HomeMy WebLinkAbout23 - Wetland Delination Report Carmax
WETLANDS & DRAINAGE CORRIDORS
EVALUATION AND DELINEATION REPORT
Parcel # 1253600030
3751 East Valley Road
Renton, WA
prepared for:
Mr. Jon Einarsen, L.G., Principal
Zipper Geo Associates, LLC
19023 36th Avenue West, Suite D
Lynnwood, WA 98036
Prepared by:
H & S CONSULTING
P. O. Box 731695
Puyallup, WA 98373
253 732-6515
MHeckert@Q.com
February 5, 2014
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The CenterPoint Project Site, 3751 East Valley Road, City of Renton, WA, Parcel number
1253600030 is approximately 12.3 acres, located in the city of Renton, Washington. An
assessment of this project area following the procedures outlined in the Washington State
Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Wash. Manual), the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual (2008 Supplement), Revised Washington State Wetland
Rating System(WSWRS), and City of Renton Title IV–3-050 (Critical Areas Regulations)
resulted in the identification of two regulated wetland areas.
The project site is developed as a cinema complex. The site is 90% impermeable surface
(structures and parking lot) and has been completely covered in imported permitted fill.
Onsite assessment included an evaluation of the function and value rating for the wetland,
a classification of each wetland and stream following the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
methods, a categorization of each wetland and drainage following City of Renton Title IV–
3-050 (Critical Areas Regulations), and an identification of the City of Renton buffer width.
WETLAND SIZE
(square feet)
City of Renton
CATEGORY
WA WETLAND
RATING
SCORE
GENERAL
BUFFER WIDTH Adjustment by
Function And
Land Use
Buffer Total
A 5,140 3 n/a 25 ft. +0 ft. 25 ft.
B 2,621 3 n/a 25 ft. +0 ft. 25 ft.
The wetland was delineated and the drainage and other features located.
The Seattle District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Washington Department of
Ecology, and City of Renton (as well as a number of other resource agencies) regulate
activities in and around identified wetland and stream areas. Such regulations focus on
the avoidance of adverse impacts to wetlands and the mitigation of such impacts that
cannot be avoided. In addition, City of Renton has established criteria to categorize
wetlands for purposes of regulation and requires a buffer along wetland and drainage
corridor areas.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 2
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................................................................................ 2
ONSITE ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 2
WETLAND AND STREAM DETERMINATION ........................................................ 6
WETLAND FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT ............................................. 7
REGULATORY CONSIDERATION ............................................................................. 9
SELECTED DEVELOPMENT ACTION .................................................................... 11
FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... 12
REFERENCE LIST ........................................................................................................ 13
APPENDIX A - FIELD DATA FORMS ....................................................................... 14
ATTACHMENT 1 – WETLAND DELINEATION .................................................... 15
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 4
STANDARD OF CARE
Prior to extensive site planning, this document should be reviewed and the wetland
boundaries verified by the appropriate resource and permitting agencies. Wetland
boundaries, wetland classifications, wetland ratings, and proposed buffers must be
reviewed and approved by City of Renton Planning and Land Services and potentially
other regulatory agencies. H & S has provided professional services that are in
accordance with the degree of care and skill generally accepted in the nature of the work
accomplished. No other warranties are expressed or implied. H & S is not responsible
for design costs incurred before this document is approved by the appropriate resource
and permitting agencies.
Mark Heckert
Principal
H & S Consulting
1
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt
INTRODUCTION
This report details the culmination of activities and onsite evaluations undertaken to
complete a wetland and drainage corridor evaluation as an element of the planning and
site development of the CenterPoint Project Site. The CenterPoint Project Site is
located generally in the southern portion of the City of Renton, Washington (Figure 1).
The project site contains a movie complex and parking area.
The evaluation and delineation of onsite and adjacent wetlands and drainage corridors is
a vital element in the planning and selection of a site development action. The goal of
this approach is to assure that planned site development does not result in adverse
environmental impacts to regulated wetlands, streams, and their associated protective
buffer areas.
Wetlands are generally defined as "those areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface water or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support,
and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation
typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions."
