HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA-08-138_Report 01CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 16, 2009
To: City Clerk's Office
From: Stacy Tucker
Subject: Land Use File Closeout
Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City
Clerk's Office
Project Name: Yahn Wetland Enhancement
LUA (file) Number: LUA-08-138, CAR
Cross-References:
AKA's:
Project Manager: Rocale Timmons
Acceptance Date: December 5, 2008
Applicant: Gregory & Jennifer Nixon Yahn
Owner: Same as applicant
Contact: Gregory Yahn
PXD Number: 3345700198
ERC Decision Date:
ERC Appeal Date:
Administrative Approval: January 12, 2009
. Appeal Period Ends: January 26, 2009
Public Hearing Date:
Date Appealed to HEX:
By Whom:
HEX Decision: Date:
Date Appealed to Council:
By Whom:
Council Decision: Date:
, Mylar Recording Number:
! Project Description: The applicant is requesting an exemption from Critical Areas Regulations.
i The applicants have revised their original approved proposal of planting native trees 3 vine maples
and 4 red cedars within the wetland buffer and the removal of a section of blackberry bushes to
just plantinq sixe Excelsor Cedar Trees and no removal of blackberry bushes.
Location: 3714 Lincoln Court NE
Comments: Originally approved 12/3/08 resubmitted revised planting plan, therefore, a revised
critical areas exemption was issued on 1/12/09 with a new 5 year expiration of 1/12/2014.
REVISED
CITY OF RENTON
EXEMPTION
FROM CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS
DATE:
LAND USE FILE NO.:
PROJECT NAME:
OWNER:
Applicant:
PROJECT MANAGERS
PROJECT LOCATION:
January 12, 2008
LUA08-138, CAR
Yahn Wetland Enhancement
City of Renton
Gregory and Jennifer Nixon Yahn
Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner (x7219)
Ion Arai, Assistant Planner (x7270)
3714 Lincoln Court NE
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting an exemption from the Critical
Areas Regulations. The applicants has revised their original approved proposal of planting
native trees (three (3) vine maples and four (4) red cedars) within the wetland buffer and the
removal of a section of blackberry bushes to just planting six (6) Excelsor Cedar Trees and no
removal of blackberry bushes.
CRITICAL AREA: Category 2 Wetland Buffer
EXEMPTION JUSTIFICATION: Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050C.5.a.iii Conservation,
Enhancement, Education and Related Activities of the Critical Areas Regulations is hereby
granted:
X iii. Approved Restoration/Mitigation: Any critical area and/or buffer restoration or
other mitigation activities which have been approved by the City.
FINDINGS: The proposed development is consistent with the following findings pursuant to
RMC section 4-3-050.C.5:
1. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or state or federal
law or regulation.
2. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry
standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles if submitted plans are
followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met.
3. Impacts will be minimized and disturbed areas will be immediately restored, if submitted
plans are followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met.
H:\Oi\l1sion.sIOe .... elop.ser\Oev&plan_lng\PROJECTS\08-138.RocalelCrillcal Area ExefTl)iion 08-138REVISED.doc Page 1 of2
4. Where wetland or buffer disturbance occurs during construction or other activities in
accordance with this exemption, the site will be revegetated with native vegetation as
required as a condition of approval for this exemption.
DECISION: An exemption from the critical areas regulations is approved for the
enhancement of the above described project subject to the following conditions:
SIGNATURE:
C.E. Vincent, Planning Director
CED Department
EXPIRATION: Five (5) years from the date of approval (signature date).
H:IDlvISlon.sIDevelop_ser\Dev&plan,lllgIPROJECTSIOB-138,RocalelCritlcal Area Exemption 08-138REVISED.doc:
( r date
Page2012
0()
"
"'----, -----'I?O
ACCESS &:
UTILITY EASEMENT
... :~~ u;~;n ... '}':::
3:~1.:}70Q:!17
C:, C.)
,"J
~.) .:.-,
u.
,,~
C}
Cl
I,!
'=J
'"
--'-"A Ci, ,
-J
® (xct'lsc(
Cedcif'
Tj
\-1\ J\c
...... ) -if
I \ -'I, I\)
yl-n IJ
l
~ ,
!
~
, -1-1: LJ I
C, [ ,.)<..: \ ,~I D
-;
S79?4'44"£
_ .... ,,-
To Whom it May Concern,
The reason for the deviation from the original plan for planting is due to the
topography and the need for planting smaller native trees at the higher elevation to
maximize privacy.
The removal of the blackberries are no longer taking place to a decrease in budget.
Sincerely,
Jennifer and Gregory Yahn
NOISII\IO 8NI011na
600Z ,1 NV'f
031\1303\:1 NOlJ'I31j~,UIO
R£\l
CITY OF RENTON
EXEMPTION
FROM CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS
DATE: December 3, 2008
LAND USE FILE NO.: LUA08-138, CAR
PROJECT NAME: Yahn Wetland Enhancement
OWNER: City of Renton
Applicant: Gregory and Jennifer Nixon Yahn
PROJECT MANAGER:
PROJECT LOCATION: 3714 Lincoln Court NE
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting an exemption from the Critical
Areas Regulations. The Critical Areas Exemption would allow the removal of existing blackberry
bushes within the buffer of a Category 2 wetland. The applicant has also proposed to plant
native trees within this same buffer; including 3 vine maples and 4 red cedars.
CRITICAL AREA: Category 2 Wetland Buffer
EXEMPTION JUSTIFICATION: Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050C.5.a.iii ConselVation,
Enhancement, Education and Re/ated Activities of the Critical Areas Regulations is hereby
granted:
X iii. Approved Restoration/Mitigation: Any critical area and/or buffer restoration or
other mitigation activities which have been approved by the City.
FINDINGS: The proposed development is consistent with the following findings pursuant to
RMC section 4-3-050.C.5:
1. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or state or federal
law or regulation.
2. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry
standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles if submitted plans are
followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met.
3. Impacts will be minimized and disturbed areas will be immediately restored, if submitted
plans are followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met.
H :\Oivision.s\Develop .ser\Dev&plan.ing\PROJECTS\08-138.Rocale\Critical Area Exemption 08-138.doc Page 1 of 2
DATE:
LAND USE FILE NO.:
PROJECT NAME:
OWNER:
Applicant:
~fVi st::-D
CITY OF RENTON
EXEMPTION
FROM CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS
December 5, 2008
LUA08-138, CAR
Yahn Wetland Enhancement
City of Renton
Gregory and Jennifer Nixon Yahn
PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons, AssOCiate Planner (x7219)
PROJECT LOCATION: 3714 Lincoln Court NE
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting an exemption from the Critical
Areas Regulations. The Critical Areas Exemption would allow the removal of existing blackberry
bushes within the buffer of a Category 2 wetland. The applicant has also proposed to plant
native trees within this same buffer; including 3 vine maples and 4 red cedars.
CRITICAL AREA: Category 2 Wetland Buffer
EXEMPTION JUSTIFICATION: Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050C.5.a.iii Conservation,
Enhancement, Education and Related Activities of the Critical Areas Regulations is hereby
granted:
X iii. Approved Restoration/Mitigation: Any critical area and/or buffer restoration or
other mitigation activities which have been approved by the City.
FINDINGS: The proposed development is consistent with the following findings pursuant to
RMC section 4-3-050.C.5:
1. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or state or federal
law or regulation.
2. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry
standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific prinCiples if submitted plans are
followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met.
3. Impacts will be minimized and disturbed areas will be immediately restored, if submitted
plans are followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met.
H :\Division.s\Oevelop .ser\Dev&plan.ing\PROJECTS\08-138. Rocale\Critical Area Exemption 08-138.doc Page 1 of 2
4. Where wetland or buffer disturbance occurs during construction or other activities in
accordance with this exemption, the site will be revegetated with native vegetation as
required as a condition of approval for this exemption.
