Buffer_mitigation_plan.pdf0(C T
Buffer Mitigation Plan
Walcker Property
Edmonds, Washington
October 5, 2006
Prepared for
Dennis Walcker
-ynnwood, Washington
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1-1
1.1
PURPOSE OF REPORT
1-1
1.2
RESPONSIBLE PARTIES/MITIGATION PROJECT TEAM
1-1
1.3
PROJECT HISTORY
1-2
1.3.1 Project Location
1-2
1.3.2 Responsible Party/Property Coordination
1-2
1.3.3 Buffer Reduction and Averaging
1-2
1.3.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation
1-3
1.4
METHODS
1-4
1.4.1 Information Review
1-4
1.4.1.1 Field Reconnaissance
1-4
1.4.2 Site Description
1-4
1.4.2.1 Critical Areas
1-4
1.4.2.2 Existing Vegetation
1-5
2.0 MITIGATION SEQUENCING 2-1
2.1 AVOIDANCE 2-1
2.2 MINIMIZATION 2-1
2.3 MITIGATION/COMPENSATION 2-2
3.0 MITIGATION PLAN 3-1
3.1 RATIONALE FOR MITIGATION SITE SELECTION 3-1
3.2 EXISTING AND ENHANCED RIPARIAN BUFFER FUNCTIONS 3-1
3.3 ENHANCEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 3-3
4.0 PLANTING PLAN
4.1 MITIGATION AREAS
4.2 PHASING AND SPECIFICATIONS
4.3 PLANTING PLAN
5.0 MONITORING, MAINTENANCE, AND CONTINGENCY PLANS
5.1 MONITORING PROGRAM
5.2 MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
5.3 CONTINGENCY PLANS
5.4 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
5.5 CONCLUSION
6.0 USE OF THIS REPORT
7.0 REFERENCES
10/5/06 @,Edmdata\Projects\9,12\OOINFileRm\R\Final Buffer Nfit Rpt\Nalcker Duffer hfit_Rpt.doc
m
4-1
4-1
4-1
4-2
5-1
5-1
5-2
5-3
5-3
5-4
6-1
7-1
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Title
1 Vicinity Map
2 Stream Buffer Widths
3 Planting Plan
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title
Summary of Buffer Reduction and Enhancement
Species Descriptions for Riparian Buffer Enhancement
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix Title
A Pertinent Edmonds Community Development Code Excerpts
B Mitigation Specifications and Planting Detail
C Selected Site Photographs
10/5/06 0.Bdm6ta\Projects\942\001\Filclhn\RTP ial Buffer bflt RpMalckcr Duffer AGt_Rpl.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
Lll
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE OF REPORT
This report presents the buffer mitigation plan prepared for Mr. Dennis Walckcr to compensate
for reduction of the riparian buffer area, which is necessary to maintain reasonable use of two adjacent,
residentially zoned properties. This report includes: 1) a fiinctional evaluation of existing conditions
within the subject property and stream buffer; 2) a planting plan and installation specifications; and
3) performance standards, and monitoring and contingency plans. The mitigation plan presented herein
was designed based on best available science and complies with the City of Edmonds sensitive area
regulations (City of Edmonds Municipal Code 20.15B). The proposed plan will improve habitat value
and functional performance of the stream buffer by increasing species diversity and vegetation density in
order to ensure no net loss of critical habitat function as a result of unavoidable buffer reduction and
averaging.
1.2 RESPONSIBLE PARTIES/MITIGATION PROJECT TEAM
Primary Responsible Party
Name: Mr. Dennis Walcker
Address: P.O. Box 996
Lynnwood, Washington 98046
Phone: (509) 860-5013
Secondary Responsible Party
Name: Eaglewood Homes
Contact: Mr. Craig Reimer
Address: 18607 Olympic View Drive
Edmonds, Washington 98020
Phone: (425) 771-6822
Mitigation Design Consultant
Name:
Landau Associates
Contact:
Shannon Moore
Title:
Senior Project Scientist
Address:
130-2❑d Avenue South
Edmonds, Washington 98020
Phone:
(425) 778-0907
General Contractor for Mitigation/Planting
Name: To Be Determined
Contact:
Title:
Address:
Phone:
10/5!06 \T&d,&taT,.jecis%942\001\Fi[cRmtR\Fina1 Buffer t,6t Rpt',\Valekc MR, Mi t_Rpt.doe LANDAU ASSOCIATES
1-1
1.3 PROJECT HISTORY
1.3.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed project is located in Township 27 North, Section 24, Range 3 East in the City of
Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington (Figure 1). It is located within the Shell Creek Basin of the
Cedar-Sammamish Watershed, Watershed Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 8. The project is located
within the riparian buffer of Shell Creek within an area zoned single-family urban development on
6,000 -square -foot (ft) lots (RS -6) (City of Edmonds 2006).
