HomeMy WebLinkAbout17254-R-WTLD-2015-01-05-WTLD Resources
CRITICAL AREA STUDY
FOR
VUECREST II SHORT PLAT
RENTON, WA
Wetland Resources, Inc. Project #14247
Prepared By:
Wetland Resources, Inc.
9505 19th Avenue SE, Suite 106
Everett, WA 98208
(425) 337-3174
Prepared For:
KBS III LLC
Attn: Kolin Taylor
12620 NE 8th Street #100
Bellevue, WA 98005
January 5, 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SITE DESCRIPTION 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2
REVIEW OF EXISTING INFORMATION 4
WETLAND CLASSIFICATION – COWARDIN SYSTEM 4
WETLAND CLASSIFICATION – CITY OF RENTON 4
WETLAND DETERMINATION REPORT 5
BOUNDARY DETERMINATION FINDINGS 6
WETLAND FUNCTIONS AND VALUES ASSESSMENT 7
WILDLIFE 8
USE OF THIS REPORT 9
REFERENCES 10
CRITICAL AREA STIUDY MAP 1/1
LIST OF APPENDICES:
APPENDIX A – FIELD DATA FORMS
Wetland Resources, Inc. Vuecrest II Short Plat
December 2014 Critical Area Study
WRI # 14247
1
SITE DESCRIPTION
On October 9th, 2014 Wetland Resources, Inc. completed a site investigation on the 2.45-acre site
located west of 102nd Ave SE in Renton, WA. The tax identification number for this parcel is
3223059097 (Section 32, Township 23N, range 05E, WM).
Access to the 2.45-acre site is via a gravel driveway from the west side of 102nd Ave SE.
Topography consists of a generally flat area on the majority of the site moving to a gentle slope with
a westerly aspect on the western side of the property. The surrounding parcels display similar
topography and follow this westerly aspect. Significant residential development characterizes the
land use in the area surrounding the subject property. The subject property is narrow and
rectangular in shape. The eastern half of the parcel is developed and contains a single-family
residence and a tool shed. A maintained yard and landscaping plants border the developed portion
of the property. The western half of the subject property is forested, appears relatively undisturbed,
and is vegetated with a mixed canopy, non-mature forest. Surrounding parcels are a mix of small
undeveloped forested areas as well as multi and single-family residential development.
One wetland (Wetland A) is located on the subject property. Wetland A is classified as a Category
II wetland per City of Renton’s wetland classification system. This wetland continues off-site to the
north and to the west. No other off-site wetlands were found within 300-ft of the subject property.
Panther Creek, a known fish-bearing stream, lies approximately a quarter mile to the east of the
subject property.
The proposed project complies with the City of Renton’s critical area regulations, and therefore
adheres to the city’s buffer requirements for wetlands. A wetland classified under City of Renton
municipal code as Category II, requires a protective buffer of 50 feet. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-
050(M)(6)(c), Category 2 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that
are not Category 1 or 3 wetlands; and/or (b) Wetlands that have heron rookeries or osprey nests, but are not Category
1 wetlands; and/or (c) Wetlands of any size located at the headwaters of a watercourse, i.e., a wetland with a
perennial or seasonal outflow channel, but with no defined influent channel, but are not Category 1 wetlands; and/or
(d) Wetlands having minimum existing evidence of human-related physical alteration such as diking, ditching or
channelization.
Wetland Resources, Inc. Vuecrest II Short Plat
December 2014 Critical Area Study
WRI # 14247
2
Figure 1: Overview of the subject property
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is proposing to subdivide the property into 8 single-family residential lots. Access for
these lots will be from a proposed road connecting to 102nd Ave SE on the eastern side of the subject
property. In order to accomplish this development activity, the applicant is proposing buffer
averaging per the provisions established in RMC Chapter 4-3-050(M)(6)(f), which requires:
i. That the wetland contains variations in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or
near the wetland and buffer; and
The wetland unit including the off-site portion varies from slightly disturbed with yard waste and
detritus from kid-related activities, to less disturbed in the on-site portion. As such, vegetation in the
northern portion has a higher concentration of invasive species and the southern portion is more
native in composition. The wetland unit is surrounded by residential development and the entirety
of the buffer shows signs of human disturbance.