DECISION: An exemption from the critical areas regulations is approved for the
enhancement of the above described project subject to the following conditions:
SIGNATURE:
C.E. Vincent, Pi'a'nning Director
CED Department
EXPIRATION: Five (5) years from the date of approval (signature date).
H:\Division.s\Oevelop.ser\Oev&plan. ing\PROJECTS\OB-138.Rocale\Critical Area Exemption OB-13B.doc Page 2 of 2
date
'-----~
I~~~~. ~~~
fTJ--;"",,*-· ~~
1 /@;,I e ~ 'P~D'R£NC[
""0. 6' ACCESS & <::>
UTILITY EASEMENT
.~.~ o~';nn'~1'~
I ,-, I. , t ~:) 1V ,;; .-r t.} 6 ' ,0 ___ oj ~) 'Job ~,
&0.
-I .... -'.. .. " . . ": ~\ .......... './,,, ~{·tt
G)
c~
t~
Cl m
-,
L~.'i~~ ~ '~{mJ.~
_~, . t . §it{ II~ N f ~ 1
(>
,-('
10 ~ s~k ," :;;1fo
l
't<~ ftM0w, ~I~
O&RU Ct~~d cA..
Ae V,f\{. M4f}t1 ~
S79 '24'4+''E
.,.. .... , " .......
... •
City of Renton
LAND USE PERMIT
MASTER APPLICATION
PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION
NAME: J,; ~ NY,· Greqe,r1.j and eJln, eF ixton Mn
_J
PRO~CT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: _
It H I\l VVETL f\OJ D EN Hf\N ~ E-I'1EJ1Ir
ADDRESS:
i'7iL/ unc.cif) Ct'l.lrt I\JE PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE:
CITY: ZIP:
K<:Iit:CJ) <j ~ LS 1.:0
3ilL( Uncdn CU.U l N c:.
i2-c-n 1-'-'" LV 11 <i S'CC; (" ,
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
i-j;)5"-171-1;;l30
APPLICANT (if other than owner)
KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S):
33~ tjjO -0/18
NAME: EXISTING LAND USErS): J<.. e.s; c1crfn ti. (
COMPANY (if applicable): PROPOSED LAND USErS): . Vv'.tt}",,,,{ ehnc,,,,te"lcnr
--
ADDRESS: EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION:
RSf
CITY: ZIP: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION
(il applicable):
TELEPHONE NUMBER
EXISTING ZONING: R\?
CONTACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (il applicable):
NAME:
V«-hll Grt'4C{1.-{ (yl
'J j
SITE AREA (in square feet): 3700 ---
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE
COMPANY (il applicable): DEDICATED:
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS:
ADDRESS:
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET
CITY: ZIP:
ACRE (if applicable):
NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable):
TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-'/J ADDRESS:
ZoGJ:21-5'3'7' j'-e:JyQh(l(ih'-'~ , NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable):
Q: we b/pw/ de vserv/forms/plann inglmasterapp .doc 07129/05
INFOR
NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable):
(
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable):
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable):
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable):
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable):
NET FLOOR AREA OF NON·RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if
applicable):
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE
NEW PROJECT (if applicable):
MATION (contin -'1)'-----______ ~
PROJECT VALUE: J/10C(}O
IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF
ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE
SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable):
o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE
o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO
o FLOOD HAZARD AREA
o GEOLOGIC HAZARD
o HABITAT CONSERVATION
___ sq. ft.
___ sq. ft.
___ sq. ft.
o SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES sq. ft.
J WETLANDS '.;)75(" . .)5 sq. ft.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
(Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included)
SITUATE IN THE QUARTER OF SECTION _, TOWNSHIP _. RANGE_. IN THE CITY
OF RENTON. KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON.
TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES
List all land use applications being applied for:
1. 3.
2. 4.
Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP
I, (Print Name/s) • declare that I am (please check one) _ the current owner of the property
involved in this application or __ the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing
statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
(Signature of Owner/Representative)
(Signature of Owner/Representative)
Q:weblpwfdevservfformsfplanninglmasterapp.doc
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that -:::-:--;-_-;--;---;-_-;-;=
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/herftheir free and voluntary act for the
uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary (Printl _____________ _
My appointment expires: _________ _
2 07129/05
,
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS
This requirement may be waived by:
1. Property Services Section .
2. Public Works Plan Review Section
PROJECT NAME: Yo;h II. C 1'1+ IC.o..\ A~~ ii~'w,"ph'(lYL..
3. Building Section DATE Wlo/01
4. Development Planning Section
Q:\WEB\Pw\DEVSERv\Forms\Planning\waiverofsubmittalreqs_9-06.xls 09106
; •
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS
Agreement Statement 2 AND 3
Inventory of Existing Sites 2 AND 3
Lease Agreement, Draft 2 AND 3
Map of 3
Photosimulations 2 AND 3
This requirement may be waivEid by:
1. Property Services Section
2. Public Works Plan Review Section
PROJECT NAME: Ya.:no CrIL'u-( &~ ~'fiY'-..
3. Building Section
4. Development Planning Section
DATE: WI3!Oj
Q;\WES\PW\DEVSERv\Forms\PJanning\waiverofsubmitlalreqs_9-06.xls 09/06
Applicant Name
'GREGORY
REQUEST FOR CRITICAL
AREAS EXEMPTION
YAI·HJ
(FOR SEPA EXEMPT ACTIVITIES)
City of Renton Development Services Division
1055 South Grady WaY-Renton, WA 98055
Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231
Project Name
'//thN VVETLflND EN 1/ /tfl/ C (5111 tN I
Brief Description of Project
f'/Ar6o..l reM 0 va.l 0+
Phone Number
lOl.v· ,)'J'7-h3'11
0<.15tl0,3 blQcktxrnes Gtnd pla.nl:lnj of.
rol\.h,,~ trees-If\ thE n,,/:tve fr-ctecbon Grou.:1:.h Ar~l (NfbA)
-Type of Critical Area
NClbVe Prokthon Growlh Ar€a. 0 Work Occurs in Critical Area ~ Work Occurs in Buffer
PURPOSE: Exempt activities provided with a letter of exemption from the Development Services
Administrator may intrude into a critical area or required buffer (Subject to any conditions or requirements
provided by the Administrator).
APPLICABILITY OF EXEMPTIONS: The following is a general list of activities that may be exempt from
the critical areas regulations. More specific descriptions of the activities are contained in the Critical
Areas Regulations. Some of the listed activities may not be exempt in certain critical areas. The
Development Services Division will evaluate you request according to the City of Renton Critical Areas
Regulations in RMC 4-3-050C, J, L, and N.
I AM REQUESTING A CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION FOR ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING
ACTIVITIES:
~ Conservation, Enhancement, and Related Activities:
• Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, and other wildlife
• Enhancement activities as defined in chapter 4-11 RMC 1
• Any critical area, buffer restoration, or other mitigation activities that have been approved
by the City
o Research and Site Investigation:
• Nondestructive education and research
• Site investigative work necessary for land use application submittals such as surveys, soil
logs, etc.