1.3.2 RESPONSIBLE PARTY/PROPERTY COORDINATION
This buffer mitigation plan fulfills mitigation requirements for two properties: 742 Daley Street
and the adjacent property 730 Daley Street based on cooperation between two responsible parties as
allowed under Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 23.40.140, Innovative
Mitigation. The construction plans for the 730 Daley Street property, submitted to the Development
Services Department by Eaglewood Homes, were designed based on an outdated ECDC, which outlined a
lesser stream buffer (50 ft) than required by the current code (75 ft). Because a buffer reduction was not
granted and there are no viable options for Eaglewood Homes to effectively enhance the stream buffer
(since more than 80 percent of it occurs on the 742 Daley Street property), coordination between the two
property owners was a practical solution for mitigating stream buffer impacts from both parties.
As stated in a signed letter addressed to Steve Bullock of the City of Edmonds, Mr. Craig Reimer
of Eaglewood Homes entered into an agreement with Mr. Walcker and the City to pay for up to $1,000
for plant material for stream buffer enhancement on the 730 Daley Street property (Landau Associates
2006). Mr. Walcker will be responsible for approval, implementation, and monitoring of the buffer
enhancement planting plan. Thus, the two parties will contribute to steam buffer enhancement that will
be completed entirely within the 742 Daley Street property, where it will have the greatest value in terms
of fish, stream, and wildlife protection. Construction on the Eaglewood Homes property is currently
under way, and Eaglewood Homes agrees to participate in the buffer mitigation plan on the Walcker
property when this plan is approved and implemented.
1.3.3 BUFFER REDUCTION AND AVERAGING
Landau Associates concluded that Shell Creek is a Type F non-anadromous fish -bearing stream
and requires a buffer width of 75 ft per Section 23.90.010 of the current ECDC (Landau Associates 2006).
If a literal interpretation of the provisions of this title were followed (including the 75 -ft vegetated
10/5/06VE•dmdata\Projects\942\001\FileRm\R\Final Buffer Mit RpM4aleker Buffer Mit_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
1-2
riparian buffer), almost the entire property would be considered riparian buffer except for approximately
400 ft2 located mostly in the southwest corner, excluding any property setbacks (see Figure 2). Though
purchased as a legally buildable lot (zoned residential), the 75 -ft stream buffer would preclude reasonable
use of the parcel. In order to allow for the proposed home and driveway, the buffer needs to be reduced.
In accordance with ECDC, we propose to reduce the buffer width by 50 percent along the west
side of the stream to no less than an average of 37.5 ft. This also removes the buffer boundary from the
Eaglewood Homes site at 730 Daley Street (Figure 2). The east side of the stream will maintain the full
extent of its existing area as buffer. Further, all undeveloped areas will be enhanced with native
vegetation, and there will be no lawn present on the property. The riparian buffer enhancement will
include a variety of native plantings throughout the entire undeveloped extent of the property in order to
improve fish, stream, and wildlife habitat over existing conditions.
For purposes of comparison, the neighboring property to the east has a limited vegetated buffer
consisting mostly of landscaped ornamental plants and lawn. The subject property meets all of the
specific variance criteria [ECDC 23.40.210 (B), Variances] to perform buffer averaging and reduce the
buffer size from the standard stream buffer to a 37.5 -ft vegetated stream buffer. Appendix A contains a
summary of pertinent City of Edmonds regulations.
1.3.4 PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
A summary of buffer reductions and enhancement is shown in Table 1. The current construction
plans for the 730 and 742 Daley Street properties do not impact any in -stream habitat (no work will occur
within Shell Creek) or wetland habitat (none exist onsite). Buffer reduction and averaging will reduce the
onsite buffer area by approximately 900 W.