(City of Renton)
STUDY PURPOSE
The purpose of this document is to present the results of an onsite assessment and
evaluation of wetland areas within the CenterPoint Project Site following the methods and
procedures outlined in the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation
Manual (Wash. Manual), Revised Washington State Wetland Rating System (WSWRS),
the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) and the Washington
Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Forest Practice Rules. Onsite assessment
noted that there were no differences in the identified wetland boundaries as a result to
using either the Wash. Manual or the 1987 Manual. Drainage corridors were also
assessed in accordance with the criteria established by City of Renton and the State of
Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Forest Practice Rules (WAC 222-
16-030). This study was designed to accommodate site planning and potential regulatory
actions and is suitable for submittal to federal, state, and local authorities for wetland and
stream boundary verification and permitting actions.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The project area was generally rectangular, approximately 12.28 acres in size, located in
Renton, Washington. The site is bounded on the east by Valley Ave NW, on the north,
south and west by commercial development. The project site contains a cinema
complex. The site is flat.
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 2
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
National Wetland Inventory Mapping
The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping completed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Fig. 2). This mapping resource did
not identify any wetland within, or in proximity to, the project site.
King County Wetland Inventory
The King County Wetland Inventory was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This
mapping resource did not identify any wetland within, or in proximity to, the project site.
City of Renton Wetland Inventory
The City of Renton Wetland Inventory was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Fig. 3).
This mapping resource did not identify any wetland within the project site. Wetlands
designated W-33a and W-33c were identified at the northwest boundary of the project
site. This wetland was described as PEM and PSS “poor” habitat, and “On fill; seven
small isolated areas”.
Soil Mapping
The soil mapping inventory completed by the Natural Resource Conservation Service
was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Fig. 4). This mapping identified the soils
generally throughout the project site as Snohomish silt loam and Tukwila muck.
Snohomish soils are not listed as “hydric.” Tukwila muck is listed as “hydric”.
Previous Delineation
City of Renton records indicate a wetland delineation and mitigation plan was conducted
as part of the original site development for the cinema complex. The original report
identifies eight wetlands totaling 1.37 acres on the site. Original development resulted in
the fill of 0.90 acres of wetlands with the creation of 0.85 ac. wetlands, and enhancement
of 0.97 ac. of wetland and buffer as mitigation.
ONSITE ANALYSIS
CRITERIA FOR WETLAND AND STREAM IDENTIFICATION
Wetlands are transitional areas between aquatic and upland habitats. In general terms,
wetlands are lands where the extent and duration of saturation with water is the primary
factor determining the nature of soil development and the types of plant and animal
communities living in the soil and on its surface (Cowardin et al., 1979). Wetlands are
generally defined within land use regulations as "areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under
normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions" (1987 Manual).
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 3
Wetlands exhibit three (3) essential characteristics, all of which must be present for an area
to meet the established criteria within the Wash. Manual and the 1987 Manual. These
essential characteristics are:
1. Hydrophytic Vegetation: A predominance of plants that are typically adapted
for life in saturated soils.
2. Hydric Soil: A soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the
growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper horizons.
3. Wetland Hydrology: Permanent or periodic inundation, or soil saturation to the
surface, at least seasonally.
A stream is generally defined as a location where surface waters produce a defined
channel or bed. A defined channel or bed is typically an area which demonstrates clear
evidence of the passage of water and includes, but not limited to, bedrock channels,
gravel beds, sand and silt beds, and defined channel swales. A stream need not contain
water year-round. A stream typically does not include irrigation ditches, canals, storm or
surface water run-off devices, or other artificial watercourses unless the constructed
watercourse conveys a stream which naturally occurred prior to the construction of such
watercourse.
STUDY METHODS
H & S completed a specific onsite evaluation of the project site on December 30, 2013.
The objective of this evaluation was to define and delineate potential wetland and
drainage corridor areas which may be present within and adjacent to the project area as
defined by the three-parameter criteria test noted within the Wash. Manual and 1987
Manual, and the water-typing criteria noted within the WDNR Forest Practice Rules (WAC
222-16-030).
Boundaries between wetland and non-wetland areas were established by examining the
transitional gradient between wetland and non-wetland characteristics criteria along
transects through the site. Delineation was performed using the typical site methodology
for areas larger than five acres as detailed in the 1987 Manual. City of Renton Wetland
category was derived utilizing the City of Renton Title IV–3-050 (Critical Areas
Regulations).
FIELD OBSERVATION
The site is bounded on the east by Valley Ave NW, on the north, south and west
by commercial development. The project site contains a cinema complex. The
site is flat.
The entire project site has been developed for commercial use. The site is
dominated by an approximately 70,000 sq. ft. commercial building, with
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 4
approximately 90% of the site covered by impervious surface. This area was
identified as non-critical area in character (i.e. not wetlands).