o Agricultural, Harvesting, and Vegetation Management:
• Harvesting wild foods
• Existing/Ongoing agricultural activities 1
PW/DevServ/Forms/Planning/CriticalAreasExemptionSEPA 12/05
• Removal of dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or dangerous ground cover or hazardous
trees which have been certified as such by a forester, registered landscape architect, or
certified arborist
o Surface Water Alteration:
• New surface water discharges provided the discharge meets the requirements of the Storm
and Surface Water Drainage Regulations 1 2 3
• New or modified regional stormwater facilities 1 2 3
• Flood hazard reduction 1 3 4 6
o Roads, Parks, Public and Private Utilities:
• Relocation of Existing Utilities out of Critical Area and Buffer
• Maintenance, operation, and repair of existing parks, trails, roads, facilities, and utilities 1 2
• Installation, construction, replacement, or operation of utilities, traffic control, and walkways
within existing improved right-if-way or easement 1 2
• Modification of existing utilities and streets by 10% or less 1 2 5
• Management and essential tree removal for public or private utilities, roads and public
parks 1
D Wetland Disturbance, Modification, and Removal:
• Any activity in small Category 3 wetlands 1 2 3 4 5
• Temporary disturbances of a wetland due to construction activities that do not include
permanent filling 1 2 3 5
o Maintenance and Construction for Existing Uses and Facilities:
• Remodeling, replacing, or removing existing structures 1 2
• Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing public or private uses and
facilities where no alteration of the critical area and required buffer or additional fill
materials will be placed 1 2
• Construction activity connected with an existing single family residence or garage, provided
that no portion of the new work occurs closer to the critical area or required buffers than
the existing structure 1 2
• Existing activities which have not been changed, expanded or altered provided they
comply with the applicable requirements of chapter 4-10 RMC 1
o Emergency Activities:
• Removal of trees or ground cover by a City department, agency, public, or private utility in
an emergency situation
• Public interest emergency use, storage, and handling of hazardous materials by
governmental organizations in an Aquifer Protection Area
ADDITIONAL PERMITS: Additional permits from other agencies may be required. It is the applicant's
responsibility to obtain these other approvals. Information regarding these other requirements may be
found at http://aDPs.ecy.wa.gov/opas/
PWIDevServ/Fonns/Planning/CriticalAreasExemptionSEPA 2 12/05
\
\
\
e
80 !.,.~I~
,6° ---' __ .--~ I ~~
~/.--~.
'20·
'" .<v ! ('; c;~ 0 t.' 6"" ' tfJ'0
~:
(.,
~.)
~>
(;1
~·l
, '" (:l r.)
Cl
D'
i ~, -,I --'"-~ ., .. ~ CI,
,"
~~ (( I KI~ "'f ~-:rt? ~~, \\l/ig:, ~ ~ ,-m~ / ~ ,,~
~»<"'b~\< »~~~~i '~ ......... ~ r~ t
1
':"': I. ~~ ';nn', <:~;
'" 3:H.:)70n'11~t 0 ",'. ,.
~
Q)
~ -. ,,:1
'§E s~l(. I ;;'10
~~~,vt~~,
o e f\U Ct~~d ~
6,e VII'lt. MyJd 4l-
, '
-,
S79'24'44't
.,..., ... -
5
(21
-7,J;j
4
---_._------
.... ,.
1 INCH = 200 FeeT
5
7 8
----------_.----
'"
-, .
. _----
--------~~~-------qC) ~ o:)q (llJ)
J. S. Jones .... nd As soci .... tes. Inc .
. ~~~ ,
,wtlCROFILMED' =~
b -.-..
WETLAND ASSESSMENT
of
3712 Lincoln Avenue N.E.
Renton, Washington
Prepared fo r:
Phil Kitzes
Charbord Development
23126 S.E. 285th Street
Maple Valley, Washington 98038
(360) 886-7786
December 4, 1998
Prepared By:
Charles Repath, Wetland Biologist
r1AO 1 '" F'l\l _j"':\ .... lJ '"'...,.;]
RECEJVED
Jeffery S. Jones, Certified Professional Wetland Scientist
3 • 0 8 5 1 nd P I 0 , e. N. ( .
IACOMA,WASHINCfON 98~12
2 5 j -9 4 2 - 7 1 3 I / r A x 2 5 3 - 9 4 2 -1 I j 2
J .... _ Jones and Associates. Inc_
Table a/Contents
1.0 Project Description .......................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Site Location and Directions ........................................................................................... 1
3.0 Methodology .....................................................................•............................................. 1
4.0 General Site Description ................................................................................................. 1
5.0 Vegetation ...........................................................................•.......................................... .3
5.1 Vegetation Methodology ..................... , ............................. : ............................................ 3
5.2 Vegetation Results .......................................................................................................... 3
6.0 Soils ................................................................................................................................ 6
6.1 Soils Methodology .......................................................................................................... 6
6.2 Soils Results .................................................................................................................... 6
7.0 Hydrology ....................................................................................................................... 8
7.1 Hydrology Methodology ................................................................................................. 8
7.2 Hydrology Results .......................................................................................................... 8
8.0 Wetland Determination ................................................................................................... 8
8.1 Uplands ........................................................................................................................... 8
8 .2 Wetlands ......................................................................................................................... 8
9.0 Wetland Rating and Buffer Regulations ......................................................................... 9
10.0 Functional Assessment. ................................................................................................. 9·
11.0 Authority ....................................................................................................................... 10
12.0 Limitations .................................................................................................................... 10
12.0 References ..................................................................................................................... 11
Figures
1.0 Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................... 2
2.0 Soils Map ........................................................................................................................ 7
Tables
1.0 Plant Indicator Status ...................................................................................................... 3
2.0 Plant Species Found at Sample Locations .................................................. .;:, ................ .5
Attachments
Wetland Map
King County Wetlands Inventory Sheets
Wetland and Buffer Functions and Semi-quantitative Performance Assessment
J. S. Jones and Associates. Inc.
1.0 Project Description
The applicant proposes to shortplat 1.73 acres. This study was conducted to determine if wetlands
are present and the type and extent of wetlands on or near the property.
2.0 Site Location and Directions
The site is located at 3712 Lincoln Avenue N.E. in Renton, Washington (see map). The King
County tax parcel number is 334570-0020. The site is in Section 32, Township 24 North, Range 5
East of the Willamette Meridian.
Directions to the site from the junction of Interstate 405 and N.E. 44th Street in Renton are as
follows: Take N.E. 44th Street east; N.E. 44th Street becomes Lincoln Avenue N.E.; atthe Yat
the junction of Lincoln Avenue N.E. and Ii0th Place N.E., stay to the right on Lincoln Avenue
N.E.; tqesite is the third property on the left south ofN.E. 36th Street.
3.0 Methodology
The wetland assessment and delineation were perfonned using the Routine Small Area
Methodology as described in Part IV, Section D of the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual (COE. (987). The Routine Small Area Methodology is "used when the project area is
small, plant communities are homogeneous, plant community boundaries are abrupt, and the
. project is not controversial." The wetland determination was based on the presence of the three.
criteria for jurisdictional wetlands: hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation.
All three criteria must be present in order to classifY an area as a wetland.
The wetland assessment included a review of the King County Wetlands [nvenlory (King County,
(991), and the USDA Soil Conservation Service's Soil Survey of King County (Snyder, 1973).
The on-site evaluation was completed on August lOth, 1998. Wetland boundaries were delineated
and marked with consecutively numbered orange flagging, based upon an evaluation of soils,
vegetation and hydrologic characteristics. The wetland boundaries and buffers are presented on
the attached wetland map.
4.0 General Site Description
The property is located on a north facing hillside. Slopes are from 10% to over 30%. One single-
family residence is present on-site. A drainage feature is located along the east property line. The
drainage feature flows to the north. On-site vegetation is deciduous forest with a dense understory
of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus). Surrounding land use is residential with areas of
deciduous forest.
J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
3712 Lincoln Avenue N.E.
Renton, Washington
Figure 1.0 Vicinity Map
2
J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
5,0 Vegetation
5.1 Vegetation Methodology
Rules for determining dominant species were established in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual (COE, 1987), Dominants are determined using the 50120 rule. To use this
rule. percent cover is added by order of descending cover until 50% cover is reached. These
species are considered dominants. The next most common species is also included as a dominant
if it has over 20% cover, Species with less than 5% cover are not considered dominant species,
Hydrophytic vegetation has adaptations that allow these species to survive in saturated or
inundated environments, These environments are classified according to the Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin, 1979). The probability of
species being found inwetland environments has been determined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service in the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary
(U.S. FWS, 1996) (see Table I). An indicator status was applied to each species according to its
probability of occurring in wetlands.