According to ECDC, "In all instances where an applicant cannot demonstrate that standard stream
buffer widths can be accommodated by project development, the applicant shall be required to submit a
stream buffer enhancement plan or a stream mitigation and buffer enhancement plan as part of a critical
areas report indicating that post -project site conditions will provide equivalent or greater protection of
stream functions and fish habitat over a standard stream buffer and existing site conditions
(Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004)." We propose that all undeveloped riparian buffer (up to 5,000 ft) located on the
742 Daley Street property, as well as an additional 950 ft2 within the right-of-way, be enhanced to meet
this standard.
1015/06'i\I:dntdataNProjectsN9421001'•Pilettm�R\Putal Buffer Mit Rpt\Waleker Buffer rdit_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
1-3
1.4 METHODS
1.4.1 INFORMATION REvitew
Landau Associates biologists reviewed information from readily available public domain
resources in order to gain a general understanding of potential critical areas issues on and near the subject
property. These resources included: visual observations of aerial photographs and parcel surveys;
interviews with the property owner•, review of reports including the Critical Areas Site Reconnaissance
(Landau Associates 2005) and the Geotechnical Evaluation (Bruce 2006); City of Edmonds' critical areas
inventory maps (City of Edmonds 2005); and appropriate ECDC sections pertaining to streams and
critical areas (City of Edmonds 2005).
1.4.1.1 Field Reconnaissance
Sacha Maxwell, a biologist from Landau Associates, conducted a site visit of the subject property
on April 11, 2006 in order to characterize existing conditions within the stream buffer and the property.
In addition, results from a 2005 site reconnaissance, presented in the Critical Areas Site Reconnaissance
report (Landau Associates 2005), were used to determine in -stream fimetions of Shell Creek.
1.4.2 SITZ; DESCRIPTION
1.4.2.1 Critical Areas
The more than 10,454 ft2 subject property is a steeply sloping, rectangular parcel located in a
residential neighborhood at 742 Daley Street in the City of Edmonds, Washington (Figure 1). A portion
of Shell Creek (LLID 1223730478218), a Type F stream requiring a 75 -ft buffer (per. ECMC), bisects the
property diagonally through its northeast corner. The creek flows north and exits the property via a large
box culvert and continues offsite (under Daley Street). Within the subject property, as well as the
upstream, adjacent property (which is currently developed), Shell Creek is approximately 12 ft wide and
armored with boulder riprap (see photographs in Appendix C). The riprap creates an abrupt transition
from the elevation of the streambed to the upland soil such that little or no wetland area is present within
the onsite riparian corridor (a wetland delineation was not performed as part of this task). Average
channel depth is approximately 2 ft deep and the water level remains low enough that the adjacent area,
composed of upland soils and vegetation, does not receive over -bank flooding on a regular basis.
The property is currently undeveloped. Existing man-made features on the property include a
large box culvert covered by a wooden gazebo/trellis (approximately 600 ft2 in size) covering the northern
end of the onsite portion of the creek and a wooden fence (within the Daley Street right-of-way) along the
10/5x06 \U7dmdata\Projects\9421001\FileRnid2\Final Buffer bfit Rpt\Walcker Buffer Mit_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
1-4
northeastern (adjacent property) border (see photographs in Appendix Q. The area north and east of the
stream surrounding the box culvert is flat and vegetated primarily by grasses and trees, with minimal
shrub cover (see photographs in Appendix C). The northernmost portion of the area is within the right-of-
way (Figure 2). Some English ivy (Hedera helix) is present along the eastern fence line.
The area west of the stream consists of steep slopes (in excess of 140 percent) that are heavily
vegetated with mature trees and shrubs (Bruce 2004). A geotechnical evaluation of the area found no
evidence of geotechnical distress (slides, erosion, etc.) and concluded that the substrate (dense fine to
coarse native sand from advance outwash overlain with up to 6 inches of organic soils in the O horizon) is
stable and that residential development will not decrease stability in accordance with ECDC 20.1513.170
(Bruce 2004).