ii. That width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland functions and values; and
Direct compensation of functions and values will be addressed by providing additional buffer of a
similar composition to the reduction area at a 1.13:1 ratio, with an approximate buffer increase of
42 square feet. No impacts to existing functions and values of the wetland area are expected by the
proposed buffer averaging activity.
iii. That the total area contained within the wetland buffer after averaging is not less than that contained within
the required standard buffer prior to averaging; and
Wetland Resources, Inc. Vuecrest II Short Plat
December 2014 Critical Area Study
WRI # 14247
3
In order to meet the requirements established for buffer averaging, an addition/reduction ratio of
1.13:1 is provided. The buffer reduction area totals 313 square feet, while the buffer addition areas
total 356 square feet. The final buffer area will be slightly larger than prior to averaging with a total
buffer increase of 42 square feet.
iv. A site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers
and Its Implications for the Management for Wetlands, McMillan 2000, or similar approaches have been
conducted. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in
WAS 365-195-905; or where the absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are
followed.
The buffer evaluation method identified above provides detailed descriptions of buffer widths and
overall effectiveness of protecting wetland and stream functions. Table 4 within the aforementioned
document described the differences between 10-meter and a 15-meter buffer. As described in the
table, both buffer widths provide approximately 60 percent sediment and pollutant removal and
provide limited habitat values. The averaging proposal reduces the buffer by 5 feet (1.5 meters) for
a small portion of the buffer area (~313 square feet). The current condition of the buffer bordering
the on-site portion of the wetland is relatively undisturbed. The applicant is proposing a minimal
decrease in this buffer area. Due to the limited reduction in buffer, as well as buffer addition
proposed at a 1.14:1 ratio in a similarly undisturbed condition, overall impact to the protection that
this buffer provides is minimal. It is the opinion of WRI that given the increase of 42 square feet in
overall buffer area in conjunction with the limited reduction in overall width (~5 feet for <25% of
the total buffer length), the proposed buffer averaging provides for an adequate width to protect the
wetland and stream system.
v. In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced by more than fifty percent (50%) of the standard buffer or be
less than twenty-five feet (25’) wide. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance per
subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-250B; and
The minimum proposed buffer width as part of this averaging activity is 45-feet, which is 90 percent
of the standard 50-foot buffer.
vi. Buffer enhancement in areas where the buffer is reduced shall be required on a case-by-case basis where
appropriate to site conditions, wetland sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics.
The areas of reduction identified as part of this averaging proposal, are generally natively vegetated
with a canopy of large coniferous and deciduous trees, an understory of smaller trees and shrubs,
and an intact herbaceous layer. Due to this relatively undisturbed condition and lack of invasives,
the reduction area would have a limited lift of function from enhancement. Therefore, buffer
enhancement is not proposed.
The buffer averaging proposed is to reduce 313 square feet of buffer adjacent to the northwest side
of the proposed roadway bordering lot 8 on the northwest side of the subject property. In order to
meet the no net loss of buffer requirement, the applicant proposes 356 square feet of additional
buffer adjacent to the northwest side of the proposed roadway bordering lot 8 and along the north
side of proposed roadway bordering the open space tract west of lot 8. The applicant will designate
all the wetland, stream, and associated buffers as a Native Growth Protection Area (NGPA) Tract.
Wetland Resources, Inc. Vuecrest II Short Plat
December 2014 Critical Area Study
WRI # 14247
4
REVIEW OF EXISTING INFORMATION
Before conducting on-site investigations, a literature review was performed to identify records of
wetlands and streams within the project area. The following information was examined:
• Hydric Soils List Snohomish County Area Washington (NRCS, 2001)
• The National Wetland Plant List: 2014 Update of Wetland Ratings. Lichvar, R.W., M.
Butterwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. Phytoneuron 2014-41: 1-42.