Table 1: Plant Indicator Status
Indicator Category Symbol Occurrence in Wetlands
Obligate Wetland OBL > 99%
Facultative Wetland FACW 67-99%
Facultative FAC 34-67%
Facultative Upland FACU 1-33%
Upland UPL > 1%
Note: FACW, FAC and FACU have + and -values to repeesent species near the wetter end of the spectrum (+) and
the drier end of the spectrum (-).
(National List 0/ Plant Species thai Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary, Reed 1988)
5.2 Vegetation Results
A small area of lawn and ornamental landscaping is present around the residence. The remainder
of the property is deciduous forest dominated by red alder and big-leaf maple (Acer
macrophyllum) with a dense understory of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus), The drainage
feature is dominated by Himalayan blackberry, salmonberry (Rubus spectabi/is) and lady fern
(Athyrium filix:femina), with areas of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea).
At sample location I (SL-I), an upland, deciduous-forested plant community is present. Dominant
species are big-leaf maple, Scouler willow (Salix scouleriana), Himalayan blackberry and sword
fern (Polystichum munitum). Dominant species at SL-I are 25% FAC and 75% FACU. An
upland plant community is present because less than 50% of dominant species are F AC, FACU
andOBL.
At SL-2. a Palustrine scrub/shrub plant community is present. Vegetation is dominated by
Himalayan blackberry, lady fern, giant horsetail (Equisetum telmateia) and reed canarygrass.
Dominant species at SL-2 are 75% FAC and FACW and 25% FACU. A hydrophytic plant
community is present because over 50% of dominant species are FAC, FACU and OBL.
3
J S. Jones and Associates. Inc.
At SL-3. an upland. deciduous-forested plant community is present. Vegetation is dominated by
red alder and Himalayan blackberry. Other dominants within 100 feet ofSL-3 in the same
vegetation community include big-leaf maple and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), two
FACU species. Dominant species at SL-3 are 50% FAC and 50% FACU. To be considered
hydrophytic, over 50% of the dominant species must be FAC, FACW or OSL.
At SL-4, an upland, deciduous-forested plant community is present. Vegetation is dominated by
big-leaf maple, western hazelnut (Cory/us cornuta), Himalayan blackberry and bracken fern
(Pteridium aquilinum). Dominant species at SL-4 are 100% FACU. An upland plant community
is present because less than 50% of the dominant species are FAC, FACW or OSL.
At SL-S, a Palustrine emergent plant community is present. SL-5 is located in a plant community.
Vegetation is dominated by bluegrass (Poa sp.), large-Ieafavens (Geum macrophyllum) and giant
horsetail. Dominantspecies at SL-7 are 100% FAC, FACW and FACW-. A hydrophytic plant
community is present because over 50% of dominant species are FAC, F ACU and OSL.
.
At SL-6, an upland. deciduous-forested plant community is present. Dominant species are big-leaf
maple and Himalayan blackberry. Dominant species at sample location 6 are 100% F ACU. An
upland plant community is present because less than 50% of the dominant species are FAC,
FACW orOBL.
4
J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
Table 2: Plant Species Found On-Site and at Sample Locations
SCientific Common Name
x
5
J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
6.0 Soils
6.1 Soils Methodology
Hydric soils are soils that are "saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing
season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part" (NTCHS, 1987). They are either
organic soils (peats and mucks), or are mineral soils that are saturated long enough to produce soil
properties associated with a reducing environment. These soils have low chroma, and have
redoximorphic characteristics (characteristics related to an anaerobic environment) such as redox
concentrations (mottles), redox depletions (gleying), or a reduced matrix (a matrix that changes
color when exposed to air).
6.2 Soils Results
USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) mapped on-site soils as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam
(AgC) (Snyder. 1973). The site visit confirmed Soil Conservation Service mapping. In a
representative profile for Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, "the surface layer and subsoil are very
dark brown, dark brown, and grayish-broWn gravelly sandy loam about 27 inches thick. The
substratum is olive-gray silty clay loam. It extends to a depth of 60 inches or more. The
substratum is grayish-brown, weakly consolidated to strongly consolidated glacial till that extends
to a depth of27 inches or more" (Snyder, 1973).
An inclusion ofNorrna sandy loam is present in the drainage feature. This inclusion was not
identified by the SCS. In a representative profile for Norma sandy loam "the surface layer is black
sandy loam about 10 inches thick. The subsoil is dark grayish-brown and dark-gray sandy loam
and extends to a depth of 60 inches or more" (Snyder, (973).
The soil at SL-l is non-hydric. From 0 to [8 inches, the "A" horizon is brown ([OYR 4/3)
gravelly sandy loam. The soil is non-hydric because it has a high chroma matrix and lacks mottles
at ten inches.
The soil at SL-2 is hydric. From 0 to [8 inches, the "An horizon is black (I OYR 2/1) silt loam.
The soil is hydric because it has a one chroma matrix at ten inches.
The soil at SL-3 is non-hydric. From 0 to 8 inches, the "An horizon is brown (lOYR 4/3) gravelly
sandy loam. From 8 to [8 inches, the "B"horizon is IOYR4/4 gravelly sandy loam. The soils is
non-hydric because it has a high chroma matrix and lacks mottles at ten inches.
The soil at SL-4 is non-hydric. From 0 to 3 inches, the "AU horizon is very dark grayish brown
([OYR 3/2) gravelly sandy loam. From 3 to [8 inches. the "B" horizon is very dark grayish brown
(2.5Y 3/2) gravelly sandy loam. The soils is non-hydric because it has a high chroma matrix and
lacks mottles at ten inches.
The soil at SL-5 is hydric. From 0 to 20 inches, the "An horizon is black (IOYR 2/1) gravelly
sandy loam. Below 20 inches. the "B" horizon is dark brown (IOYR 3/3) with many yellowish red
(5YR 5/6 mottles). The soil at SL-5 is hydric because it has a one chroma matrix at ten inches.
6
3712 Lincoln Avenue N.E.
Renton, Washington
USDA Soil Conservation Service
King County Soil Survey, 1973, Sheet II
Figure 2.0 Soils Map
7
J. S. Jones and Associates. Inc.
J. S. Jones and Associates. Inc.
The soil at SL-6 is non-hydric. From 0 to 2 inches, the "An horizon is very dark grayish brown
(lOYR 3/2) gravelly sandy loam. From 2 to 18 inches, the "8" horizon is dark yellowish brown
(lOYR 3/4) gravelly sandy loam with common, distinct, yellowish red (5YR 5/6) mottles. The soil
at SL-6 is non-hydric because it has a high chroma matrix at ten inches.
7.0 Hydrology
7.1 Hydrology Methodology
The 1987 manual requires inundation, flooding, or saturation to the surface for at least 5% to
. 12.5% of the growing season to satisfy the hydrology requirements for jurisdictional wetlands
(COE, 1987). In Western Washington, wetland hydrology is typically present between the months
of December and May. The growing season can either be defmed by the number· of· frost-free days
(temperatures above 28(F), or the period during which the soil temperarureata depth of 19.7
inches is above biological zero (4I(F). The growing season is all but a few weeks of the year. The
delineation took place August 15th, during a week of heavy precipitation. At each sample
location. wetland hydrology indicators such as inundation, saturation, water marks, and drainage
patterns in wetlands were assessed in a twenty-inch soil pit.
7.2 Hydrology Results
Wetland hydrology is associated with the drainage feature located near the east property line.
Hydrology comes from rainfall. surface flow, seeps and the upstream portion of the drainage
feature. A surface water flow 2 inches deep was present in the drainage fearure at the time of the
site visit.
At SL-I. SL-3. SL-4 and SL-6, wetland hydrology was not present at the time ofthesitevisit.