The National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) surveyed soil in the area and classified it as
Alderwood-Urban Land complex with 8 to 15 percent slopes (MRCS 1983). Alderwood is an upland soil
series that contains depressions of minor hydric soils, including McKenna (3,2133) and Norma (2133,3),
which meet ponding and saturation criteria but not flooding criteria (NRCS 2001). These hydric series
were not observed onsite, with the possible exception of a small area in the southeast corner that extends
into a depression on the neighboring property. This depressional area was saturated during the site visit
and contained emergent vegetation, including grasses (Poa and Agrostis spp.) and horsetail (Equisetum
aovense), although a wetland delineation was not within the scope of this task. For future reference, this
area would be an ideal location for buffer enhancement.
1.4.2.2 Existing Vegetation
At the time of the site reconnaissance (April 2006), the 75 -ft stream buffer (consisting almost the
entire property) contained approximately 60 percent canopy cover of mature [up to 36 inches diameter at
breast height (dbh)] coniferous trees including western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), western red cedar
(Thuja plicata), and Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga nienziesii) trees. The locations of some of the larger trees
present onsite were surveyed and are shown on Figure 2. Grasses comprise groundcover along the
northern and eastern sides of the stream and box culvert, along with a few ornamental and native maple
trees (Aced- spp.).
The understory on the western portion of the property contains approximately 75 percent scrub -
shrub cover dominated by a variety of native species, such as big -leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), sword
fern (Polystichum munition), red alder (Alnus twbra), and salal (Gualtheria shallon). This area also
contains an abundance of woody debris and stumps. The immediate western riparian area, to
approximately 15 ft from the stream edge, contains a narrow footpath and the understory is dominated by
non-native species, including herb Robert (Geranium robertianuon), stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), and
10!5/06 \\Edmdata\Projects\942\001\FileRm\R\Final Buffer Nfit Rpt\Walcker Buffer Nfit_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
1-5
the invasive Himalayan blackberry (Rubins armeniacus). The southeastern area of the property contains
little canopy coverage and is dominated by an escaped ornamental flowering shrub species. See
Appendix C for site photographs.
10!5106 \\Edmdata\Projects19,12\001\FileRm\R\Final Buffer Mit Rpt\Nakker Buffer Mit_Rpt.doe LANDAU ASSOCIATES
1-6
2.0 MITIGATION SEQUENCING
Mitigation sequencing is a process that proposed projects must undertake to ensure site
developments avoid, minimize, rectify, and reduce impacts to wetlands and ensure no net loss of critical
areas functions or values (and is required by ECDC 23.40.120). The proposed residential development is
necessary based on the land use zoning and reasonable use rights of the property owner. The following
steps have been taken prior to using compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts to wetlands.
2.1 AVOIDANCE
Work within critical areas was avoided to the greatest extent possible given land size and location
constraints. However, buffer reduction and averaging was necessary to allow reasonable use of the
property (single-family residential development) in keeping with its zoning. No grading or construction
work will occur within the reduced and averaged buffer or within Shell Creek (Figure 2).
2.2 MINIMIZATION
The proposal minimizes net loss of critical area functions and values consistent with the best
available science. Minimization includes sensitive site design and siting of facilities and construction
staging areas. The building design, including location of structures, was designed to minimize impacts to
critical areas. The proposed residence will be located in the southeastern portion of the property, as far
from the creek as possible (Figure 2). No lawn will be created within the property and all undeveloped
area will be dedicated to riparian enhancement and protection. The riparian buffer must be reduced in
order to allow for reasonable use of the property. After buffer reduction and averaging, no riparian buffer
will be affected.
We recommend salvaging small vegetation from the construction/clearing footprint as practical
and possible. Also, any large wood (e.g., stumps, root wads, and debris) from the construction area
should be moved close to the stream where it can be used a riparian habitat. The grass areas adjacent to
the stream are ideal locations.
Best Management Practices (BMPs) associated with the construction will also be used to avoid or
reduce adverse impacts to sensitive areas during the mitigation work. These practices address clearing,
planting, and stormwater management related to the mitigation project. Mr. Walcker will install silt
fences and straw bales to prevent erosion, clearly mark excavation and construction boundaries with
brightly colored tape, and post signage around the riparian buffer. BMP protocols are described in detail
in Appendix B. The following information, which is required under 23.40.130 C. Detailed Construction
Plans, will need to be supplied separately from this report by the general contractor or Mr. Walcker.