• National Wetlands Inventory map of project area (online wetlands mapper found at
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/mapper.html)
• Web Soil Survey of the project area (online soil survey found at
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx)
• Renton Municipal Code (Critical Areas Regulations), 4-3-050
• King County iMAP Interactive Mapping Tool, Website accessed at
http://www.kingcounty.gov/operations/GIS/Maps/iMAP.aspx
• SalmonScape Interactive Mapping website administered by the Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife accessed at http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/salmonscape/
• WDFW Priority Habitats and Species Maps – online version located at:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/
WETLAND CLASSIFICATION – COWARDIN SYSTEM
According to the Cowardin System, as described in Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States, the classifications for the on-site wetland and streams are as follows:
Wetland: Palustrine, Forested, Broad-leaved Deciduous, Saturated.
WETLAND CLASSIFICATION-CITY OF RENTON
Under the City of Renton’s Critical Area Regulations in Renton’s Municipal Code (RMC), Title 4
Chapter 3-050, the wetlands and streams within the vicinity of the subject site are classified as
follows:
Wetland – Category II
The on-site wetland is a depressional wetland adjacent to and intermittent stream. This wetland is
Classified as a Category II under the RMC 4-3-050(M), since it is located at the headwater of the
off-site stream and, as such, receives a standard buffer of 50 feet.
WETLAND DETERMINATION REPORT
Methodology
Wetland Resources’ staff conducted a site visit in October 2014, to locate wetlands and streams
occurring within and near the project site. Wetland conditions were evaluated using routine
Wetland Resources, Inc. Vuecrest II Short Plat
December 2014 Critical Area Study
WRI # 14247
5
methodology described in the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual
(Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #96-94, March 1997). Under this method,
the process for making a wetland determination is based on three sequential steps:
1.) Examination of the site for hydrophytic vegetation (species present and percent cover);
2.) If hydrophytic vegetation is found, the presence of hydric soils is then determined;
3.) The final step is to determine the presence of wetland hydrology in the area examined under the
first two steps.
The following criteria descriptions were used in the boundary determination:
Vegetation Criteria
The 2010 Regional Supplement defines hydrophytic vegetation as “assemblage of macrophytes that
occurs in areas where inundation or soil saturation is either permanent or of sufficient frequency
and duration to influence plant occurrence.” Field indicators were used to determine whether the
vegetation meets the definition for hydrophytic vegetation.
Soils Criteria and Mapped Description
The 2010 Regional Supplement defines hydric soils as “soils that formed under conditions of
saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic
conditions in the upper part.” Field indicators were used to determine whether a given soil meets
the definition for hydric soils.
The soils underlying the project area are mapped in the Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey as follows: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes. The following
soil descriptions are excerpts from the official soils descriptions found on the NRCS website
(http://soils.usda.gov/technical/classification/osd/index.html).
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes (AgC). The AgC soil unit is described as rolling with
irregularly shaped areas ranging from 10 to about 600 acres in size. The A horizon ranges form very
dark brown to dark brown. The B horizon is dark brown, grayish brown, and dark yellowish brown.
Permeability is moderately rapid in the surface layer and subsoil and very slow in the substratum.
Available water capacity is described as low. Included within this soil unit are the poorly drained
Norma, Bellingham, Seattle, Tukwila, Shalcar soils, and Alderwood soils that have slopes more
gentle or steeper than 6 to 15 percent. Included soil units make up no more than 30 percent of the
total acreage.
Wetland Resources, Inc. Vuecrest II Short Plat
December 2014 Critical Area Study
WRI # 14247
6
Hydrology Criteria
As stated in the 2010 Regional Supplement, the “term wetland hydrology encompasses all
hydrologic characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the
surface for a sufficient duration during the growing season.” It also explains “areas with evident
characteristics of wetland hydrology are those where the presence of water has an overriding
influence on characteristics of vegetation and soils due to anaerobic and chemically reducing
conditions, respectively.”
Additionally, the US Army Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual states that “areas
which are seasonally inundated and/or saturated to the surface for a consecutive number of days
≥12.5 percent of the growing season are wetlands, provided the soil and vegetation parameters are
met. Areas inundated or saturated between 5 and 12.5 percent of the growing season in most years
may or may not be wetlands. Areas saturated to the surface for less than 5 percent of the growing
season are non-wetlands.” Field indicators were used to determine whether wetland hydrology
parameters were met on this site.
BOUNDARY DETERMINATION FINDINGS
Wetland
The on-site wetland is a linear depressional wetland located in the northwest portion of the site.