Wetland hydrology indicators including water marks, drift lines, sediment deposits or drainage
patterns in wetlands were.not present at these sample locations.
At SL-2 and SL-S. the wetland hydrology criteria was positive because the soil was saturated to
the surface. A defined stream channel was present in the drainage feature at both sample
locations.
8.0 Wetland Determination
8.1 Uplands
SL-I. SL-3, SL-4 and SL-6 are upland sample locations. Upland vegetation is dominant. Soils are
high chroma and lack redox features. Wetland hydrology indicators were not present.
8.2 Wetlands
The on -ite wetland is 8470 square feet. The wetland is associated with the drainage feature
located along the east property boundary. The wetland extends off-site to the north and south.
On-site wetlands were not identified in the City of Renton Critical Areas Inventory (Renton, 1991)
or the King County Wetland Inventory (King County. 1990).
The on-site wetland was delineated on the basis of the presence of Norma soils and a hydrophytic
vegetation community. Wetland hydrology was observed in the bottom of the drainage feature.
8
J S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
Wetland hydrology was not present throughout the entire area of both Norma soils and
hydrophytic vegetation because the delineation took place during the summer dry season.
Himalayan blackberry, a FACU is a dominant in both uplands and wetlands on-site. Himalayan
blackberry is commonly found in wetlands as well as uplands in Western Washington and was not
considered in determining the wetland boundary.
SL-2 and SL-5 are located in the drainage feature along the east property boundary. Vegetation at
both SL-2 and SL-5 is hydrophytic. Soils are one chroma at ten inches and soils were saturated to
the surface.
9.0 Wetland and stream Rating and Buffer Requirement
The wetland in the drainage feature is over one acre in size. According to Chapter 32 of the
wetlands greater than 2,200 square feet are Category 2 wetlands.· Category 2 wetlands are required
to have a 50-foot buffer.
10.0 Functional Assessment
Wetlands have three primary functions. Wetlands improve water quality, as soils and leafy
emergents act to filter and bind water borne pollutants. Wetlands provide important'water-holding
and flood storage functions. by slowly releasing storm runoff to rivers, reducing the extent of
flooding downstream. Wetlands provide important wildlife habitat for a large number of
invertebrate. plant and animal species. Benefits to nearby human residents include buffering from
surrounding development and opportunities for enjoying native wildlife and vegetation.
On-site wetlands are in the upper third of the watershed. Hydrology comes from hillside seeps,
rainfall and sheet flow from the surrounding uplands. Water quality improvement is high.
Vegetation cover is over 90% and now-through is moderate. Water holding and storm water
functions are moderate due to the unconstrained outlet and the size of the wetland. Wetland and
wetland buffer functions were assessed using the Wetland and Buffer Functions and Semi-
quantitative Pec(ormance Assessment (Cooke. 1995).
Flood and stormwater functions are moderate. The wetland is associated with a tributary of May
Creek. the wetland. includind oft~site area. is 5 to 10 acres and is located in the upper 1/3rd of the
drainage. Base now and groundwater support is moderate because of the wetlands size, position
in the watershed. seasonal flooding and low-flow sensitive fish popUlations downstream. Erosion
and shoreline protection is moderate because of the dense vegetation along the ordinary high water
mark and moderate development upstream. Water quality improvement is moderate because of
the size of the wetland. high vegetation cover and moderately developed upstream basin.
the on-site wetland provides moderate biological support because of its' size, variety of habitat
types. high invasive species. seasonal surface water, moderate organic export and connection to
upland habitats. Overall habitat functions are moderate because the wetland size, moderate habitat
diversity and moderate function as sanctuary or refuge from surrounding development. Specific
habitat functions are moderate .tor invertebrates, amphibians, mammals and birds and low for fish.
Cultural and socioeconomic functions are low. The wetland is privately owned and therefore lacks
9
J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
educational and passive and active recreational opportunities. Aesthetic value is low because
views of the wetland are blocked by Himalayan blackberry. The presence of historical or
archaeological resources is not known.
11.0 Authority
This determination is in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the objective of .
which is to "maintain and restore the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of
the United States" (COE, 1987). Wetlands are "areas that are inundated or saturated by surface 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. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas" (EPA, 40 CFR
230.3 and CE, 33 CFR 328.3). ,
12.0 Limitations
Wetlands are subject to seasonal and annual variation. Wetland determinations and delineations
are not final until approved by regulatory agencies and/or local jurisdictions.
10
J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
13.0 References
COE. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, US
Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksberg, Mississippi.
Cowardin. Lewis M.· 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United
States. e.s. Fish and Wildlife Service. Jamestown, North Dakota.
Federal Register. 1980. 40 CFR Part 230; Section 404(b)( I) Guidelines for Specification of
Disposal Sites for Dredged or Fill Material. Vol. 45, No. 249, 85352-85353. US Government
Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Federal Register. 1982. Title 33: Navigation and Navigable Waters; Chapter II, Regulatory
Programs of the Corps of Engineers. Vol. 47, No. 138, P 31810. US Government Printing Office,
Washington D.C. ,
King County. 199\. King County Wetlands Inventory. King County Environmental Division.
Bellevue. Washington.
King County. 1996. Zoning Code Title 2 I A. King County Department of Development and
Environmental Services. Renton, Washington . .
MacBeth Division. 1990. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corporation.
Baltimore, Maryland.
Reed. Porter B. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: National Sum·mary.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. St. Petersburg, Florida.
Renton. 1992. Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton. Renton. Washington
Snyder. Dale E .. Phillip S~ Gale, Russell F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area,
Washingron. USDA, SCS. Washington, D.C.
II
,. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
#
Attachments
12
,
S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
Routine Wetland Determination Data Form
(1987 CaE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: -3 112LJ.-.;(oJp flt/ -0. C. Dale: "2Z
APPli~antJow~'lJ~I~t!.:i
Investigator: L..
County: 1<':;1
State: /.L'.
Do Nonnal Circumstances exist on the site? <YsJ No Community 10:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation) Yes <@ Transect !D:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes ~ Plot 10: ~2-7 Explain: Sample Loc.:
Wetl.lUpl: /./.0
V -CoI.«.t I .Jr.
VEGETATION 1 I ~,
Dominant Indicator Percent Basal Dominant Indicator Percent Stem
I~!: Sp~cies St~lus CQy!:r ..AmI WQod:l Y:il1~::i Status ~ Qnutl
IE} ./PltJ(2k .---Y-a. 9·lI-b~(~ j,'kv .?6 /--#((.) ----2. 10.r-. --------J. II. ----------4. 12.
Dominant Indicator Percent Stem Dominant Indicator Percent
~ Status ~ Dll!nl 11;~:tIiD ~ C=r
ML bL.L --~() 'T --
6. -----14. -----
7. 15. ----8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACWor FAC: 2<7% (Excluding FAC-)
Basis for Decision: k5S 77/"", ";0% Fdt; ;~O.6c...
/
HYDROLOGY
~~Ualld l:b:<j[QIQcy" Ingi~atQ[,s;
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Primary Indicators:
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Guage -Inundated
_ Aerial Photographs -Saturated hI Upper 12 Inches
Other Water marks ~Recorded Data Available:
-
Drift Lines -_ Sediment Deposits
Ei~ld Qb,eaaliQD,: _ Drainage Pallerns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water (in.) .. _ Oxidized Root Channels (upper 12"
Water-Stained Leaves -Depth to Free Water in Pit (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test -Depth to Saturated, Soil: (in.) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Basis for Decision: tlltf~ J1;kI'7j ) ,<J'/;; Itf0rJ5 jlr HLsr.ur
.
J. ~, les and Associates, Inc, .
SOILS
Map Unit Name /f. /~J h 'Vvvl 6;L Drainage Class:?'/7AL /.