10/5;06 \\Edmdata\Projects\942\OOIV-ileR.\R\Fiaa1 Buffer Mit RpANakker Buffer N1it_Rpl.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
2-1
® The proposed construction sequence, timing, and duration; and
® Grading and excavation details.
2.3 MITIGATION/COMPENSATION
Riparian buffer enhancement will be completed as part of the proposed project in order to
compensate for impacts to the riparian area due to unavoidable buffer reduction and averaging. The
buffer enhancement meets mitigation sequencing as outlined in the ECDC (23.40.120 Mitigation
sequencing) by, "compensating for the impact to wetlands, frequently flooded areas, and fish and wildlife
habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments."
10/5.!06 \\Ldntdata\Projects\942\0011FileRm\R\Final Buffer pfit Rpt\Walcker Buffer b(it_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
2-2
3.0 MITIGATION PLAN
The mitigation plan presented in this section meets City requirements as outlined in 23.40.130,
Mitigation Plan Requirements.
3.1 RATIONALE FOR MITIGATION SITE SELECTION
There are no viable options for Eaglewood Homes to effectively enhance the stream buffer for the
following two primary reasons: 1) more than 80 percent of the buffer occurs offsite (on the 742 Daley
Street property) and 2) the neighboring property (742 Daley Street) is in the permitting phase for a
planned development that would reduce ecological connections (wildlife corridors) between the stream
and the 730 Daley Street property. Enhancement of a larger contiguous area of stream buffer close to
Shell Creek is preferable to the preservation of smaller isolated habitat areas. Thus, we propose that all
riparian buffer enhancement will take place on the 742 Daley Street property, where it will have the
greatest opportunity to improve fish, stream, and associated upland wildlife habitat.
3.2 EXISTING AND ENHANCED RIPARIAN BUFFER FUNCTIONS
Wetland functional assessment is integral to every jurisdiction's land use decisions and permitting
requirements. The Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear Projects (WSDOT 2000)
provides a rapid assessment for wetland functions. This methodology does not quantify functional
performance, but it does provide a qualitative evaluation of functions in a consistent manner through
evaluation of a number of qualifiers for each function by a wetland biologist. The biologist uses this
methodology to determine whether specific components are present, and then uses the tool to determine
whether or not a particular function is likely to be provided and to characterize the relative importance of
each function.
The appropriate sections of this methodology can also be applied to wetland buffers. Functions
typically associated with buffers include flood flow alteration, sediment removal, nutrient and toxicant
removal, general habitat for mammals and birds, and native plant richness because of their support and
protection of adjacent wetland habitat.
The site has high opportunity to increase its functional value due to its proximity to Shell Creek, a
fish -bearing stream containing anadromous fish below the subject property and non-anadromous fish
within the area of the subject property. The section of the creek on the subject property is located in the
middle/lower portion of its watershed. Conditions of the existing stream and riparian buffer within the
property were evaluated using the tool and the functions projected for enhancement are summarized here.
1015/06\\F.durhm\Prcjectsl942\00I\Fi1eRm`.R\Fina1 Buffer Mit RpMalcker Buffer l,lit_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
3-1
Functions that are expected to be improved by the vegetation enhancement plan are marked with an
asterisk.
Functions that are considered to be well provided by existing conditions include:
0 Native Plant Richness*
- Physical Indicators: Buffer contains fairly high quality forest and understory cover
containing some areas of non-native understory vegetation (lawn grasses, English Ivy,
Himalayan blackberry, and escaped ornamentals).*
® Uniqueness and Heritage
- Physical Indicators: WDFW priority anadromous fish use in lower reaches of Shell Creek
(offsite) but barriers to upstream migration exist.