The western 10% of the site has been developed as a stormwater detention facility.
This entire area has been graded and manipulated as part of site development.
This area contains stormwater conveyances and retention/detention ponds, and
receives stormwater from the entire site through storm drains. Within this detention
facility, two areas on-site and one area adjacent at the north boundary express
wetland characteristics. These areas are dominated by a mixed tree and shrub
plant community. Observed species included mature black cottonwood (Populus
trichocarpa) and mature and red alder (Alnus rubra), as well as planted willow
(Salix spp.) and an emergent layer of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea).
This plant community was identified as hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of
wetlands).
As identified at several sample plots within this plant community the soil is a mixed
gravelly loam to gravelly sandy loam, appears to be installed fill material, and did
exhibit redoximorphic features. Field indicators of wetland hydrology are present.
Soils
The project was generally comprised of gravelly sandy loam, and was apparently filled as
a development activity up to 3 ft. deep. This area did not exhibit redoximorphic features
such as gleying, oxidized root channels, or mottles. This area did not meet the hydric soil
criteria.
The western portion of the site is the only area not paved. The surface soil layer within
this parcel was generally silt loam underlain with clay loam or gravelly clay loam. The
sub-soil within this area was generally noted as silt loam, dark gray (10YR 2/1) in color,
and exhibited prominent redoximorphic features (i.e. soil mottles, oxidized root channels).
These soils met the hydric soil criteria.
Hydrology
Hydrology within the overall project area appeared to be the result of seasonal stormwater
runoff from onsite and adjacent properties; short-term seasonal ponding within
depressional areas and soil characteristics. Stormwater surface runoff through the overall
project area was directed by a stormwater system to the ditches in the west, which flowed
through the detention area, then west into the City storm drainage system. The detention
ditch and pond appear to have been created as part of the filling of the site.
Vegetation
Impermeable surface covers 90% of the site, interspersed with ornamental landscaping
vegetation. This plant community was identified as non-hydrophytic in character (i.e.
typical of uplands).
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 5
Along the west boundary of the site, the site was dominated by a mixed wet forest plant
community. This plant community was identified as hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical
of wetlands).
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 6
WETLAND AND STREAM DETERMINATION
Wetland determination was based on sample plots which contained hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology in accordance with the 1987 Manual (2008
Supplement) and the Wash. Manual. Based on these methods two wetlands were
identified within the project site.
WETLAND SIZE
(square feet)
City of Renton
CATEGORY
WA WETLAND
RATING
SCORE
GENERAL
BUFFER WIDTH Adjustment by
Function And
Land Use
Buffer Total
A 5,140 3 n/a 25 ft. +0 ft. 25 ft.
B 2,621 3 n/a 25 ft. +0 ft. 25 ft.
Wetland A: This wetland was located within the stormwater control system along the
west boundary of the site. This wetland appears to have been created by the filling of
the site, cutting off drainage to the drainage ditch to the north. Hydrology for this wetland
was provided by stormwater drainage from the commercial development on all sides of
the feature.
Wetland A meets the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) criteria for classification as
a palustrine, forested, seasonally flooded (PFOC).
Since this wetland meets the criteria of City of Renton:
(1) Are characterized by hydrologic isolation, human-related hydrologic alterations
such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; and
(2) Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or
compaction of soils; and
(3) May have altered vegetation.
It appears to be a Category 3 Wetland. General buffer for a City of Renton Category 3
Wetland is 25 ft. Based upon the criteria and the absence of extraordinary features, the
buffer appears to be qualified for the 25 ft. buffer.
Buffer Width assigned by Rating is 25 feet, as measured perpendicular to the wetland
edge.
Wetland B: This wetland was located within the stormwater control system along the
west boundary and to the north of the site. This wetland appears to have been created
by the filling of the site. Hydrology for this wetland was provided by stormwater drainage
from the commercial development on all sides of the feature.
Wetland B meets the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) criteria for classification as
a palustrine, forested, seasonally flooded (PFOC).
Since this wetland meets the criteria of City of Renton:
(1) Are characterized by hydrologic isolation, human-related hydrologic alterations
such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; and
(2) Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or
compaction of soils; and
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 7
(3) May have altered vegetation.
It appears to be a Category 3 Wetland. General buffer for a City of Renton Category 3
Wetland is 25 ft. Based upon the criteria and the absence of extraordinary features, the
buffer appears to be qualified for the 25 ft. buffer.