This wetland unit continues off-site to the north and to the west, and incorporates a portion of an
intermittently flowing stream. Vegetation within the wetland consists of a canopy of red alder (Alnus
rubra, FAC) and western red cedar (Thuja plicata, FAC), with an understory of salmonberry (Rubus
spectabilis, FAC), spirea (Spiraea douglasii, FacW), lady fern (Athyrium felix-femina, FAC), sedge (Carex sp.,
OBL), and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FACW). Soils in this wetland are typically a black
(2.5Y 2.5/1) clay loam from the surface to seven inches below. The sublayer is a vey dark gray (5Y
3/1) clay loam with from seven to thirteen inches below. From thirteen to eighteen plus inches soils
were gray (2.5Y 5/1) with redoximorphic features present (5% with color of 2.5Y 5/6). Soils were
saturated at six inches below the surface during the October 2014 investigation.
The dominance of species rated “Facultative” or wetter satisfies the criteria for hydrophytic
vegetation in the areas mapped as wetland. Based on field indicators of hydric soils and presence of
soil saturation at six inches, it appears that the areas mapped as wetland are saturated to the surface
for more than 12.5 percent of the growing season. This wetland meets all criteria for designation as
a wetland.
Non-Wetland
The areas mapped as non-wetland are generally forested with a mixed canopy non-mature forest.
Vegetation species within the forest generally include Western red cedary (Thuja plicata, FAC), big-
leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum, FACU), red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC), Oso-berry (Oemleria cerasiformis,
FACU), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium, FACU), beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta, FACU), red
elderberry (Sambucus racemosa, FACU), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus, FACU), creeping blackberry
(Rubus ursinus, FACU), and swordfern (Polystichum munitum, FACU).
Wetland Resources, Inc. Vuecrest II Short Plat
December 2014 Critical Area Study
WRI # 14247
7
Non-wetland soils were typically a very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) silt loam with no
redoximorphic features from the surface to sixteen plus inches below. These soils were dry during
the October 2014 site visit.
Based on the lack of field indicators, it appears that areas of the site mapped as non-wetland are not
saturated to the surface for more than 12.5 percent of the growing season, thereby not fulfilling
wetland hydrology criteria.
WETLAND FUNCTIONS AND VALUES ASSESSMENT
Methodology
The methodology for this functions and values assessment is based on professional opinion
developed through past field analyses and interpretation. This assessment pertains specifically to the
wetlands and streams in the vicinity of the site, but is typical for assessments of similar systems
common to Western Washington.
Functional Components
Wetlands in Western Washington perform a variety of ecosystem functions. Included among the
most important functions provided by wetlands are: stormwater control, water quality
improvement, fish and wildlife habitat, aesthetic value, recreational opportunities and education.
The most commonly assessed functions and their descriptions are listed below. Assessments of these
functions for the project site are provided in the “Analysis” section of this report.
Hydrologic Functions
Wetlands often function as natural water storage areas during periods of precipitation and flooding.
By storing water that otherwise might be channeled into open flow systems, wetlands can attenuate
or modify potentially damaging effects of storm events, reducing erosion and peak flows to
downstream systems. Additionally, the soils underlying wetlands are often less permeable, providing
long-term storage of stormwater or floodflow and controlling baseflows of downstream systems.
Stormwater storage capacity and floodflow attenuation are generally a function of the size of the
wetland and their topographic characteristics.
Water Quality
Surface water quality improvement is another evaluated function. Surface runoff during periods of
precipitation increases the potential for sediments and pollutants to enter surface water. Wetlands
improve water quality by acting as filters as water passes through them, trapping sediments and
pollutants from surface water. Ponded areas within depressional wetlands also allow sediments to
drop out of suspension, thereby increasing water quality. As development increases, the potential
for polluted water to reach wetlands and streams also increases. Unnaturally high inputs of
pollutants, which are often found in urbanized areas, along with the size of the wetlands and the
vegetation structure within them are the main limiting factors of this function.