0 Habitat for Birds*
- Physical Indicators: Canopy cover, downed logs, and stumps present within buffer;
species diversity moderate*; berry -producing vegetation.*
Functions that are considered to be provided to a limited extent include:
0 General Fish Habitat*
- Physical Indicators: Anadromous fish use in lower reaches (offsite) and non-anadromous
fish; lower portion is within urban area with moderate canopy cover for stream
temperature regulation; lack of habitat complexity (large woody debris, riffles, pools,
gravel substrate, overhanging vegetation) for refuge within project site.*
0 Flood Flow Alteration
- Physical Indicators: Buffer contains dense mature woody vegetation and organic duff soil
layer that can absorb precipitation and runoff and help desynchronize peak flows
downstream.* However, steep topography, unrestricted outlet, and lack of overbank
flooding (armored channel) are limiting factors.
0 Erosion Control and Shoreline Management*
- Physical Indicators: Buffer contains dense mature woody vegetation and organic duff soil
layer that can absorb precipitation and runoff and help desynchronize peak flows
downstream.* However, steep topography, unrestricted outlet, and the lack of overbank
flooding and wetlands (armored channel) are limiting factors.
® Production of Organic Matter and its Export*
- Physical Indicators: Vegetated buffer present, but lack of deciduous vegetation cover
adjacent to stream*; no wetland habitat along riparian edge; streambed is armored such
that seasonal flooding is limited/blocked.
0 General Habitat Suitability*
10'5/06 \\Fidmdata�Projects\942"t001U'ileRmVtkPinal Duffcr Mit RpINAValcker Duffer Mit_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
3-2
- Physical Indicators: Riverine connections for anadromous fish to upstream area affected
by culverts and road crossings; cutthroat trout presence upstream; high shade and
functioning buffer for wildlife; two Cowardin classes that are not dominated by invasive
species*; little interspersion of habitats beside creek channel (armored).*
® Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates
- Physical Indicators: Flowing stream present but substrate is primarily composed of silt
and fine sand; low detritus input.*
® Habitat for Wetland -Associated Mammals
- Physical Indicators: Minimal seasonal or permanent standing water within wetland but
stream is permanently flowing; limited amount of upland habitat corridors within urban
area.
Functions that are not likely provided include:
® Sediment Removal
Physical Indicators: No flat riparian/wetland area or woody vegetation associated with
water flow to stow velocity*; no sediment deposits within stream; no overbank flooding
(annored channel).
® Nutrient and Toxicant Removal
- Physical Indicators: No associated wetland area; low organic matter accumulation present
in stream; no seasonally flooded areas.
® Habitat for Amphibians:
- Physical Indicators: Lack of suitable spawning habitat and fish -bearing stream adjacent.
® Educational or Scientific Value
- Physical Indicators: Property is in private ownership, with the exception of the portion
within the Daley Street right-of-way.
3.3 ENHANCEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS
The goals and objectives for enhancement are based on improving the functions and values of the
riparian area within the stream buffer. Goals are broad statements that generally define the intent or
purpose of the proposed mitigation. Objectives specify the direct actions necessary to achieve the stated
goals. Performance standards are the measurable values of specific variables that ensure objectives have
been met. They provide the basis for determining if mitigation is a regulatory success.
10/5/06\\Edmdata�Projects\942\OOl\FileRmkMFinal Buffer Mit Rpt%Walcker Buffer t,lil_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
3-3
Goal #1: Compensate for the loss of riparian habitat suitability from increased development in the
buffer by creating a structurally diverse and species -rich riparian buffer habitat within the
remaining buffer area that is self sustaining.
Objective 1: Plant a diversity of species within a minimum of 5,000 ft2 of riparian habitat area.
Performance Standard la: Species Diversity:
By the end of Years 1 through 3, the enhanced area will contain growing vegetation
communities composed of at least four dominant native species.
Performance Standard lb: Multiple Cover Classes:
By the end of Year 3, the enhanced area will contain an established vegetation
community that includes at least three cover classes (the existing forested layer, the sub -
canopy, the scrub -shrub layer, and/or a groundcover) that are each dominated by a
diversity of native species.
Note: we do not expect that the canopy cover will be substantially increased until at least
Year 10 due to tree species growth rate.
Performance Standard 1 c: Survival Standards:
Year 1: By end of the year, 100 percent survival of planted species, or if 100 percent
survival is not achieved, appropriate species of native volunteer plants will be counted for
each dead or missing plant.
