐ Drift Deposits (B3) ☐ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ☐ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ☐ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ☐ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ☐ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ☐ Iron Deposits (B5) ☐ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ☐ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ☐ Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ☐ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ☐ Frost-Heave Hummocks ☐ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ☐ Other (explain in remarks) Field Observations Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Surface Water Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): Water Table Present? Yes ☐ No ☒ Depth (in): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes ☒ No ☐ Depth (in): 0-4 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Top 4 inches saturated from precipitation. Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 1 RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): Wetland A Date of site visit: 2/1/2016 Rated by: J. Palmer, R. Kahlo Trained by Ecology? ☒Y ☐N Date of training: 09/2014 HGM Class used for rating: Depressional Wetland has multiple HGM classes? ☒Y ☐N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map: King Count iMap, GoogleEarth OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY (based on functions ☒ or special characteristics ☐) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS ☐ Category I – Total score = 23 - 27 ☒ Category II – Total score = 20 - 22 ☐ Category III – Total score = 16 - 19 ☐ Category IV – Total score = 9 - 15 FUNCTION Improving Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Circle the appropriate ratings Site Potential H M L H M L H M L Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL Score Based on Ratings 7 7 7 21 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV None of the above ☒ Score for each function based on three ratings (order of ratings is not important) 9 = H,H,H 8 = H,H,M 7 = H,H,L 7 = H,M,M 6 = H,M,L 6 = M,M,M 5 = H,L,L 5 = M,M,L 4 = M,L,L 3 = L,L,L Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 2 Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4 1 Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 2 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1 2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 2 Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 3 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 4 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 5 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 6 Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Ponded depressions R 1.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) R 2.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2 Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3 Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) L 2.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3 Slope Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants (can be added to figure above) S 4.1 Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 3 HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? ☒NO – go to 2 ☐YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe – go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. ☒NO – go to 3 ☐YES – The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ☐The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; ☐At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). ☒NO – go to 4 ☐YES – The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ☐The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), ☐The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks, ☐The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. ☒NO – go to 5 ☐YES – The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ☐The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, ☐The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 4 ☒NO – go to 6 ☐YES – The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. ☒NO – go to 7 ☐YES – The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. ☒NO – go to 8 ☐YES – The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM class to use in rating Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary of depression Depressional Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland is Slope + Depressional + Riverine Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 5 DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). points = 3 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet. points = 2 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 1 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1 1 D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions).Yes = 4 No = 0 0 D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub-shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes): Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 1/2 of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants < 1/10 of area points = 0 5 D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is > ½ total area of wetland points = 4 Area seasonally ponded is > ¼ total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is < ¼ total area of wetland points = 0 4 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above 10 Rating of Site Potential If score is: ☐12-16 = H ☒6-11 = M ☐0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1-D 2.3? Source Yes = 1 No = 0 0 Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above 2 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: ☐3 or 4 = H ☒1 or 2 = M ☐0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 D 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality (answer YES if there is a TMDL for the basin in which the unit is found)? Yes = 2 No = 0 2 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 4 Rating of Value If score is: ☒2-4 = H ☐1 = M ☐0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 6 DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outletpoints = 2 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points = 1 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 0 0 D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part. Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 5 Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 3 The wetland is a “headwater” wetland points = 3 Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in) points = 0 5 D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself. The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points = 5 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit points = 3 The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0 Entire wetland is in the Flats class points = 5 0 Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above 5 Rating of Site Potential If score is: ☐12-16 = H ☐6-11 = M ☒0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site? D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at >1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above 3 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: ☒3 = H ☐1 or 2 = M ☐0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest score if more than one condition is met. The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down-gradient into areas where flooding has damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds):  Flooding occurs in a sub-basin that is immediately down-gradient of unit. points = 2  Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient. points = 1 Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub-basin. points = 1 The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why points = 0 There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points = 0 2 D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes = 2 No = 0 0 Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above 2 Rating of Value If score is: ☒2-4 = H ☐1 = M ☐0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 7 These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of ¼ ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked. ☒ Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 ☒ Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 ☒ Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1 ☒ Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If the unit has a Forested class, check if: ☒ The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon 4 H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). ☐ Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 ☒ Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 ☐ Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 ☒ Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0 ☒ Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland ☐ Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland ☐ Lake Fringe wetland 2 points ☐ Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points 2 H 1.3. Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2. Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 5 - 19 species points = 1 < 5 species points = 0 2 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams in this row are HIGH = 3points 3 Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 8 H 1.5. Special habitat features: Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points. ☒ Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long). ☒ Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland ☒ Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m) ☐ Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) ☒ At least ¼ ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) ☐ Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of strata) 4 Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above 15 Rating of Site Potential If score is: ☒15-18 = H ☐7-14 = M ☐0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site? H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: % undisturbed habitat: 2.6% + [(0.4% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2]: 2.8% If total accessible habitat is: > 1/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2 10-19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1 < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. Calculate: % undisturbed habitat: 10.4% + [(6.7% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2]: = 13.8% Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches points = 1 Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 1 H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2) ≤ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 -2 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above -1 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: ☐4-6 = H ☐1-3 = M ☒< 1 = L Record the rating on the first page H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score that applies to the wetland being rated. Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2 ☒ It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page) ☐ It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists) ☐ It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species ☐ It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources ☐ It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1 Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0 2 Rating of Value If score is: ☒2 = H ☐1 = M ☐0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 9 WDFW Priority Habitats Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat. ☐ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha). ☐ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report). ☐ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. ☐ Old-growth/Mature forests: Old-growth west of Cascade crest – Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi- layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests – Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest. ☐ Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 – see web link above). ☒ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. ☐ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 – see web link above). ☒ Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. ☐ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report – see web link on previous page). ☐ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. ☐ Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. ☐ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. ☒ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 10 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Wetland Type Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met. Category SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? ☐ The dominant water regime is tidal, ☐ Vegetated, and ☐ With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt ☐Yes –Go to SC 1.1 ☒No= Not an estuarine wetland SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? ☐Yes = Category I ☐No - Go to SC 1.2 Cat. I SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? ☐ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25) ☐ At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. ☐ The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. ☐Yes = Category I ☐No= Category II Cat. I Cat. II SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV) SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High Conservation Value? ☐Yes – Go to SC 2.2 ☒No – Go to SC 2.3 SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? ☐Yes = Category I ☐No = Not a WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf ☐Yes – Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 ☒No = Not a WHCV SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on their website? ☐Yes = Category I ☐No = Not a WHCV Cat. I SC 3.0. Bogs Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? ☐Yes – Go to SC 3.3 ☒No – Go to SC 3.2 SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or pond? ☐Yes – Go to SC 3.3 ☒No = Is not a bog SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30% cover of plant species listed in Table 4? ☐Yes = Is a Category I bog ☐No – Go to SC 3.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory, you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog. SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy? ☐Yes = Is a Category I bog ☐No = Is not a bog Cat. I Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 11 SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA Department of Fish and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. ☐ Old-growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more. ☐ Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm). ☐Yes = Category I ☒No = Not a forested wetland for this section Cat. I SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? ☐ The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks ☐ The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom) ☐Yes – Go to SC 5.1 ☒No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? ☐ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100). ☐ At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. ☐ The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2) ☐Yes = Category I ☐No = Category II Cat. I Cat. II SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: ☐ Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103 ☐ Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105 ☐ Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 ☐Yes – Go to SC 6.1 ☒No = not an interdunal wetland for rating SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M for the three aspects of function)? ☐Yes = Category I ☐No – Go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger? ☐Yes = Category II ☐No – Go to SC 6.3 SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac? ☐Yes = Category III ☐No = Category IV Cat I Cat. II Cat. III Cat. IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics If you answered No for all types, enter “Not Applicable” on Summary Form NA Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 12 Wetland name or number Wetland A This page left blank intentionally 1 ECY 2014 Wetland Rating Form: Depressional figures Figure 1. Cowardin plant classes - D1.3, H1.1, H1.4 Figure 2. Hydrology: hydroperiods, outlets, and 150ft buffer - D1.1, D1.4, D4.1, H1.2, D2.2, D5.2 Figure 3. Contributing upland basin to wetland area - D4.3, D5.3 Figure 4. Accessible and undisturbed habitat 1km from wetland edge - H2.1, H2.2, H2.3 Figure 5. Screen-capture of 303(d) listed waters in basin - D3.1, D3.2 Figure 6. Screen-capture of TMDL list for WRIA - D3.3 Resources and Links: King County i-Map Google Earth ECY 303(d) list TMDL list 2 Figure 1. Cowardin plant classes - D1.3, H1.1, H1.4 Note: Boundaries depicted may not be to scale. They are sketches based on available data and best professional judgment. LEGEND Wetland boundary Permanent stream Palustrine emergent Palustrine scrub-shrub Palustrine forested 3 Figure 2. Hydrology: hydroperiods, outlets, and 150ft buffer - D1.1, D1.4, D4.1, H1.2, D2.2, D5.2 Note: Boundaries depicted may not be to scale. They are sketches based on available data and best professional judgment LEGEND Seasonally flooded Saturated only Permanently flowing stream Approx. 150-foot buffer Outlet 4 Figure 3. Contributing upland basin to wetland area - D4.3, D5.3 Note: Boundaries depicted may not be to scale. They are sketches based on available data and best professional judgment. LEGEND Wetland unit Approx. basin boundary 5 Figure 4. Accessible and undisturbed habitat 1km from wetland edge - H2.1, H2.2, H2.3 Note: Boundaries depicted may not be to scale. They are sketches based on available data and best professional judgment. LEGEND Wetland A Relatively undisturbed Moderately disturbed 1 km 6 Figure 5. Screen-capture of 303(d) listed waters in basin - D3.1, D3.2 LEGEND Wetland A Approximately 1 mile 7 Figure 6. Screen-capture of TMDL list for WRIA in which unit is found - D3.3 TPTPTPTP115.00'115.00'150.00'DP - 1DP - 2DP - 3DP - 4PANTHER CREEK, BOTH BANKS, TYPE F115'-0" STANDARD BUFFERWETLAND A, CATEGORY II150'-0" STANDARD BUFFERSTREAM B, BOTH BANKS, TYPE F115'-0" STANDARD BUFFERWETLAND A, CATEGORY II150'-0" STANDARD BUFFERSTREAM C, BOTH BANKS, TYPE F115'-0" STANDARD BUFFERPANTHER CREEK, BOTH BANKS, TYPE F115'-0" STANDARD BUFFERPANTHER CREEK, BOTH BANKS, TYPE F115'-0" STANDARD BUFFER150.00'DELINEATION WETLANDDELINEATED STREAM OHWMBUFFERDATA PITLEGENDVALLEY MEDICAL CENTERPROJECT MANAGER: DESIGNED: DRAFTED: CHECKED:SHEET SIZE:ORIGINAL PLAN IS 22" x 34".SCALE ACCORDINGLY.BY© Copyright- The Watershed CompanyDATEPRINTED BY FILENAMES c i e n c e & D e s i g n750 Sixth Street SouthKirkland WA 98033p 425.822.5242www.watershedco.comJOB NUMBER:SHEET NUMBER:SUBMITTALS & REVISIONSDESCRIPTIONDATENO.UW MEDICINE | VALLEY MEDICAL CENTERDELINEATION MAPBECKY HARDIFACILITIES PROJECT MANAGERKC PARCELS 885767-0100, -0060, -0050, AND 302305-9034RENTON, WA NL--LVJP, RK160113OF 11 02-26-16 INTERNAL REVIEW SET LV2/26/2016 LUCAS VANNICE 160113 DELINEATION MAP - 2016-02-25.DWGVICINITY MAPSNOTES1. CRITICAL AREAS DELINEATED BYTHE WATERSHED COMPANY ONFEBRUARY 1 AND 4, 20162. SURVEY RECEIVED FROM BUSH,ROED & HITCHINGS, INC. 2009MINOR AVE. E. SEATTLE, WA98102. (206) 323-4144DELINEATION MAPW1200'50'25'0100'PROJECT AREA The Watershed Company October 2016 Appendix B - I A P P E N D I X B Renton Valley Medical Center, Stream Buffer Mitigation Plan DWWDDDTPTPTPTPDNUPDN UP 400LOBBY 401STORSTAIR 8STAIR 7ELEV 4ELEV 5403STORAGEELEV 3115. 