Wildlife Habitat
Wetlands have potential to provide diverse habitat for aquatic, terrestrial, and avian species for
nesting, rearing, resting, cover, and foraging. Wildlife species are commonly dependent upon a
variety of intermingled habitat types, including wetlands, adjacent uplands, large bodies of water,
Wetland Resources, Inc. Vuecrest II Short Plat
December 2014 Critical Area Study
WRI # 14247
8
and movement corridors between them. Human intrusion, including development within and
adjacent to wetlands, and impacts to movement corridors are the most limiting factors for wildlife
habitat functions. Assessments of these functions for the project site are provided below.
Existing Conditions
Wetland
Hydrologic Function
The on-site portion of the wetland is in a topographic depression. Off-site to the west the wetland
unit incorporates an intermittent stream. In general, depressional wetlands with direct connection
to an intermittent stream have moderate potential to perform hydrologic functions. This wetland
collects and temporarily stores precipitation as well as floodwater entering downstream systems
during storm events. This wetland provides a low to moderate value for this function.
Water Quality
The wetland is moderately vegetated and the residence time of water within this wetland is low to
moderate, given its gradient and association with the stream. These characteristics allow for the
wetland to serve somewhat as a filter and allow sediment in the water to settle. This wetland
provides a low to moderate value for this function.
Wildlife Habitat
This wetland provides a low to moderate level of habitat interspersion given that it is primarily
forested. This wetland provides secondary habitat to multiple species of birds. However, the size of
this wetland and its proximity to residential development limits its ability to provide a high value for
wildlife functions. This wetland provides a moderate value for this function.
WILDLIFE
During our October visit, various bird species were observed. In addition to these individuals, the
list below discusses the wildlife that are expected to use the site.
Avian species expected to use the subject site include: American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos),
American robin (Turdus migratorius), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), black-capped chickadee (Poecile
atricapillus), dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), red-breasted nuthatch (Sitka
canadensis), northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), hairy woodpecker (Picoides villosus), downy woodpecker
(Dendrocopus villosus), red-breasted nuthatch (Sitka canadensis), brown creeper (Certhia americana), varied
thrush (Ixoreus naevius), and red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis).
Mammals expected to use this site include: Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), shrews (Sorex spp.),
coyote (Canis latrans), raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), and eastern cottontail
rabbits (Sylvilagus floridanus).
Other wildlife expected to use this site include: pacific tree frog (Hyla regilla), northwestern
salamander (Ambystoma gracile), and rough-skinned newt (Taricha granulosa). These lists are not meant
to be all-inclusive and may omit species that currently utilize or could utilize the site.
Wetland Resources, Inc. Vuecrest II Short Plat
December 2014 Critical Area Study
WRI # 14247
9
USE OF THIS REPORT
This Critical Area Study is supplied to KBS III LLC as a means of determining on-site wetland
conditions, as required by City of Renton during the permitting process. This report is based
largely on readily observable conditions and, to a lesser extent, on readily ascertainable conditions.
No attempt has been made to determine hidden or concealed conditions.
The laws applicable to wetlands are subject to varying interpretations and may be changed at any
time by the courts or legislative bodies. This report is intended to provide information deemed
relevant in the applicant's attempt to comply with the laws now in effect.
The work for this report has conformed to the standard of care employed by wetland ecologists. No
other representation or warranty is made concerning the work or this report and any implied
representation or warranty is disclaimed.
Wetland Resources, Inc.
Jeff Mallahan
Associate Ecologist
Wetland Resources, Inc. Vuecrest II Short Plat
December 2014 Critical Area Study
WRI # 14247
10
REFERENCES
Castelle, A.J., C. Conolly, M. Emers, E.D. Metz, S. Meyer, M. Witter, S. Mauermann, T.
Erickson, and S.S. Cooke. 1992. Wetland Buffers: Use and Effectiveness. Washington.
Department of Ecology, Publication No. 92-10. Olympia, WA.
City of Renton Municipal Code, Title 4 Chapter 3. Renton, WA. Ord. 5286, May 14, 2007.
Cooke, Sarah S. 2000. Wetland and Buffer Functions Semi-Quantitative Assessment
Methodology (SAM). Cooke Scientific Services. February 2000.
Cowardin, et al., 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States.
U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-79/31. December 1979.
Environmental Laboratory. (1987). Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical
Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State wetland rating system for western Washington – Revised.
Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 04-06-025.