Years 2 through 3: By end of each year, 75 percent survival of planted species, or if 75
percent survival is not achieved, appropriate species of native volunteer plants will be
counted for each dead or missing plant.
Performance Standard Id: Self -Sustaining System:
Survival standards for Year 3 will be met without continued irrigation, if possible.
Performance Standard 1 e: Overall Percent Cover:
By the end of Year 1, the enhanced areas will contain an overall cover of 60 percent
vegetation dominated by a diversity of native species.
By the end of Year 2, the enhanced areas will contain an overall cover of 65 percent
vegetation dominated by a diversity of native species.
By the end of Year 3, the enhanced areas will contain an overall cover of 70 percent
vegetation dominated by a diversity of native species.
Note: we do not expect that the enhanced areas will contain a successfully established
vegetation community that includes an overall cover of 80 percent vegetation dominated
by a diversity of native species until Year 5.
Performance Standard If. Invasive Species:
Areal coverage of non-native, invasive species may not account for more than 15 percent
of total site coverage in any year (Years 1 through 3).
10/5/06OEdmdata,Projects%9421001tEileRm\R\Eiva7 Buffer Mit Rpt\Wakker Buffer Mil_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
3-4
4.0 PLANTING PLAN
4.1 MITIGATION AREAS
The proposed mitigation design includes a planting plan to create structurally diverse and species -
rich buffer habitat. This design will compensate for riparian buffer width reduction in compliance with
City code. The mitigation design will consist of a limited amount of invasive species removal and
additional native species planting. Each of these activities is described in greater detail below. In
addition, detailed mitigation specifications are provided in Appendix A of this report.
4.2 PHASING AND SPECIFICATIONS
Mitigation will include general phases to be implemented sequentially. Installation of the
compensatory mitigation is proposed to be done concurrently with site development. To implement the
proposed mitigation in order to protect the retained buffer and restored buffer habitat, a specific sequence
of construction will need to be followed. The detailed mitigation specifications in Appendix A provide
explicit instructions regarding the construction sequence. A summary of this sequence is provided below:
® Prior to ground clearing, identify and flag the existing buffer and install sediment and erosion
control measures at the existing buffer boundary. Install protective measures for upland
buffer vegetation that is to remain. Install sediment fencing along the outside edge of the
buffer restoration area.
® Contact an International Society of Arboriculture -certified arborist during the planning stages
of construction to assist with plant salvaging and conservation of trees outside of the
construction boundary whose roots extend into the construction area.
0 Install protective and informational signs.
® Install irrigation system.
® Remove blackberries within wetland and upland areas. Any invasive species will be removed
from the mitigation areas prior to planting. Herbicides cannot be used within the stream
wetland or buffer areas. Painting of herbicides on freshly cut blackberry stubs during the
growing season is allowed.
® Amend soil as needed with organic compost and mulch.
® Monitor and control invasive species.
® Conduct ongoing adaptive management as needed based on the monitoring results or
additional/unforeseen circumstances.
® Plant buffer with trees and shrub species as specified; it is important that a biologist be onsite
during planting layout.
10/5/06PEdmdata\Yrojecls\942�00ITileRm�R\final Buffer Nfit RpWalcker Buffer Mit_Rpldoe LANDAU ASSOCIATES
4-1
4.3 PLANTING PLAN
To compensate for spatial and temporal loss of riparian buffer functions to be incurred by
proposed clearing within the subject property, Landau Associates has designed a planting plan that will
enhance the habitat value of the reduced stream buffer area. The stream buffer mitigation plan presented
herein includes the following: 1) a native vegetation planting plan; 2) a plan to retain specific habitat
features; and 3) a plan to control non-native invasive plant or wildlife species, as required by ECDC
23.90.030 (C), Mitigation and Equivalent or Greater Biological Functions.
The mitigation plan is designed to create a species -rich matrix of trees and shrubs that will
improve riparian habitat functions for wildlife and provide enough shade to control the spread of invasive
species. Specifically, partial sun to shade -tolerant species will be planted under the existing canopy to
increase species diversity and structural complexity. A mix of five deciduous tree species will eventually
replace lost canopy cover and supplement the existing late successional canopy vegetation.