0 0 ' 115.00'150.00'DP - 1DP - 2DP - 3DP - 4PANTHER CREEK, LEFT BANK, TYPE F 115'-0" STANDARD BUFFERWETLAND A, CATEGORY II150'-0" STANDARD BUFFERSTREAM B, BOTH BANKS, TYPE F115'-0" STANDARD BUFFERWETLAND A, CATEGORY II150'-0" STANDARD BUFFERSTREAM C, BOTH BANKS, TYPE F115'-0" STANDARD BUFFERPANTHER CREEK, LEFT BANK, TYPE F 115'-0" STANDARD BUFFERPANTHER CREEK, LEFT BANK, TYPE F 115'-0" STANDARD BUFFER150.00'PROPOSED PARKING GARAGEDELINEATION WETLANDDELINEATED STREAM OHWMBUFFERDATA PITLEGENDVALLEY MEDICAL CENTERPROJECT MANAGER: DESIGNED: DRAFTED: CHECKED:SHEET SIZE:ORIGINAL PLAN IS 22" x 34".SCALE ACCORDINGLY.BY© Copyright- The Watershed CompanyDATE PRINTED BY FILENAME THEWATERSHEDCOMPANYS c i e n c e & D e s i g n750 Sixth Street SouthKirkland WA 98033p 425.822.5242www.watershedco.comJOB NUMBER:SHEET NUMBER:SUBMITTALS & REVISIONS DESCRIPTIONDATENO.RENTON VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER MITIGATION PLAN PREPARED FOR BECKY HARDI FACILITIES PROJECT MANAGER 400 S. 45RD STREET RENTON, WA 98055RKRK/KMBKMBRK160113OF 81 10-10-2016 REVIEW SET KMB 10/10/2016KYLE BRAUN 160113 DELINEATION MAP - 2016-02-25.DWG VICINITY MAPSNOTES1. CRITICAL AREAS DELINEATED BYTHE WATERSHED COMPANY ONFEBRUARY 1 AND 4, 20162. SURVEY RECEIVED FROM BUSH,ROED & HITCHINGS, INC. 2009MINOR AVE. E. SEATTLE, WA98102. (206) 323-4144EXISTING CONDITIONSW1200'50'25'0100'PROJECT AREASHEET INDEXW1 EXISTING CONDTIONSW2 IMPACTS ASSESSMENTW3 MITIGATION PLANW4 BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANW5 BUFFER AVERAGING PLANW6 TEMPORARY IMPACTS RESTORATION PLANW7 PLANTING INSTALLATION NOTES AND DETAILSW8 MITIGATION PLAN NOTES AND DETAILS STREAM OHWMBUFFER REDUCTION (MITIGATED THROUGH BUFFER AVERAGING) (3,422 SF)BUFFER REDUCTION (MITIGATED THROUGH BUFFER ENHANCEMENT) (1,948 SF)PROPOSED STREAM BUFFERSTANDARD STREAM BUFFERPROPOSED BSBLSTANDARD BSBLTEMPORARY BUFFER IMPACTS TO BE RESTORED AND ENHANCED (6,271 SF)SBSBDNUPSTAIR 7403STORAGELEGENDPROJECT MANAGER: DESIGNED: DRAFTED: CHECKED:SHEET SIZE:ORIGINAL PLAN IS 22" x 34".SCALE ACCORDINGLY.BY© Copyright- The Watershed CompanyDATE PRINTED BY FILENAME THEWATERSHEDCOMPANYS c i e n c e & D e s i g n750 Sixth Street SouthKirkland WA 98033p 425.822.5242www.watershedco.comJOB NUMBER:SHEET NUMBER:SUBMITTALS & REVISIONS DESCRIPTIONDATENO.RENTON VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER MITIGATION PLAN PREPARED FOR BECKY HARDI FACILITIES PROJECT MANAGER 400 S. 45RD STREET RENTON, WA 98055RKRK/KMBKMBRK160113OF 81 10-10-2016 REVIEW SET KMB 10/10/2016KYLE BRAUN 160113_RENTON_VAL_MED_MITIGATION_PLAN.DWGIMPACTS ASSESSMENTW240'10'5'080'TEMPORARY IMPACTSBUFFER REDUCTION THROUGH ENHANCEMENTBUFFER REDUCTION THROUGH ADDITION AND ENHANCEMENTPROPOSED PARKING GARAGEEXISTING PARKING GARAGE TPSBSBSBSBDNUPSTAIR 7403STORAGESTREAM OHWMBUFFER ADDITION THROUGH AVERAGING AND ENHANCEMENT PLANTING AREA (3,422 SF)BUFFER REDUCTION (MITIGATED THROUGH BUFFER AVERAGING) (3,422 SF)BUFFER ENHANCEMENT (3,896 SF)BUFFER REDUCTION (MITIGATED THROUGH BUFFER ENHANCEMENT) (1,948 SF)PROPOSED STREAM BUFFERSTANDARD STREAM BUFFERPROPOSED BSBLTEMPORARY BUFFER IMPACTSPROJECT MANAGER: DESIGNED: DRAFTED: CHECKED:SHEET SIZE:ORIGINAL PLAN IS 22" x 34".SCALE ACCORDINGLY.BY© Copyright- The Watershed CompanyDATE PRINTED BY FILENAME THEWATERSHEDCOMPANYS c i e n c e & D e s i g n750 Sixth Street SouthKirkland WA 98033p 425.822.5242www.watershedco.comJOB NUMBER:SHEET NUMBER:SUBMITTALS & REVISIONS DESCRIPTIONDATENO.RENTON VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER MITIGATION PLAN PREPARED FOR BECKY HARDI FACILITIES PROJECT MANAGER 400 S. 45RD STREET RENTON, WA 98055RKRK/KMBKMBRK160113OF 81 10-10-2016 REVIEW SET KMB 10/10/2016KYLE BRAUN 160113_RENTON_VAL_MED_MITIGATION_PLAN.DWGMITIGATION PLANW380'20'10'040'PROPOSED BUFFER ENHANCEMENTBUFFER REDUCTION THROUGH AVERAGINGEXISTING PARKING GARAGEPROPOSED BUFFER ADDITION THROUGHAVERAGING AND ENHANCEMENTLEGENDPROPOSED PARKING GARAGEBUFFER REDUCTION THROUGH ENHANCEMENT STREAM OHWMSILT FENCE (SHEET W7, DETAIL 1)SPLIT RAIL FENCE (SHEET W8, DETAIL 1)TREESACER MACROPHYLLUM / BIGLEAF MAPLEPSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII / DOUGLAS-FIRPOPULUS BALSAMIFERA / COTTONWOODSHRUBSROSA GYMNOCARPA / BALDHIP ROSEMAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM / TALL OREGON GRAPEOEMLERIA CERASIFORMIS / OSO BERRYRUBUS SPECTABILIS / SALMONBERRYSYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS / SNOWBERRYGROUNDCOVERSPOLYSTICHUM MUNITUM / SWORD FERNQTY1810101818181818150SPACING9'-0" O.C.9'-0" O.C.9'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.2'-0" O.C.SIZE2 GAL.2 GAL.2 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.PROJECT MANAGER: DESIGNED: DRAFTED: CHECKED:SHEET SIZE:ORIGINAL PLAN IS 22" x 34".SCALE ACCORDINGLY.BY© Copyright- The Watershed CompanyDATE PRINTED BY FILENAME THEWATERSHEDCOMPANYS c i e n c e & D e s i g n750 Sixth Street SouthKirkland WA 98033p 425.822.5242www.watershedco.comJOB NUMBER:SHEET NUMBER:SUBMITTALS & REVISIONS DESCRIPTIONDATENO.RENTON VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER MITIGATION PLAN PREPARED FOR BECKY HARDI FACILITIES PROJECT MANAGER 400 S. 45RD STREET RENTON, WA 98055RKRK/KMBKMBRK160113OF 81 10-10-2016 REVIEW SET KMB 10/10/2016KYLE BRAUN 160113_RENTON_VAL_MED_MITIGATION_PLAN.DWGBUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANW420'5'2.5'010'LEGENDBUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANTING SCHEDULE (3,896 SF)SOIL PREPARATIONSTEP 1STEP 2STEP 3STEP 4MIN. 6"PLANTING AREA PREPARATIONSTEP 1REMOVE INVASIVE SPECIES. ADDRESSCOMPACTION TO A MINIMUM SIX (6) INCHDEPTH. COMPACTION LEVELS SHOULD BEAPPROPRIATE FOR ROOT GROWTH(75-85% PROCTOR DENSITY) OR ASOTHERWISE APPROVED BY RESTORATIONSPECIALIST. DRAINAGE RATE SHALL BEBETWEEN 1 - 5 INCHES PER HOUR OR ASOTHERWISE APPROVED BY THERESTORATION SPECIALIST. WORK WITHINROOT ZONES SHALL BE DONE BY HAND.STEP 2PLACE THREE (3) INCHES COMPOST ANDAMEND WITH DE-COMPACTED SOIL.STEP 3INSTALL WOOD CHIP MULCH 4" DEEP.STEP 4INSTALL PLANTS. (SEE PLANTING DETAIL.)4" WOODCHIPMULCH4"EXISTINGDEPTHVARIESSEQUENCE