King County iMap: Interactive mapping tool.
http://www5.kingcounty.gov/iMAP/viewer.htm?mapset=kcproperty.
National Wetland Plant List: 2014 Update of Wetland Ratings. Lichvar, R.W., M. Butterwick,
N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. Phytoneuron 2014-41: 1-42.
SalmonScape. Interactive Mapping website administered by the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife. http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/salmonscape/index.html.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2010). "Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0)," ERDC/EL
TR-10-3, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory wetlands mapper available online at
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/mapper.html.
Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Washington State
Department of Ecology. Publication #96-94. March 1997.
Web Soil Survey. United States Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation
Service. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm.
n
n
SIDEWALKSIDEWALKOPEN SPACE / TREE
PRESERVATION EASEMENT
12345678
OVERHANG
SHED
DECK
BUILDING
GARAGE
N89°45'28"E 636.70'N01°13'26"E 167.25'N89°49'30"E 636.52'N01°16'40"E 168.01'50 FTWETLAND
CATEGORY 2
Scale 1" = 50'
5025 75 1000
PROPOSED ROAD
Delineation / Mitigation / Restoration / Habitat Creation / Permit Assistance
9505 19th Avenue S.E. Suite 106 Everett,Washington 98208
Phone: (425) 337-3174
Fax: (425) 337-3045
Email: mailbox@wetlandresources.com
CRITICAL AREA STUDY MAP
KBS III - MAIN AVE S
Sheet 1/1
WRI Job #14247
Drawn by: JM
December 2014
KBS III LLC
12320 NE 8th
Street #100
Bellevue, WA 98005
CRITICAL AREA STUDY MAP
KBS III - MAIN AVE S
PORTION OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 5E, W.M.
LEGEND
BUFFER
DATA SITE
WETLAND
S1BUFFER ADDITION
BUFFER REDUCTION
S1
S2
4
5
F
T
BUFFER
ADDITION
236 SQ FT
BUFFER
REDUCTION
313 SQ FT
BUFFER
ADDITION
120 SQ FT
EXISTING STRUCTURES
TO BE DEMOLISHED
EXISTING CONCRETE
& GRAVEL DRIVE
Appendix A
Corps Data Sheets
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site:
City/County:
Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:
State:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR):
Lat:
Long:
Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:
NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
, Soil
, or Hydrology
significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation
, Soil
, or Hydrology
naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
KBS III, LLC Renton 10/8/14
Curtis Schuster WA S1
MK and JM SEC 32 TWP 23N RGE 05E
slightly sloped concave 2
LRR-A 47º26'07.89" N 122º12'22.87" W WGS84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes none
4
4
4
4
4 4
Linear 50x5
Thuja Plicata 10 N FAC
Acer Marcophyllum 60 Y FACU
70
50X5
Rubrus spectabilis 60 Y FAC
60
50X5
Stachys cooleyae 30 Y FAC
Tolmiea menziesii 30 Y FAC
Athyrium filix-femina 20 Y FACW
Carex obnupta 5 N OBL
Agrostis stolonifera 5 N FAC
90
30
Rubus ursinus 20 Y FACU
20
10
4
6
66%
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
4
4
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
S1
0-7 2.5Y 2.5/1 100 C Lo Saturated to surface
7-13 5Y 3/1 100 C Lo
13-18+2.5Y 5/1 95 2.5Y 5/6 5 C M Sa C Lo
4
4
4
4
4
4 4
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site:
City/County:
Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:
State:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR):
Lat:
Long:
Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:
NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
, Soil
, or Hydrology
significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation
, Soil
, or Hydrology
naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
KBS III, LLC Renton 10/8/14
Curtis Schuster WA S2
MK and JM SEC 32 TWP 23N RGE 05E
sloped none 10
LRR-A 47º26'07.89" N 122º12'22.87" W WGS84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes none
4
4
4
4
4 4
15x15
Acer Marcophyllum 20 Y FACU
20
50X5
Corylus cornuta 20 Y FACU
Oemleria cerasiformis 5 Y FACU
25
50X5
Polystichum munitum 25 Y FACU
25
0
4
0%
0
0
0
70 280
0
70 280
4
4
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
S2
0-16+10 YR 3/2 100 Soil was dry
4
4
4
4
4 4