(Series and Phase): Do· Field Observations 6~
Taxonomy (Subgroup)'r-~-/ h /L ~/l.L Confirm Mapped Type? e
EQfil~ 12~miptiQn;
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Structure
(~ ~ ~ (Munsell Moist) Abungance!~Qnt!:i!SI CQOC[etiQDS . g!~.
0-3 cCSL
3-t-I"'J t05L
Hydric Soil Indicators: Concretions
-Histosol -= High Organic Content in Surface layer
_ Histic Epipedon in Sandy Soils
-Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_ Reducing Conditions -Listed on National Hydric Soils List -.
I _ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ 2 Chroma with Mottling
Basis for Decision: I J.J.I,"-n fdn AJ,n-~t!'"5Wf
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ()$!? Is the Sampling Point in a Wetland? Yes ~
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ®
Hydric Soils Present? Yes'~
Remarks: .-
-
* This data form is a combination of the original and amended 1987 Routine Wetland Determination data rorms.
,.
Jones and Associates, Inc.
Routine Wetland Determination Data Form
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
ProjectiSite: .~ '//"2 / . .,u/",IA.J //-0<.<-1 C. Dale: Ci"'/2(,/H~
ApplicanllOwner: k. -/-1/« County: * Investigator: >/ ,,-ffiLI
/"\
State:
Do Nonnal Circumstances exist on the site? (Yes/ No Community 10:
Transect 10:
Plot 10:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation) Yes:!3
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes
Explain: Sample Lac.: ~ Wetl.lUpl:
'.J~ Iff '" r #' /Ifz.,!ff /V,?,.--<? /, ~
VEGETATION /
Dominant Indicator Percent Basal DOlllinant Indicator Percent Stem
I[!:~ Su!:~i!:s Slatus CQl!!:[ ~. W~ V' ~tJ.!::t l&m. l:wmI
I. --9'~7 'Mev t::U --
2. . 10. ----3. II. ----4. 12. -
Dominant Indicator Percent Stem Dominant Indicator Percent
Sht:llb S~~i~ Stat!.!:i C2EL Qrnnl Herb StIIlIs W!m
5. ----13/ .&/J, &/-J Elk ?-6 --
6. I~';" II ,J/ fiku /6 ----
7. 15.!.?7;;,;.... J/)'? to "3/) --8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC:
7.,-% F#c Q'fhyuJ (Excluding FAC-)
Basis for Decision: 7/7#[, k'.or-d O~~¥ a;4rd
Ot/~ <0<70 7#c r;i?rCLJ
HYDROLOGY
W~lIalld U~d[QIQe): Illdi~alQ[s'
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Primary Indicators:
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Guage Inundated
_ Aerial Photographs .......saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Other Water marks --
No Recorded Data Available: -Drift Lines -_ Sediment Deposits .
Ei~k! Qbsen:atiQIlS; VDrainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary [ndicators (2 or more required):
DepUl of Surface Waler (in.) .. Oxidized Roo! Channels (upper [2"
11 -Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pi! (in.) _ Loca[ Soil Survey Data
e) (in.)
~C-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: Other (Explain in Remarks)
Basis for Decision: 'I'~f't-'Ld (' iJ #I t--¥ { -5# -jb5u/;'U
J.~. nes and Associates, Inc.
SOILS '/
Map Unit Name ;!-I p, w.,.f-Drainage Class: vP//
(Series and Phase): ,_. r4"f L Do Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): ~~-, ~IA'Yj" ,,-Confirm Mapped Type? ~NO
~Qfil~ QescriRtiQn;
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Structure
(lnilill HQrizQn (MUnl~ll MQilll (Mynsell M2isD AbYndaD~!:l;;Qntm! f~S:~DS ~tc a-P fr ~ez'f k -/r--+-I.?J . ?5'.t:..
Hydric Soil Indicators: Concretions
-Histosol -High Organic Content in Surface layer
_ Histic Epipedon in Sandy Soils
-Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_ Reducing Conditions = Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ 2 Chroma with Mottling
Basis for Decision: /~{~ Him ;V.I-r '/A!¥~
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ~ Is the Sampling Point in a Wetland? Yes It:!2.J
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes6W
Hydric Soils Present? Yes at:;>
Remarks:
. -* This data form IS a combination of the ongmal and amended 1967 Routine Wetland Determination data forms,
" :. Jones and Associates, Inc.
Routine Wetland Determination Data Form
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: -;,:::) 717... / .~/;,7,J A->.-' f JC;
Applicant/Owner' LX J. ""..,
Investigator: L---'>..L,.A.I _
,
Dale: -c;?/Z~d:;7F
County: A:/~
State: WA:::....
Do Nonnal Circumslances .xist on the site? (2.SY No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation) Yes ~
CommunilY ID: __ _
Transect ID:
PlotlD:
Sample Loc.: $. -2
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes a:!JY
Explain: ________ ~ _________ _
VEGETATION
Dominant
2. ____ _
3. ____ _
4.
Dominant
Shrub Sp<:e;es
5. ____ _
6. ____ _
7. ____ _
8.
Indicator
~
Indicalor
Status
.
Percent Basal
CQY~[ .Awl.
~ ---
---
---
Percent Stem
~Qmnl
---
---
---
WetiJUpl: / ~ ':J
Dominant Indicator Percent Stem
WQodX ':lilIes Stalu~ ..cJu= kmmJ
9.,u..h~~ .II KO /a:J'$ __
10. ------
II. ------
12.
Dominanl Indicator Percent
1:I~[b Sut~its SlaW Cl!m:
13. ---
14. -----
IS. ---
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC:
(Excluding FAC-) ~
/
HYDROLOGY
y,:e!lalliJ I:bd[QIQg~ hldicaIQr~;
_ Recorded Dala (Describe in Remarks): Primary Indicators:
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Guage -Inundated
_ Aerial Photographs _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Other Water marks ~ Recorded Data Available: -
-Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Eield Q~etyal;QIIS; _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicalors (2 or more required):
Deptll of Surface Water (in.) .. _ Oxidized Root Channels (upper 12")
Water-Stained Leaves -Depth to Free Water in Pit (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test -Depth to Salurated Soil: (in.) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Basis for Decision: /pJ;clt!-n1 jJJr 7r~e,vr
"
J. v. les and Associates, Inc.
SOILS
Map Unit Name A1 Drainage Class: 1-.tX>,,-
(Series and Phase): I:IIm A-Do Field Observations
Ye® Ta~onomy (Subgroup): FJ"/AAH: j" ... ,,-·AL Confirm Mapped Type?
rl!m~ Q~s~[jPtil!D; ..
Depth Matri~ Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Te~ture, Sln1cture
~~l liQ[jzQO (MUDS~II MQi~t) (MYns~1I Ml!isll Abundance/contrast ~=etc
Il-~t{ZZLl
I .
.
.
. Hydric Soil Indicators: -Concretions
-Histosol . _ High Organic Content in Surface layer
_ Histic Epipedon in Sandy Soils
-Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
~Ieyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ 2 Chroma with Mottling
Basis for Decision: / C 4roPf/l-~ /0 11
.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ~No Is the Sampling Point in a Wetland? ~ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? . ~NO
Hydric Soils Present? No
Remarks:
* This data fOml is a combination of the original and amended 1987 Routine Wetland Determination data forms,
.'
/.
S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
Routine Wetland Determination Data Form
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: -'=O<""'<...L-¥~:-=..~<.LL.:::.....u..-v-~c.>:.J..-« Date:
Applicant/Ow,:.n::::e;.:r:~-=.L.J...p.'.;,jf-______ _
Investigator:
County: -'-ri-Fr--
State:
Do Nonnal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
Is the area a potential problem area?
No
Yes d:§?
Yes~
Community!D: __ _
Transect !D:
Plot 10:
Explain: __________________ _ Sample Lac.:
WetlJUpl:
VEGETATION
Dominant Indicator Percent 8asal Dominant Indicator Percent Stem
Im Sps:s;i~s S~ ~oz;r.· Area Wft~~~ 51; DruL CmuU 4.~ 9. Hf:~ Mi u YZ? _
2. ------10. ____
3. ------II. ------
4. 12.