OF WORK - NOT TO SCALE3" STREAM OHWMSILT FENCE (SHEET W7, DETAIL 1)SPLIT RAIL FENCE (SHEET W8, DETAIL 1)SB S B DN UPSTAIR 7TREES / SPACING 9'-0" O.C.ACER MACROPHYLLUM / BIGLEAF MAPLEPSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII / DOUGLAS-FIRPOPULUS BALSAMIFERA / COTTONWOODSHRUBS / SPACING 5'-0" O.C.ROSA GYMNOCARPA / BALDHIP ROSEMAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM / TALL OREGON GRAPEOEMLERIA CERASIFORMIS / OSO BERRYRUBUS SPECTABILIS / SALMONBERRYSYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS / SNOWBERRYGROUNDCOVERS / 2'-0" O.C.POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM / SWORD FERNQTY15991818181818150SPACING9'-0" O.C.9'-0" O.C.9'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.2'-0" O.C.SIZE2 GAL.2 GAL.2 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.PROJECT MANAGER: DESIGNED: DRAFTED: CHECKED:SHEET SIZE:ORIGINAL PLAN IS 22" x 34".SCALE ACCORDINGLY.BY© Copyright- The Watershed CompanyDATE PRINTED BY FILENAME THEWATERSHEDCOMPANYS c i e n c e & D e s i g n750 Sixth Street SouthKirkland WA 98033p 425.822.5242www.watershedco.comJOB NUMBER:SHEET NUMBER:SUBMITTALS & REVISIONS DESCRIPTIONDATENO.RENTON VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER MITIGATION PLAN PREPARED FOR BECKY HARDI FACILITIES PROJECT MANAGER 400 S. 45RD STREET RENTON, WA 98055RKRK/KMBKMBRK160113OF 81 10-10-2016 REVIEW SET KMB 10/10/2016KYLE BRAUN 160113_RENTON_VAL_MED_MITIGATION_PLAN.DWGBUFFER AVERAGING PLANW520'5'2.5'010'LEGENDBUFFER AVERAGING PLANTING SCHEDULETEMPORARY IMPACTS TO BERESTORED PLANTING PLAN.SEE SHEET W6.SOIL PREPARATIONSTEP 1STEP 2STEP 3STEP 4MIN. 6"PLANTING AREA PREPARATIONSTEP 1REMOVE INVASIVE SPECIES. ADDRESSCOMPACTION TO A MINIMUM SIX (6) INCHDEPTH. COMPACTION LEVELS SHOULD BEAPPROPRIATE FOR ROOT GROWTH(75-85% PROCTOR DENSITY) OR ASOTHERWISE APPROVED BY RESTORATIONSPECIALIST. DRAINAGE RATE SHALL BEBETWEEN 1 - 5 INCHES PER HOUR OR ASOTHERWISE APPROVED BY THERESTORATION SPECIALIST. WORK WITHINROOT ZONES SHALL BE DONE BY HAND.STEP 2PLACE THREE (3) INCHES COMPOST ANDAMEND WITH DE-COMPACTED SOIL.STEP 3INSTALL WOOD CHIP MULCH 4" DEEP.STEP 4INSTALL PLANTS. (SEE PLANTING DETAIL.)4" WOODCHIPMULCH4"EXISTINGDEPTHVARIESSEQUENCE OF WORK - NOT TO SCALE3" STREAM OHWMTEMPORARY IMPACTS RESTORATION PLANTING AREA (6,271 SF)SILT FENCE (SHEET W7, DETAIL 1)SPLIT RAIL FENCE (SHEET W8, DETAIL 1)TREESACER MACROPHYLLUM / BIGLEAF MAPLEPSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII / DOUGLAS-FIRPOPULUS BALSAMIFERA / COTTONWOODSHRUBSROSA GYMNOCARPA / BALDHIP ROSEMAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM / TALL OREGON GRAPEOEMLERIA CERASIFORMIS / OSO BERRYRUBUS SPECTABILIS / SALMONBERRYSYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS / SNOWBERRYGROUNDCOVERSPOLYSTICHUM MUNITUM / SWORD FERNQTY2413132626262626300SPACING9'-0" O.C.9'-0" O.C.9'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.5'-0" O.C.2'-0" O.C..SIZE2 GAL.2 GAL.2 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.1 GAL.SBSTORAGEPROJECT MANAGER: DESIGNED: DRAFTED: CHECKED:SHEET SIZE:ORIGINAL PLAN IS 22" x 34".SCALE ACCORDINGLY.BY© Copyright- The Watershed CompanyDATE PRINTED BY FILENAME THEWATERSHEDCOMPANYS c i e n c e & D e s i g n750 Sixth Street SouthKirkland WA 98033p 425.822.5242www.watershedco.comJOB NUMBER:SHEET NUMBER:SUBMITTALS & REVISIONS DESCRIPTIONDATENO.RENTON VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER MITIGATION PLAN PREPARED FOR BECKY HARDI FACILITIES PROJECT MANAGER 400 S. 45RD STREET RENTON, WA 98055RKRK/KMBKMBRK160113OF 81 10-10-2016 REVIEW SET KMB 10/10/2016KYLE BRAUN 160113_RENTON_VAL_MED_MITIGATION_PLAN.DWGTEMPORARY IMPACTS RESTORATION PLANW640'10'5'020'LEGENDTEMPORARY IMPACTS PLANTING SCHEDULESOIL PREPARATIONSTEP 1STEP 2STEP 3STEP 4MIN. 6"PLANTING AREA PREPARATIONSTEP 1REMOVE INVASIVE SPECIES. ADDRESSCOMPACTION TO A MINIMUM SIX (6) INCHDEPTH. COMPACTION LEVELS SHOULD BEAPPROPRIATE FOR ROOT GROWTH(75-85% PROCTOR DENSITY) OR ASOTHERWISE APPROVED BY RESTORATIONSPECIALIST. DRAINAGE RATE SHALL BEBETWEEN 1 - 5 INCHES PER HOUR OR ASOTHERWISE APPROVED BY THERESTORATION SPECIALIST. WORK WITHINROOT ZONES SHALL BE DONE BY HAND.STEP 2PLACE THREE (3) INCHES COMPOST ANDAMEND WITH DE-COMPACTED SOIL.STEP 3INSTALL WOOD CHIP MULCH 4" DEEP.STEP 4INSTALL PLANTS. (SEE PLANTING DETAIL.)4" WOODCHIPMULCH4"EXISTINGDEPTHVARIESSEQUENCE OF WORK - NOT TO SCALE3" PROJECT MANAGER: DESIGNED: DRAFTED: CHECKED:SHEET SIZE:ORIGINAL PLAN IS 22" x 34".SCALE ACCORDINGLY.BY© Copyright- The Watershed CompanyDATE PRINTED BY FILENAME THEWATERSHEDCOMPANYS c i e n c e & D e s i g n750 Sixth Street SouthKirkland WA 98033p 425.822.5242www.watershedco.comJOB NUMBER:SHEET NUMBER:SUBMITTALS & REVISIONS DESCRIPTIONDATENO.RENTON VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER MITIGATION PLAN PREPARED FOR BECKY HARDI FACILITIES PROJECT MANAGER 400 S. 45RD STREET RENTON, WA 98055RKRK/KMBKMBRK160113OF 81 10-10-2016 REVIEW SET KMB 10/10/2016KYLE BRAUN 160113_RENTON_VAL_MED_MITIGATION_PLAN.DWGPLANT INSTALLATION NOTES AND DETAILSW7GENERAL NOTESQUALITY ASSURANCE1. PLANTS SHALL MEET OR EXCEED THE SPECIFICATIONS OFFEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LAWS REQUIRING INSPECTION FORPLANT DISEASE AND INSECT CONTROL.2. PLANTS SHALL BE HEALTHY, VIGOROUS, AND WELL-FORMED,WITH WELL DEVELOPED, FIBROUS ROOT SYSTEMS, FREE FROMDEAD BRANCHES OR ROOTS. PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROMDAMAGE CAUSED BY TEMPERATURE EXTREMES, LACK OREXCESS OF MOISTURE, INSECTS, DISEASE, AND MECHANICALINJURY. PLANTS IN LEAF SHALL BE WELL FOLIATED AND OFGOOD COLOR. PLANTS SHALL BE HABITUATED TO THE OUTDOORENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS INTO WHICH THEY WILL BEPLANTED (HARDENED-OFF).3. TREES WITH DAMAGED, CROOKED, MULTIPLE OR BROKENLEADERS WILL BE REJECTED. WOODY PLANTS WITH ABRASIONSOF THE BARK OR SUN SCALD WILL BE REJECTED.4. NOMENCLATURE: PLANT NAMES SHALL CONFORM TO FLORA OFTHE PACIFIC NORTHWEST BY HITCHCOCK AND CRONQUIST,UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON PRESS, 1973 AND/OR TO A FIELDGUIDE TO THE COMMON WETLAND PLANTS OF WESTERNWASHINGTON & NORTHWESTERN OREGON, ED. SARAH SPEARCOOKE, SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY, 1997.DEFINITIONS1.PLANTS/PLANT MATERIALS. PLANTS AND PLANT MATERIALSSHALL INCLUDE ANY LIVE PLANT MATERIAL USED ON THEPROJECT. THIS INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO CONTAINERGROWN, B&B OR BAREROOT PLANTS; LIVE STAKES ANDFASCINES (WATTLES); TUBERS, CORMS, BULBS, ETC..; SPRIGS,PLUGS, AND LINERS.2.CONTAINER GROWN. CONTAINER GROWN PLANTS ARE THOSEWHOSE ROOTBALLS ARE ENCLOSED IN A POT OR BAG IN WHICHTHAT PLANT GREW.SUBSTITUTIONS1. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO OBTAIN SPECIFIEDMATERIALS IN ADVANCE IF SPECIAL GROWING, MARKETING OROTHER ARRANGEMENTS MUST BE MADE IN ORDER TO SUPPLYSPECIFIED MATERIALS.2. SUBSTITUTION OF PLANT MATERIALS NOT ON THE PROJECT LISTWILL NOT BE PERMITTED UNLESS AUTHORIZED IN WRITING BYTHE RESTORATION CONSULTANT.3. IF PROOF IS SUBMITTED THAT ANY PLANT MATERIAL SPECIFIED ISNOT OBTAINABLE, A PROPOSAL WILL BE CONSIDERED FOR USEOF THE NEAREST EQUIVALENT SIZE OR ALTERNATIVE SPECIES,WITH CORRESPONDING ADJUSTMENT OF CONTRACT PRICE.4. SUCH PROOF WILL BE SUBSTANTIATED AND SUBMITTED INWRITING TO THE CONSULTANT AT LEAST 30 DAYS PRIOR TOSTART OF WORK UNDER THIS SECTION.INSPECTION1. PLANTS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO INSPECTION AND APPROVAL BYTHE RESTORATION CONSULTANT FOR CONFORMANCE TOSPECIFICATIONS, EITHER AT TIME OF DELIVERY ON-SITE OR ATTHE GROWER'S NURSERY. APPROVAL OF PLANT MATERIALS ATANY TIME SHALL NOT IMPAIR THE SUBSEQUENT RIGHT OFINSPECTION AND REJECTION DURING PROGRESS OF THE WORK.2. PLANTS INSPECTED ON SITE AND REJECTED FOR NOT MEETINGSPECIFICATIONS MUST BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY FROM SITEOR RED-TAGGED AND REMOVED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.3. THE RESTORATION CONSULTANT MAY ELECT TO INSPECT PLANTMATERIALS AT THE PLACE OF GROWTH. AFTER INSPECTION ANDACCEPTANCE, THE RESTORATION CONSULTANT MAY REQUIRETHE INSPECTED PLANTS BE LABELED AND RESERVED FORPROJECT. SUBSTITUTION OF THESE PLANTS WITH OTHERINDIVIDUALS, EVEN OF THE SAME SPECIES AND SIZE, ISUNACCEPTABLE.MEASUREMENT OF PLANTS1. PLANTS SHALL CONFORM TO SIZES SPECIFIED UNLESSSUBSTITUTIONS ARE MADE AS OUTLINED IN THIS CONTRACT.2. HEIGHT AND SPREAD DIMENSIONS SPECIFIED REFER TO MAINBODY OF PLANT AND NOT BRANCH OR ROOT TIP TO TIP. PLANTDIMENSIONS SHALL BE MEASURED WHEN THEIR BRANCHES ORROOTS ARE IN THEIR NORMAL POSITION.3. WHERE A RANGE OF SIZE IS GIVEN, NO PLANT SHALL BE LESSTHAN THE MINIMUM SIZE AND AT LEAST 50% OF THE PLANTSSHALL BE AS LARGE AS THE MEDIAN OF THE SIZE RANGE.(EXAMPLE: IF THE SIZE RANGE IS 12" TO 18", AT LEAST 50% OFPLANTS MUST BE 15" TALL.).SUBMITTALSPROPOSED PLANT SOURCES1. WITHIN 45 DAYS AFTER AWARD OF THE CONTRACT, SUBMIT ACOMPLETE LIST OF PLANT MATERIALS PROPOSED TO BEPROVIDED DEMONSTRATING CONFORMANCE WITH THEREQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED. INCLUDE THE NAMES ANDADDRESSES OF ALL GROWERS AND NURSERIES.PRODUCT CERTIFICATES1. PLANT MATERIALS LIST - SUBMIT DOCUMENTATION TOCONSULTANT AT LEAST 30 DAYS PRIOR TO START OF WORKUNDER THIS SECTION THAT PLANT MATERIALS HAVE BEENORDERED. ARRANGE PROCEDURE FOR INSPECTION OF PLANTMATERIAL WITH CONSULTANT AT TIME OF SUBMISSION.2. HAVE COPIES OF VENDOR'S OR GROWERS' INVOICES ORPACKING SLIPS FOR ALL PLANTS ON SITE DURING INSTALLATION.INVOICE OR PACKING SLIP SHOULD LIST SPECIES BY SCIENTIFICNAME, QUANTITY, AND DATE DELIVERED (AND GENETIC ORIGIN IFTHAT INFORMATION WAS PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED).DELIVERY, HANDLING, & STORAGENOTIFICATIONCONTRACTOR MUST NOTIFY CONSULTANT 48 HOURS OR MORE INADVANCE OF DELIVERIES SO THAT CONSULTANT MAY ARRANGE FORINSPECTION.PLANT MATERIALS1.TRANSPORTATION - DURING SHIPPING, PLANTS SHALL BEPACKED TO PROVIDE PROTECTION AGAINST CLIMATE EXTREMES,BREAKAGE AND DRYING. PROPER VENTILATION ANDPREVENTION OF DAMAGE TO BARK, BRANCHES, AND ROOTSYSTEMS MUST BE ENSURED.2.SCHEDULING AND STORAGE - PLANTS SHALL BE DELIVERED ASCLOSE TO PLANTING AS POSSIBLE. PLANTS IN STORAGE MUSTBE PROTECTED AGAINST ANY CONDITION THAT IS DETRIMENTALTO THEIR CONTINUED HEALTH AND VIGOR.3.HANDLING - PLANT MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE HANDLED BY THETRUNK, LIMBS, OR FOLIAGE BUT ONLY BY THE CONTAINER, BALL,BOX, OR OTHER PROTECTIVE STRUCTURE, EXCEPT BAREROOTPLANTS SHALL BE KEPT IN BUNDLES UNTIL PLANTING AND THENHANDLED CAREFULLY BY THE TRUNK OR STEM.4.LABELS - PLANTS SHALL HAVE DURABLE, LEGIBLE LABELSSTATING CORRECT SCIENTIFIC NAME AND SIZE. TEN PERCENTOF CONTAINER GROWN PLANTS IN INDIVIDUAL POTS SHALL BELABELED. PLANTS SUPPLIED IN FLATS, RACKS, BOXES, BAGS, ORBUNDLES SHALL HAVE ONE LABEL PER GROUP.WARRANTYPLANT WARRANTYPLANTS MUST BE GUARANTEED TO BE TRUE TO SCIENTIFIC NAMEAND SPECIFIED SIZE, AND TO BE HEALTHY AND CAPABLE OFVIGOROUS GROWTH.REPLACEMENT1.PLANTS NOT FOUND MEETING ALL OF THE REQUIREDCONDITIONS AT THE CONSULTANT'S DISCRETION MUST BEREMOVED FROM SITE AND REPLACED IMMEDIATELY AT THECONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE.2.PLANTS NOT SURVIVING AFTER ONE YEAR TO BE REPLACED ATTHE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE.PLANT MATERIALGENERAL1. PLANTS SHALL BE NURSERY GROWN IN ACCORDANCE WITHGOOD HORTICULTURAL PRACTICES UNDER CLIMATICCONDITIONS SIMILAR TO OR MORE SEVERE THAN THOSE OF THEPROJECT SITE.2. PLANTS SHALL BE TRUE TO SPECIES AND VARIETY ORSUBSPECIES. NO CULTIVARS OR NAMED VARIETIES SHALL BEUSED UNLESS SPECIFIED AS SUCH.QUANTITIESSEE PLANT LIST ON ACCOMPANYING PLANS AND PLANT SCHEDULES.ROOT TREATMENT1.CONTAINER GROWN PLANTS (INCLUDES PLUGS): PLANT ROOTBALLS MUST HOLD TOGETHER WHEN THE PLANT IS REMOVEDFROM THE POT, EXCEPT THAT A SMALL AMOUNT OF LOOSE SOILMAY BE ON THE TOP OF THE ROOTBALL.2.PLANTS MUST NOT BE ROOT-BOUND; THERE MUST BE NOCIRCLING ROOTS PRESENT IN ANY PLANT INSPECTED.3.ROOTBALLS THAT HAVE CRACKED OR BROKEN WHEN REMOVEDFROM THE CONTAINER SHALL BE REJECTED.PLANT INSTALLATION SPECIFICATIONSScale: NTSTREE AND SHRUB PLANTING2NOTES:1. PLANTING PIT SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN (2)TIMES THE WIDTH OF THE ROOT BALL DIA.2. LOOSEN SIDES AND BOTTOMS OF PLANTING PIT3. SOAK PLANTING PIT AFTER PLANTING2X MIN DIA. ROOTBALLREMOVE FROM POT OR BURLAP & ROUGH-UPROOT BALL BEFORE INSTALLING. UNTANGLEAND STRAIGHTEN CIRCLING ROOTS - PRUNE IFNECESSARY. IF PLANT IS EXCEPTIONALLYROOT-BOUND, DO NOT PLANT AND RETURN TONURSERY FOR AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVESPECIFIED MULCH LAYER. HOLD BACK MULCHFROM TRUNK/STEMSFINISH GRADEREMOVE DEBRIS AND LARGE ROCKS FROM PLANTINGPIT AND SCARIFY SIDES AND BASE. BACKFILL WITHSPECIFIED SOIL. FIRM UP SOIL AROUND