Buffer Width assigned by Rating is 25 feet, as measured perpendicular to the wetland
edge.
Artificial features: This assessment identified drainage features and detention pond within
the project site that are ambivalent as regulated features. The two on site areas appear
to be artifacts of the original site development, and appear to be a City-approved water
quality facility that was constructed in a former wetland area. Areas of wetland are called
out in the primary engineering design of the area. The entire area appears to have been
graded and manipulated in the course of development to accept and process stormwater.
There are berms on all sides of the area, and particularly at the north boundary. Storm
water is deposited into the swales in the east boundary of the area, then flowing to the
central pond, then to the southern ponds. From there, the flow is directed to the City
stormwater system through a culvert. The system processes normal storm flow, and the
larger area accommodates flood flow.
Although these areas express wetland characteristics, their wetland functions were
subsumed by the detention/retention functions of the storm water facility upon
development of the site. These areas appear to be artifacts of stormwater management,
therefore not regulated as “Critical Areas”. However, should they be determined to be
regulated features, they appear to meet the criteria for designation as City of Renton
Category 3 Wetlands. As such, they would be required to be protected by a 25 ft. buffer,
which would be contained within the wetland swales east of the wetlands (following the
original development buffering scheme).
The one area at the north boundary appears to be a remnant of the original site
development. This area appears less manipulated, and has a greater cover of trees and
shrubs, going north from the north boundary. This area is truncated from the site by an
established and functional berm, which inhibits surface flow to/from the site. Flow is
permitted to/from the site by a culvert in the northeast corner of the detention area.
This area appears to be regulated as a “Critical Area”. This wetland appears to meet the
criteria for designation as City of Renton Category 3 Wetlands. As such, it is required to
be protected by a 25 ft. buffer, which may encroach onto the presently developed area of
the site in a very small area.
Off-Site Wetlands:
No other areas within 315 ft. were identified as critical areas.
WETLAND FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT
Wetlands are known to perform significant roles in the ecosystem, some of which are of
immediate value to society. These roles vary greatly with the size, type, hydrology,
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 8
vegetation, and location of wetland areas. Although the ecological functions performed
by these wetlands are complex, interrelated, and difficult to assess and quantify, methods
have been developed for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Adamus et al. 1987: Reppert
et al. 1979). The functions provided by wetlands include hydrologic support, shoreline
protection, stormwater and floodwater storage, water quality, groundwater recharge, and
provision of wildlife habitat.
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON FUNCTIONS
The functions that a wetland performs are characterized by answering a series of
questions that note the presence, or absence, of certain indicators. Indicators are
easily observed characteristics that are correlated with quantitative or qualitative
observations of a function (Hruby et al. 2000).
Depressional or Flats Wetlands
Potential to Improve Water Quality
Potential to Reduce Flooding and Stream Erosion
Riverine and Freshwater, Tidal Fringe Wetlands
Potential to Improve Water Quality
Potential to Reduce Flooding and Stream Erosion
Opportunity to Reduce Flooding and Stream Erosion
Lake-fringe Wetlands
Potential to Improve Water Quality
Opportunity to Improve Water Quality
Potential to Reduce Shoreline Erosion
Opportunity to Protect Resources from Shoreline Erosion
Slope Wetlands
Potential to Improve Water Quality
Opportunity to Improve Water Quality
Potential to Reduce Flooding and Stream Erosion
Opportunity to Reduce Flooding and Erosion
Functions Related to Habitat for All Classes of Wetlands
Potential to Provide Habitat
Opportunity to Provide Habitat
Score and Category Based on Functions
Wetlands that are Category I based on functions need to score 70 points or more.
Total scores between 51-69 are Category II; 30-50 are Category III, and less than
30 are Category IV.
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 9
REGULATORY CONSIDERATION
The proposed alteration of lands defined by various federal, state, and local authority
rules and regulations as "wetlands" raises environmental concerns that are generally
addressed in the development review process. These concerns center on the
development's potential adverse impacts to the structure, function, value, and size of
these "wetland" areas. Such adverse impacts may include a reduction in wildlife habitats,
reduced surface water quality, reduced water retention, a reduced ground water recharge
rate, reduced plant species diversity, and the reduction in the function and value of other
associated wetland and non-wetland characteristics.
STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
Proposed action undertaken through either of the Corps of Engineers processes
(Nationwide or Individual) are also subject to the provisions of the Washington State
Department of Ecology Section 401 Water Quality Certification Process. Projects that
may be exempt from Corps of Engineers Section 404 jurisdiction may still require review
by the Washington State Department of Ecology to ensure consistency with State water
quality protection provisions.
THE CITY OF RENTON - City of Renton Title IV–3-050 (Critical Areas Regulations).
The City of Renton regulates activities in and around sensitive wetland and stream areas.
Such regulation also requires that an undisturbed native vegetation buffer be placed along
the upland side of the identified sensitive areas.
City of Renton Title IV–3-050 (Critical Areas Regulations).
M. WETLANDS:
1. Applicability: The wetland regulations apply to sites containing or abutting wetlands as
described below. Category 3 wetlands, less than two thousand two hundred (2,200)
square feet in area, are exempt from these regulations if they meet exemption criteria in
subsection C of this Section.
a. Classification System: The following classification system is hereby adopted for the
purposes of regulating wetlands in the City. Wetlands buffer widths, replacement ratios
and avoidance criteria shall be based on the following rating system:
i. Category 1: Category 1 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following
criteria:
(a) The presence of species listed by Federal or State government as endangered or
threatened, or the presence of essential habitat for those species; and/or
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 10
(b) Wetlands having forty percent (40%) to sixty percent (60%) permanent open water (in
dispersed patches or otherwise) with two (2) or more vegetation classes; and/or
(c) Wetlands equal to or greater than ten (10) acres in size and having three (3) or more
vegetation classes, one of which is open water; and/or
(d) The presence of plant associations of infrequent occurrence; or at the geographic
limits of their occurrence; and/or
ii. Category 2: Category 2 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the
following criteria:
(a) Wetlands that are not Category 1 or 3 wetlands; and/or
(b) Wetlands that have heron rookeries or osprey nests, but are not Category 1 wetlands;
and/or
(c) Wetlands of any size located at the headwaters of a watercourse, i.e., a wetland with a
perennial or seasonal outflow channel, but with no defined influent channel, but are not
Category 1 wetlands; and/or
(d) Wetlands having minimum existing evidence of human-related physical alteration
such as diking, ditching or channelization; and/or
iii. Category 3: Category 3 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the
following criteria:
(a) Wetlands that are severely disturbed. Severely disturbed wetlands are wetlands which
meet the following criteria:
(1) Are characterized by hydrologic isolation, human-related hydrologic alterations such
as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; and
(2) Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or compaction of
soils; and
(3) May have altered vegetation.
6. Wetland Buffers:
a. Buffers Required:
i. Wetland buffer zones shall be required of all proposed regulated activities abutting
regulated wetlands.
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 11
ii. Any wetland created, restored, or enhanced in conjunction with creation or restoration
as compensation for approved wetland alterations shall include the standard buffer
required for the class of the wetland being replaced.
iii. All required wetland buffer zones shall be retained in their natural condition. Category
3 wetland buffers of twenty five feet (25') require the buffers be fully vegetated with
native species or restored; otherwise increased buffer widths to protect functions and
values may be required.
iv. Where buffer disturbance has occurred during construction or other activities,
revegetation with native vegetation may be required.
b. Measurement of Buffers: All buffers shall be measured from the wetland boundary as
surveyed in the field pursuant to the requirements of subsection M4a of this Section,
Methodology.
c. Standard Buffer Zone Widths:
i. The width of the required wetland buffer zone shall be determined according to the
wetland category. The buffer zone required for all regulated wetlands is determined by
the classification of the wetland. If standard buffer widths cannot be met, and buffer
reductions per subsection M6e of this Section and buffer averaging per subsection M6f of
this Section cannot be accomplished, a variance to buffer requirements may be requested
per subsection N of this Section, Alternates, Modifications and Variances, and RMC 4-9-
250B, Variance Procedures. If the criteria in subsection M6d of this Section are met,
standard buffers may be increased.
Wetland Category Standard
Buffer
Category 1 100 feet
Category 2 50 feet
Category 3 25 feet
SELECTED DEVELOPMENT ACTION
The proposed onsite action selected focuses on the commercial re-development of the
site.
The entire site will be re-developed.
The development will terminate at the western edge of present development, and no
encroachment into the wetland/detention complex at the west will occur.