Dominant Indicator Percent Stem Dominant Indicator Percent
Silmb 51!!:~i~S Stalus Qru:L l&lm! :;;?iZia.-. Sla1l!s C=r
S.,~.uu-r F~u -;?o ---f9k.o ~
6. 14. ------
7. ---IS. ---
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are 08L, FACW or FAC:
(Excluding FAC-) 0
Basis for Decision: .... //hll~ bg ( ~ V) ?/~~A.!f .-?:; /Jcfr' -~~
D'/p riJ.c, Fr¢c-c.u OnL ,
HYDROLOGY
~~!Ialld Hxd[Q12eX IndjcatQrs;
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Primary Indicators:
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Guage Inundated
_ Aerial Photographs -Saturated in Upper fi Inches
Other Water marks --(...-"No Recorded Data Available: Drift Lines -_ Sediment Deposits
Ei~ld Qbst:ClatiQll,s' _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indie.tors (2 or more required):
DeP~1 of Surface Water (in.) .-_ Oxidized Root Challnels (upper 12"
Water-Stained Leaves -DepUI to Free Water in Pit (in.) -Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test -Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Basis for Decision: / p,Le 1I-fh5 }Jdf ?rt!'~#
J. ~. es and Associates, Inc.
SOILS
Map Unit Name A-Ijll/,J.-wl d5L
Drainage Class: ??::?'d /:/1///
(Series and Phase): Do Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): r-~; dJ .L..-/LJI-f Confirm Mapped Type? (fij No
~Qfil~ Q~miptiQD;
Depth Matrix Co lars Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Structure
(lm;b~s) HQriwn ~:~~~t) (MlIDS~1I MQist) AbYDg~D~!:l~QDtrnll ~.~~s ~~ o-/<? fl-
.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Concretions
-.Histosol _ High Organic Content in Surface layer
_ Histic Epipedon in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ 2 Chroma with Mottling
Basis for Decision: -3 c2""""Cl.?'A" q~%~
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes~ Is the Sampling Point in a Wetland? Yes <§7
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes .@'
Hydric Soils Present? Yes @
Remarks:
* This data form is a combination of the original and amended 1987 Routine WeUand Determination data (orms.
.. .
J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
Routine Wetland Determination Data Form
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Sit~ § / /'. L., ~ .. N',-,} A.J /hx.-ve;-Date: 4/zl//Qr
ApPlicant/Owner:~ Wi;.
lnvestigator: .. !..-/-County: ~ State: ___
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ~ No Community ID:
Is the site signifieantly disturbed (At)pical Situation) es <11£ Transect ID:
Plot ID: Is the area a potential problem area? Yes OW
Explain: Sample Loc.: ""6L-~
WetIJUpl: ?a-l-
VEGETATION
Dominant Indicator Per~t Basal Dominant Indicator Per~t Stem
Tree SQecies Status Cover Area Woody Vines Status Cover Count
I. ·9. ----2. 10. ----3. --H ..
4. 12. ----
Dominant Indicator Percent Stem Dominant Indicator Percent
Shrub.Soecies Status Cover Coont S.v --
6. --
7. --
8.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACWor FAC:
(Excluding FAC .. ) /
Basis for Decision: /~$~~kp/rn1I/'
~ / a?'lo
HYDROLOGY
Wetland HvdrolQID' Indicators:
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Primary Indicators:
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Guage -Inundated
_ Aerial Photographs ........saturated in Upper 12 lnches
Other Water marks ~o Recorded Data Available:
-
Drift Lines -_ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ......--lJrainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water (in.) " _ Oxidiied Root Channels (upper
12") , Water-Stained Leaves
I ~(in.) -
Depth to Free Water in Pit Local Soil Survey Data
lJ
J/FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Basis for Decision: ,51/-1-Iv.s cJr fc<! OI't1lu~ ? If-I/ 6t J.-I) -
J. S .• _ .. es and Associates, Inc.
SOILS
Map Unit Name ~~ Drainage Class: . ~/:Y.)v
(Series and Phase): "" "'-Do Field Observations r erNo3
Taxonomy (Subgroup): -.j/./ .... J... Jh1l7J.I'Yu vlJ). Confirm Mapped Type? Y 0
Pofile Descrigtion: .V
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Structure
(Inches} Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist] Abundance/contrast Concretions, etc.
/)-"2<;) H-I /, ·'-17 'ZIL , -<'''f"L ..
"2.</-r a /OI/}?.,/3 'J7;/l?Jk :22;:?A>-1/ /fJIY .<'..<L
I
Hydric Soil Indicators: -Concretions
-Histosol High Organic Content in Surface layer
_ Histic Epipedon . -in Sandy Soils
-Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
...-cieyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ 2 Chroma with Mottling
Basis for Decision: J C;',oJ771f t!Z /0"
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ~ No Is the Sampling Point in a Wetland? ~ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? ~ No
Remarks:
* This data form is a canbination 0/ the original and anended 1987 Routine Wetland DEtermination data lams.
. '
J. S. Jones and Associates. Inc.
Routine Wetland Determination Data Form
(19B? COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: .:3 / Z. i.--.u£/j.<,) &x. ,uE Date: Q/2<//CfF
ApplicantJOwnec //,..t. /~ County: /~ Investigator: J--" /if~ State:
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? 4? No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation) Yes c1@ Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Y es ~ Plot ID:
Explain: Sample Loc.: <L-£
WetIJUpI: /.>0
VEGETATION
Dominant Indicator Basal Dominant Indicator Stem
Tree S~ies Status Area Wft Vines Status Count
IBL~ FACt,} ~ /~ --9. • hlrklJu'J'Ycv
2. ----10. --3. II. .
------
4. 12.
Dominant Indicator Percent Stern Dominant Indicator Percent
ShrubS~ies Status Cover Coont HerbS~ies Status --Cover
5. ----13. --. --
6. 14. ------7. IS. ----8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACWor FAC: 6% (Excluding FAC-)
Basis for Decision:
No 'H?-( H(c:.J C::>/;L ~..v.&nS-/ / .
HYDROLOGY
Wetland HvdrolQgy Indicators:
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Primary Indicators:
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Guage -Inundated
_ Aerial Photographs _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches .rro; Other Water marks -o Recorded Data Available: Drift Lines -
_ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth to Surface Water (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels (upper 12")
Water·Stained Leaves -Depth to Free Water in Pit (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test -Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Basis for Decision: 1~Jt:lt~ /I.ftf/5 »or <~~sa)t
I
J. <>. nes and Associates, Inc.
SOILS
Map Unit Name d Drainage Class: t11 .. .J IAv/IJ
(Series and Phase): frl, _JJ.t,dMti IJ -S L Do Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): (.//Vll.. __ --lIJI\A,d.'.A~ Confirm Mapped Type?~ No
Pofile Descri~tion:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Structure
eCh~ . Hjf!0n (Munsell Mds!) (Munsell Moist l Abundance/contrast Concretions etc.
I O~, (L "711 . . 6'){
. e. r" ta .,,! L £ -(~~ try,,,; t-"" 'St" . ~ 4l. J7 ~ r.."l'
I
Hydric Soil Indicators: Concretions
Histosol . _ High Organic Content in Surface layer -
_ Histic Epipedon in Sandy Soils
-Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on' Local Hydric Soils List
_ Reducing Conditions -'-Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ 2 Chroma with Mottling
Basis for Decision: 4 (.J,~m'+a.I"P"c> nUj-11.-/ r ~kc
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ~ Is the Sampling Point in a Wetland? Yes (J%
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ~
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Remarks:
.'
. * This data fctm is a ccmbtnatico ci the original and amended 1987 Routine Wetland Detenninatioo data forms.