PLANT.Scale: NTSSILT FENCE1SILT FENCE FABRIC AND WIRE MESH BACKINGSHALL BE WIRED TO TOP, MIDDLE AND BOTTOMOF POSTSTEEL "T" POSTOR 2"x4"WOOD POSTS,OR EQUIVALENTSILT CONTAINMENT FENCEFABRIC: JOINTS IN FILTERFABRIC SHALL BE SPLICEDAT POSTS. USE STAPLES,WIRE RINGS, OREQUIVALENT TO ATTACHFABRIC TO POSTS.8' MAX.FINISH GRADELAKE / RIVER / WETLANDSECTIONELEVATIONKEY SILT FENCE BOTTOM IN 4" X 4" MINIMUMTRENCH BACKFILLED WITH NATIVE MATERIAL.TRENCH THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE FENCE WITHNO BREAKS.CUT-AWAYSHOWING2"X2", 14 GAUGEWIREMESH BACKINGSILT FENCE MAINTENANCE STANDARDS:1.ANY DAMAGE SHALL BE REPAIREDIMMEDIATELY.2.SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED WHENACCUMULATION EXCEEDS 6" IN DEPTH. PROJECT MANAGER: DESIGNED: DRAFTED: CHECKED:SHEET SIZE:ORIGINAL PLAN IS 22" x 34".SCALE ACCORDINGLY.BY© Copyright- The Watershed CompanyDATE PRINTED BY FILENAME THEWATERSHEDCOMPANYS c i e n c e & D e s i g n750 Sixth Street SouthKirkland WA 98033p 425.822.5242www.watershedco.comJOB NUMBER:SHEET NUMBER:SUBMITTALS & REVISIONS DESCRIPTIONDATENO.RENTON VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER MITIGATION PLAN PREPARED FOR BECKY HARDI FACILITIES PROJECT MANAGER 400 S. 45RD STREET RENTON, WA 98055RKRK/KMBKMBRK160113OF 81 10-10-2016 REVIEW SET KMB 10/10/2016KYLE BRAUN 160113_RENTON_VAL_MED_MITIGATION_PLAN.DWGMITIGATION PLAN NOTES AND DETAILSW8MITIGATION PLAN OVERVIEWTHE PROPOSED MITIGATION PLAN FULFILLS THE REQUIREMENTS OF RMC 4-3-050.H. IN ORDER TOALLOW FOR THE PROPOSED PARKING GARAGE EXPANSION AND ASSOCIATED GRADINGACTIVITIES, STREAM BUFFER MODIFICATION AND UNAVOIDABLE TEMPORARY STREAM BUFFERIMPACTS WILL OCCUR. BUFFER MODIFICATION WILL TAKE THE FORM OF REDUCTION WITHENHANCEMENT AND BUFFER AVERAGING WITH ENHANCEMENT. TEMPORARY STREAM BUFFERIMPACTS, WILL ALSO BE RESTORED AND ENHANCED IN-PLACE. BUFFER AVERAGING WILL OCCURAT A 1:1 RATIO, AND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT WILL OCCUR AT A 2:1 RATIO (ENHANCEMENT AREA :REDUCTION AREA).MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES1.WITHIN THE PROPOSED RESTORATION AREAS, ESTABLISH DENSE NATIVE VEGETATION THAT ISAPPROPRIATE TO THE ECO-REGION AND SITE.2.WHERE INDICATED ON THE PLAN, AREAS WITHIN THE RESTORATION AREA WILL REMAINSUBSTANTIALLY VEGETATED WITH A PREPONDERANCE OF NATIVE TREES, SHRUBS, ANDGROUNDCOVERS AND WILL CONTAIN LITTLE INVASIVE OR NOXIOUS WEED COVER.PERFORMANCE STANDARDSTHE STANDARDS LISTED BELOW WILL BE USED TO JUDGE THE SUCCESS OF THE INSTALLATIONOVER TIME. IF PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ARE MET AT THE END OF YEAR 5, THE SITE WILL THENBE DEEMED SUCCESSFUL AND THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY BOND WILL BE ELIGIBLE FORRELEASE BY THE CITY OF RENTON.1.SURVIVAL: ACHIEVE 100% SURVIVAL OF INSTALLED TREE, SHRUB, AND GROUNDCOVERPLANTINGS BY THE END OF YEAR 1. THIS STANDARD CAN BE MET THROUGH PLANTESTABLISHMENT OR THROUGH REPLANTING AS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THE REQUIREDNUMBERS. INDIVIDUAL GROUNDCOVER PLANTINGS CANNOT BE FEASIBLY COUNTED.THEREFORE, GROUNDCOVERS SHALL BE MONITORED FOR AREAS OF OBVIOUS MORTALITYAND APPROPRIATE REPLACEMENT QUANTITIES RECOMMENDED BY THE RESTORATIONPROFESSIONAL TO ENSURE SATISFACTION OF THE NATIVE COVER STANDARD (BELOW).2.NATIVE COVER:a.ACHIEVE 50% COVER OF NATIVE TREES, SHRUBS, AND GROUNDCOVERS BY YEAR 3. NATIVEVOLUNTEER SPECIES (BUT NOT GRASSES) MAY COUNT TOWARDS THIS COVER STANDARD.b.ACHIEVE 80% COVER OF NATIVE TREES, SHRUBS, AND GROUNDCOVERS BY YEAR 5. NATIVEVOLUNTEER SPECIES (BUT NOT GRASSES) MAY COUNT TOWARDS THIS COVER STANDARD.TREES AND SHRUBS MUST ACCOUNT FOR A MINIMUM OF 65% COVER.c.SPECIES DIVERSITY: ESTABLISH AT LEAST THREE NATIVE TREE SPECIES, FOUR NATIVESHRUB SPECIES AND ONE NATIVE GROUNDCOVER SPECIES BY YEAR 3 AND MAINTAIN THISDIVERSITY THROUGH YEAR 5. NATIVE VOLUNTEER SPECIES (BUT NOT NATURALIZEDGRASSES) MAY COUNT TOWARDS THIS STANDARD.d.INVASIVE COVER: AERIAL COVER FOR ALL NON-NATIVE, INVASIVE AND NOXIOUS WEEDSWITHIN THE BUFFER PLANTING AREAS WILL NOT EXCEED 10% AT ANY YEAR DURING THEMONITORING PERIOD. INVASIVE PLANTS ARE DEFINED AS THOSE LISTED BY THEWASHINGTON STATE NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL BOARD AS CLASS A, B, OR C.TECHNIQUES AND PLANSCONSTRUCTION NOTES AND SPECIFICATIONSGENERAL WORK SEQUENCE1.INSTALL SILT FENCING AROUND ALL CLEARING LIMITS.2.PREPARE THE PLANTING AREAS:a.REMOVE GRAVEL, FILL MATERIAL, GARBAGE, AND DEBRIS;b.CLEAR ALL HIMALAYAN BLACKBERRY AND ENGLISH IVY FROM THE PLANTING AREAS, MAKINGSURE TO REMOVE THE ROOTS.c.ROTOTILL TO DE-COMPACT SOILS AND INCORPORATED THREE INCHES OF COMPOST INTOTHE UPPER NINE INCHES OF THE SOIL. DO NOT ROTOTILL BENEATH THE EXISTING TREECANOPY.3.ALL PLANT INSTALLATION IS TO TAKE PLACE DURING THE DORMANT SEASON (OCTOBER 15TH -MARCH 1ST).a.PREPARE A PLANTING PIT FOR EACH PLANT AND INSTALL PER THE PLANTING DETAILS.b.APPLY A BLANKET APPLICATION OF WOODCHIP MULCH, FOUR INCHES THICK, ACROSS ALLPLANTING AREAS.4.INSTALL A TEMPORARY, ABOVE-GROUND IRRIGATION SYSTEM CAPABLE OF COVERING THEENTIRE PLANTING AREA.5.INSTALL A SPLIT RAIL FENCE BETWEEN DEVELOPED AREAS AND THE PLANTING AREAS PERDETAILS.SPECIFICATIONS1.COMPOST: CEDAR GROVE COMPOST OR EQUIVALENT PRODUCT. 100% VEGETABLE COMPOSTWITH NO APPRECIABLE QUANTITIES OF SAND, GRAVEL, SAWDUST, OR OTHER NON-ORGANICMATERIALS.2.FERTILIZER: SLOW RELEASE, GRANULAR PHOSPHOROUS-FREE FERTILIZER. FOLLOWMANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICATION. KEEP FERTILIZER IN A WEATHER-TIGHTCONTAINER WHILE ON SITE. NOTE THAT FERTILIZER IS TO BE APPLIED ONLY IN YEARS 2THROUGH 5 AND NOT IN THE FIRST YEAR.3.IRRIGATION SYSTEM: AUTOMATED SYSTEM CAPABLE OF DELIVERING AT LEAST TWO INCHESOF WATER PER WEEK FROM JUNE 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30 FOR THE FIRST TWO YEARSFOLLOWING INSTALLATION.4.RESTORATION PROFESSIONAL: THE WATERSHED COMPANY [(425) 822-5242] PERSONNEL, OROTHER PERSONS QUALIFIED TO EVALUATE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PROJECTS.5.WOOD CHIP MULCH: ARBORIST CHIPS (CHIPPED WOODY MATERIAL) APPROXIMATELY 1 TO 3INCHES IN MAXIMUM DIMENSION (NOT SAWDUST OR COARSE HOG FUEL). THIS MATERIAL ISCOMMONLY AVAILABLE IN LARGE QUANTITIES FROM ARBORISTS OR TREE-PRUNINGCOMPANIES. THIS MATERIAL IS SOLD AS “ANIMAL FRIENDLY HOG FUEL” AT PACIFIC TOPSOILS[(800) 884-7645]. MULCH MUST NOT CONTAIN APPRECIABLE QUANTITIES OF