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 12
FIGURES
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 13
REFERENCE LIST
Adamus, P.R., E.J. Clairain Jr., R.D. Smith, and R.E. Young. 1987. Wetland Evaluation
Technique (WET); Volume II: Methodology, Operational Draft Technical Report Y-87,
U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands
and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79/31.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,"
Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Miss.
Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist. 1977. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of
Washington Press. Seattle, Washington.
Reppert, R.T., W. Sigleo, E. Stakhiv, L. Messman, and C. Meyers. 1979. Wetland
Values - Concepts and Methods for Wetland Evaluation. Research Report 79-R1, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soils Conservation Service. Soils Survey of King
County Area Washington, February 1979.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands
Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication Number 96-94.
Washington State Department of Fisheries, Catalog of Washington Streams and
Salmon Utilization, Volume 1., 1975
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 14
APPENDIX A - Field Data Forms
13012 – CenterPoint Renton WetRpt 15
ATTACHMENT 1 – Wetland Delineation Map
PROJECT SITE
Fig. 1Parcel #1253600030Vicinity map
´
0 1 20.5 Miles
1 in = 1 miles
PSSC PFOA
PFOA
PEMC
PFOC
PEM/SSF
PSSC
PFOC
PEMAPABH
PFOC
PSSC
PSSC
PEMC
PEMC
PEMC
PSSC
PEMC
PEMC
PSSC
PEMC
PEMC
PEMC
PEMC
PEMC
PSSF
PROJECT SITE
Fig. 2Parcel #1253600030National Wetland Inventory map
´
0 1,000 2,000500Feet
1 in = 1,000 feet
PROJECT SITE
Fig. 3Parcel #1253600030City of Renton Wetland Inventory map
´
0 1,000 2,000500Feet
1 in = 1,000 feet
Urban land
Snohomish silt loam
Woodinville silt loam
Tukwila muck
Seattle muck
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes
Renton silt loam
Indianola loamy fine sand, 4 to 15 percent slopes
PROJECT SITE
Fig. 4Parcel #1253600030NRCS soil type map
´
0 500 1,000250Feet
1 in = 500 feet
4
Att. 1Wetland and Drainage Corridor Assessment3751 East Valley Rd., City of RentonParcel #1253600030
0 150 30075Feet
1 inch = 150 feet
PondPond
Pond
Pond
Bioswale
Bioswale
Bioswale
Pond
Bioswale
Bioswale
W-33c
W-33a
W-48g4
Att. 1aWetland and Drainage Corridor AssessmentParcel #1253600030Surface Water System
0 150 30075Feet
1 inch = 150 feet
WL A 5,140 Sq. Ft on site
WL B 2,621 Sq. Ft on site
WETLAND BUFFER BOUNDARYWETLAND BUFFER BOUNDARY WETLAND BUFFER BOUNDARYAtt. 1Parcel #1253600030Wetland Delineation MapWest Portion - DETAILFrom Survey
0 40 8020Feet
1 inch = 40 feet
PONDS & BIOSWALES
H & S Consulting253 732 6515
1/13/14
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: 13032 Zip Renton centerPoint City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date:12/30/13
Applicant/Owner: CenterPoint State: WA Sampling Point: SP 1
Investigator(s): M. HECKERT Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Detention area Local relief (concave, convex, none): level Slope (%): 2%
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Mckenna gravelly loam NWI classification: PFOC
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Yes , Soil Yes, or Hydrology Yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 10M) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2. Populus trichocarpa 30 y FAC
3.
4.
= Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10 m )
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 100
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 1 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species 1 x 3 = 3
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 1 (A) 3 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.8
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: ground level maintained
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP 1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12 10/YR4/1 100 grey 100 clay loam
12-18 10yr 4/1 100 clay loam
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (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: fill
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): 8
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 6
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test Worksheet:
1. Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A) 2.
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 4.
50% = , 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. OBL species x1 =
4. FACW species x2 =
5. FAC species x3 =
50% = , 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x5 =
1. Dactylis glomerata 50 yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Prevalence Index = B/A =
3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01
7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No 2.
50% = , 20% = = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks: fill bare ground
Project Site: 13032 Zipper CenterPoint City/County: RENTON/KING Sampling Date: 12/30/13
Applicant/Owner: cENTERpOINT State: WA Sampling Point: SP 2
Investigator(s): M. Heckert Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%): 2
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
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
recent fill
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP 2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-16 10 yr 4/1 100
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks: fill on old fill
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
No
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Project Site: 13032 CenterPointr