Wetland and Buffer Functions and Semi-quantitative Performance Assessment
Wetland # 3712 I.incoln Ave. N.E.
Location S T R
Function Group I I pt
Flood! -size <5 acres
Stonn Water -riverine or l<tkeshoct wetland
Control
< 100;' fon::sted cover
X unconstrained outlet
tocated in lower 1/3"' of the
drainage
Points 10.
(max IS) .
Base Flow! X. size <S acres
Ground Water riverine Of lakeshore wetland
~ located in lower 1I3rr:1 oCUle .
Support drainage
_ temporally flooded or saturated
_ no tlow-sensitive fish populations
Points 10
on-site or downstream
(Max 15)
Erosion! _ Sparse grass/herbs or no veg along
Shoreline OHWM
Protection x.. wetland extends < 30 m from
OHWM
_ highly developed shoreline or .
Points ~ subcatchment
(Max 9)
Water Quality x.. rapid flow-through site
Improvement _ < 50% veg cover
_ upstream in basin from wetland is points 1 undeveloped (max 12) X. holds <25% overland runoff
Staff Repath Date 9125/98
. Criteria
Group 2 2 pis
X-size S~IO acn::s
X mid.sloped wetland .
X. 10-30% fO,rested cover
scmi-constraincd outlet -_ located in middle 113"' of-the
drainage
_ size 5-10 acres
X. mid-slopcd wetland
_ Itx:ated in middle 1/3 of
drainage
X. seasonally or semi-permanently
flooded or saturated
X low f1ow~sensitive fish
populations on-site or downstream
_ moderate wood or veg along
OHWM
-wetland extends 30-60 m from
OHWM
II moderately develop<d
shoreline Of subcatchment
_ moderate flow through site
SQ-3O% cover -X. s SO% of basin upstream from
wetland is deve.foped
-holds 25-500A overland runoff
N?A -Not Apphcable, Nil -No InformatIOn Avrulable
Group 3 3 pis
size > I 0 acres
_ depressions, headwaters, bogs, flats
> 300/. forested cover -culvertlbcrm~d outlet
K..located in upper 1131'11 of drainage
,
size> 10 ac~
-depressions. headwaters, bogs, Oats
X. located in upper 1/3'" of drainage
_permanently flooded or saturated.. or
intennittently exposed
_ high flow-sensitive popUlations
contiguous with site in highly permeable
strata
X. dense wood or veg along OHWM
wetland extends >200 m from -
OHWM
_ undeveloped shoreline or
subcatchmenl
_ slow flow through site
X >80% veg cover
_ >50"1. of basin upstream from wetland
developed
holds >50% overland runoff -
Dominant Vegetation: Deciduous forest, Himalayan blackberry understory plant
community.
Wildlife:
.' ..
Wetland and Buffer Functions and Semi-quantitative Performance Assessment
Wetland # 3712 Lincoln Ave. N.E.
Location S T R
Function Group 1 1 pt
Natural -size <S acres
Biological _ ag land. low veg structure
X seasonal surface water Support _ one habitat type
PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST
_ low plant diversity «6 species)
Points 21
(max 36) _ > 50% invasive species
_low primary productivity
_ low organic accumulation
_ low organic export
few habitat features -_ buffers very disturbed
_ isolated from upland habitats
Overall Habitat size <5 acres
Functions _low habitat diversity
Points ~ _low sanctuary or refuge
(max 9)
Specific _ Low Invertebrate Habitat
Habitat _low amphibian habitat
Functions x. low fISh habitat
low mammal habitat
Points 2. -low bird habitat
(max IS) -
CulturaV X. low educational opportunities
Socioeconimic X. low aesthetic value
PoinlS2 x.. lacks commercial flShciics.
(max 21) agriculture. renewable resources x.. lacks historical or archeological
resources
X. lacks passive and active
recreational opportunities x.. privately owned
x.. not near open space
Notes.
Staff Repath . Date 9125/98
Criteria
Group 2 2pts Group 3 3 pts
X. size 5-10 ams size> 10 acres
X. 2 level vcg _ high veg structure
_ permanent surface water _open water pools through summer
X. two habitat types. ,.;-." ] habitat typ<S
PAD POW PEM PSS PFO EST P AD rQ~ eEM ess em EST
X. JnO<lerate plant divmity (7-15 _ high plant dive",ity (>15 species)
species) x.. l()"SOOI. invasive species _ <10-'" invasive species x... moderate primary productivity _ high primary productivity
.:..-. moderate: organic accumulation _ high organi" acc:wnulation
X. moderate organic expoct _ high organic export
X. some: habitat features _ many habitat features
X. buffers slighdy distutbed buffers not disturbed
_ partially connected to upland X. well connected to upland habitats'
habitats
X. size 5·10 acres -size > 10 acres
X. moderate habitat diversity _ high habitat diversity
X. moderate sanctuary or refuge _ high sanctuary or refuge
X. moderate invertebrate habitat _ high invertebillte habitat x.. ~odcratc amphibian habitat _ high amphibian habitat
-moderate fish habitat _ high fisl1 habitat
X. moderate mammal habitat _ high mammal habitat x.. modcr3te bird habit!1t _ high bird habitat
_ moderate educational opportunities _ high educational opportunities
-moderate :aesthetic value _ high aesthetic value
moderate commercial fisheries _ high commercial fisheries
agriculture, renewable resources agriculture, renewable resources
-moderate h istQricai or _ important historical or
an::hc:ological site archeological site
_ some passin and active recreational _ many passive and active
opportunities recreational opportunities
_ privately owned, some public _ unrestricted public acceSs
access.
_ ~ome connection to open space _ directJy connectc:d to open space
KROLL
PAGE#
.zG,~ING MAP
o Ruource Con,,,ru.Uon
B RuidtnUd J dulac:
a RuidcnU.1 !i 4u/.<:
8 Rnid~nUd 4u/.a<:
~ Rc"jd<:nU.1 W.nur~",l"..-"d lIome'
~ Ruld"lLtul 10 du/u: a Ruid"lLti~1 1-1 du/."
~ Residential Wulli-r .. miIT !,,{ill
o C<ln.-enien"" Commerd,,1
~ C"nler I"~(,hborhood o c"nler Suburbil.n
o Center Downlown
~ Cenler OHi"c Ruidenliil.l o Commerci.l A..-lcri .. 1
~ Comm .. r~~il.1 Artenal Autom.11
@ C"mmcrcl.1 arn<:e
~ !nd.ulrid HuvT
'~ Indu.lral )(e .. lL .. "TI
. ;>.' !'ublu, t.H
({"nton Cit,. Limils
.. _, --, : _0._ i (Gre,. Tc%t) J>relCllL($
tBi3 Alllom.1I Di.Lrid "
1-:.:. :1 ,," ... tam.U Di~l .. ,cl B
PAGE
INDEX
~'. \ .
!
.~
; ~
~
SE 88t
.
SE 89tl
SE 90lt
S
D4 . 5 T23N R5E E V2 C4
32 T24N R5E E 112
i
I
! ,
' . . . ' ..
,
I
I ,
!
I ,. ,
!
~1KI13\?Z
:lNHVJ-DO'lJ t::
;
.t\()
"
®
~~"lp,~:nr\"}{r..
I ,;> ::: 0<V. Cn-~(\~ ", ~:;V' .(.j
!~:((;
I I , 7l::i'" J r" . -";
.~
If) "I.
;11' "? l \ =4' .I;::rt II ~'~'~iz'--~·"~·'.·. r}tJ·
'0
.Y"l
Q').
-t'
'·,15 .• :;
(.)
tAl
';'R.
tJ.l
.~:
C) o
tJ
t;"
',tJl
, I,; t , ':. -,) --"'-~ -.-Cf,
.. ;;
!
. ;."
,.
<"i'
-----.... .. S79 '24 '44-'t:
.,. . .., .... -