GARBAGE, PLASTIC,METAL, SOIL, AND DIMENSIONAL LUMBER OR CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITION DEBRIS.MONITORING PROGRAMMONITORING METHODSTHIS MONITORING PROGRAM IS DESIGNED TO TRACK THE SUCCESS OF THE MITIGATION SITE OVERTIME AND TO MEASURE THE DEGREE TO WHICH IT IS MEETING THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDSOUTLINED IN THE PRECEDING SECTION.AN AS-BUILT PLAN WILL BE PREPARED BY THE RESTORATION PROFESSIONAL (THE WATERSHEDCOMPANY [(425) 822-5242], OR OTHER PERSONS QUALIFIED TO EVALUATE ENVIRONMENTALRESTORATION PROJECTS) PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE MONITORING PERIOD. THE AS-BUILTPLAN WILL BE A MARK-UP OF THE PLANTING PLANS INCLUDED IN THIS PLAN SET. THE AS-BUILTPLAN WILL DOCUMENT ANY DEPARTURES IN PLANT PLACEMENT OR OTHER COMPONENTS FROMTHE PROPOSED PLAN. DURING THE AS-BUILT INSPECTION, THE MONITORING RESTORATION SPECIALIST SHALL INSTALLMONITORING TRANSECTS IN THE WETLAND BUFFER RESTORATION AREAS AND ESTABLISH PHOTOPOINTS. APPROXIMATE TRANSECT AND PHOTO POINT LOCATIONS SHALL BE MARKED ON THEAS-BUILT PLAN. AT LEAST SIX, 50-FOOT TRANSECTS SHALL BE ESTABLISHED IN THE PLANTINGAREAS, INCLUDING AT LEAST TWO IN EACH AREA - BUFFER ENHANCEMENT AREA, BUFFERADDITION WITH ENHANCEMENT AREA, AND THE TEMPORARY BUFFER DISTURBANCE/RESTORATIONAREA.MONITORING WILL TAKE PLACE TWICE ANNUALLY FOR FIVE YEARS, INCLUDING A SPRINGMAINTENANCE INSPECTION AND A FORMAL MONITORING INSPECTION TO OCCUR IN THE LATESUMMER OR EARLY FALL. YEAR 1 MONITORING WILL COMMENCE IN THE FIRST FALL SUBSEQUENTTO INSTALLATION.SPRING MONITORINGTHE SPRING MAINTENANCE INSPECTION SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING, REPORTED IN A BRIEFMEMO SUBMITTED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND/OR MAINTENANCE CREWS:1)CONDUCT A WEED AND MAINTENANCE INSPECTION IN THE SPRING TO IDENTIFY ANYMAINTENANCE NEEDS NECESSARY TO PREPARE THE SITE FOR THE UPCOMING GROWINGSEASON.2)SUMMARIZE FINDINGS IN A SPRING MAINTENANCE MEMO FOR THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY.LATE SUMMER/FALL MONITORINGTHE FORMAL MONITORING VISIT SHALL RECORD AND REPORT THE FOLLOWING IN AN ANNUALREPORT SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF RENTON:1)SUMMARY OF THE SPRING MAINTENANCE VISIT RECOMMENDATIONS.2)VISUAL ASSESSMENT OF THE OVERALL SITE.3)YEAR 1 COUNTS OF LIVE AND DEAD PLANTS BY SPECIES.4)COUNTS OF DEAD PLANTS WHERE MORTALITY IS SIGNIFICANT IN ANY MONITORING YEAR.5)ESTIMATE OF NATIVE COVER USING THE LINE-INTERCEPT METHOD ALONG ESTABLISHEDTRANSECTS. ALL PLANTED AREAS NOT DIRECTLY COVERED BY TRANSECTS WILL BE VISUALLYASSESSED AND NOTED AS TO HOW THEY ARE MEETING THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.6)VISUAL ESTIMATE OF NATIVE GROUNDCOVER.7)ESTIMATE OF NON-NATIVE, INVASIVE WEED COVER WITHIN PLANTING AREAS USING THELINE-INTERCEPT METHOD AND/OR VISUAL ESTIMATES ARE PRACTICAL; ESTIMATE INVASIVECOVER IN WETLAND RESTORATION AND BUFFER MITIGATION AREAS SEPARATELY.8)TABULATION OF ESTABLISHED NATIVE SPECIES, INCLUDING BOTH PLANTED AND VOLUNTEERSPECIES.9)PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION FROM FIXED REFERENCE POINTS AND/OR TRANSECT ENDS.10)ANY INTRUSIONS INTO OR CLEARING OF THE PLANTING AREAS, VANDALISM, OR OTHERACTIONS THAT IMPAIR THE INTENDED FUNCTIONS OF THE MITIGATION AREA.11)RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR OF ANY PORTION OF THE MITIGATIONAREA.SITE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTSTHE SITE WILL BE MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS FOR FIVEYEARS FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF THE CONSTRUCTION.1)FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATIONS NOTED IN THE PREVIOUS MONITORING SITE VISIT AND THESPRING MAINTENANCE MEMO.2)GENERAL WEEDING FOR ALL PLANTED AREAS:a.AT LEAST TWICE YEARLY, REMOVE ALL COMPETING WEEDS AND WEED ROOTS FROMBENEATH EACH INSTALLED PLANT AND ANY DESIRABLE VOLUNTEER VEGETATION TO ADISTANCE OF 18 INCHES FROM THE MAIN PLANT STEM. WEEDING SHOULD OCCUR AT LEASTTWICE DURING THE SPRING AND SUMMER. FREQUENT WEEDING WILL RESULT IN LOWERMORTALITY, LOWER PLANT REPLACEMENT COSTS, AND INCREASED LIKELIHOOD THAT THEPLAN MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS BY YEAR 5.b.MORE FREQUENT WEEDING MAY BE NECESSARY DEPENDING ON WEED CONDITIONS THATDEVELOP AFTER PLAN INSTALLATION.c.DO NOT WEED THE AREA NEAR THE PLANT BASES WITH STRING TRIMMER (WEEDWHACKER/WEED EATER). NATIVE PLANTS ARE EASILY DAMAGED OR KILLED, AND WEEDSEASILY RECOVER AFTER TRIMMING.d.ENSURE THAT ESTABLISHED HIMALAYAN BLACKBERRY CANES OUTSIDE OF THE PLANTINGAREAS ARE CUT BACK AT LEAST 10 FEET FROM THE PLANTING AREAS.3)APPLY SLOW RELEASE GRANULAR FERTILIZER TO EACH INSTALLED PLANT ANNUALLY IN THESPRING (BY JUNE 1) OF YEARS 2 THROUGH 5.4)REPLACE MULCH AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN A 4-INCH-THICK LAYER, RETAIN SOIL MOISTURE,AND LIMIT WEEDS.5)REPLACE DEAD PLANTS FOUND IN THE SUMMER MONITORING VISITS DURING THE UPCOMINGFALL/WINTER DORMANT SEASON (OCTOBER 15 TO MARCH 1) OR AT THE DIRECTION OF THERESTORATION PROFESSIONAL.6)PROVIDE IRRIGATION FOR THE ENTIRE PLANTED AREA WITH A MINIMUM OF ONE INCH OF WATERPROVIDED PER WEEK FROM JUNE 1ST THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH FOR AT LEAST THE FIRSTTWO YEARS FOLLOWING INSTALLATION THROUGH THE OPERATION OF A TEMPORARYIRRIGATION SYSTEM.CONTINGENCY PLANIF THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM WITH THE MITIGATION AREAS MEETING PERFORMANCESTANDARDS, A CONTINGENCY PLAN WILL BE DEVELOPED AND IMPLEMENTED. CONTINGENCYPLANS CAN INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO: SOIL AMENDMENT; ADDITIONAL PLANTINSTALLATION; AND PLANT SUBSTITUTIONS OF TYPE, SIZE, QUANTITY, AND LOCATION.SITE PROTECTIONPERMANENT SPLIT-RAIL FENCING AND CRITICAL AREA PROTECTION AREA (CAPA) SIGNS WILL BEINSTALLED BETWEEN THE RESTORATION AREAS AND ALL DEVELOPED AREAS.MITIGATION PLAN NOTES18" MIN. 4"12"12" 3'-0" 6" 12"8'-0" MAX4"CHAMFER TOP OFPOSTS 45 DEGREES TOA DEPTH OF 1" ON ALLFOUR SIDES.ATTACH CITY/COUNTYAPPROVED PRE-PRINTEDMETAL SIGN TO POST WITHTWO 58" DIA. GALVANIZEDCARRIAGE BOLTS. SEE PLANSFOR SIGN LOCATIONS.FINISHED GRADECOMPACTED GRAVEL BASE.NO CONCRETE IS TO BEPLACED IN SENSITIVE AREAS.COMPACTED SUBGRADE6" x 6" ROUGH CUT, SPLIT, CEDARPOST NOTCHED TO CONTAINAND CONCEAL RAIL CONNECTION2 X 6 ROUGH CUT, SPLIT,CEDAR RAILSScale: NTSSPLIT RAIL FENCE1