We have selected to plant 23 native tree and shrub species that could have naturally occurred on
the subject property and that will nicely supplement the existing native species present on the site
(Table 2). These species have been chosen not only for their ability to tolerate site-specific soil, shade
and moisture conditions, but also for their ability to provide wildlife forage, habitat, and erosion control
functions, and for their transplanting success. Descriptions of the habitat, forage, aesthetic values, and
growing conditions of each species are presented in Appendix B.
Selected plants include a diverse mix of plants that will create a complex forest structure. Large
canopy -creating tree species include western red cedar, western hemlock, and Douglas fir to replace trees
that will be lost due to construction, along with Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) and grand fir (Abies
grandis) to enhance diversity. Lower canopy trees will include willows (Salix spp.) along the stream bed
and western crabapple (Malus fusca), western hazelnut (Corylus comuta), and red elderberry (Sambucus
racemosa) in the uplands. Lower shrub cover will include snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), bald -hip
and nootka roses (Rosa gymnocarpa and nutknana) and salmonberry (Rubus speetabalis), which will
compete with invasive blackberry species. Groundcovers include fast -spreading species such as
woodland strawberry (Fragaria vesca), red columbine (Aquilegia foimosa) and goat's beard (Aruncus
dioicus Sylvester).
The planting plan is based on an average planting density of one tree or large shrub per 8 -ft radius
with the remaining areas filled with shrubs planted 3 -ft on center, accounting for existing native
vegetation (as required by the ECDC). Shrubs, including snowberry and baldhip and nootka roses, spread
by underground rhizomes and therefore will quickly spread to fill in any gaps between plants. As well,
willow and black cottonwood are quick to colonize new areas. The enhancement area contains existing
native tree, shrub and groundcover that will remain intact. A total of 78 plantings will be installed within
10/5/06 UEdmdata\Projects\942\001'FFileRtn\RlFinal ➢utter N51 Rpt\Wakker Buffer Mit_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
4-2
the stream buffer, including 27 trees (container and stakes), 51 shrubs, plus and additional 90 ground -
covering plants, in order to provide immediate shade to slow the development of the Himalayan
blackberry. All existing vegetation and woody debris outside of the construction foot print will be
retained. Multiple large stumps and downed logs that are present on the property will be retained as
habitat for birds, snakes, and small mammals (Figure 3). ECDC specifies 8' tall trees; however, this is not
practical because nursuries do not sell native species at this size. Furthermore, studies show that smaller
trees grow faster and quickly obtain wider diameter than larger trees following planting (Watson and
Himelick 1997).
The layout of the plant communities was designed to maximize interspersion of species
(Figure 3). The layout of plants will be informal and irregular groupings of a variety of species to
resemble naturally occurring plant communities. We have calculated the number of plants of each species
needed and shown their approximate locations generally on the planting plan (Figure 3). Because of the
complexity in elevation, soils, proximity to streams, and property boundaries as well as the importance of
retaining existing native vegetation, the actual layout of plants will be primarily determined by a qualified
biologist present onsite during the planting phase. The final locations of existing and planted individuals
will need to be surveyed and mapped and will represent the as -built site habitat map. The final as -built
map will serve as the baseline for monitoring the success of the enhancement project (refer to
Section 5.1).
10Ul06 \\Edmdata\Projects\942\001\EileRiu\R\Einal Duffer Mit RpMalcker Butter N it_Rpt.doc LANDAU AsSOCIATES
4-3
5.0 MONITORING, MAINTENANCE, AND CONTINGENCY PLANS
Monitoring, maintenance, and contingency plans are important elements for the success of the
mitigation project. The proposed mitigation site will be monitored during and following installation of
the mitigation project. Maintenance will be conducted tlu-oughout the monitoring period and contingency
plans will be provided and implemented as needed during the monitoring period. Specific discussion of
each of these elements is provided below.
5.1 MONITORING PROGRAM
As stated in ECMC 23.40.130 (D) Monitoring Program, the mitigation plan shall include a
program for monitoring construction and for assessing a completed project. Monitoring tasks will begin
prior to any site work for the proposed mitigation project. A project engineer or biologist will coordinate
with the construction contractor to ensure that the specifications are understood and achievable given
onsite conditions. Prior to any grading work, and periodically during construction, a monitoring effort
will verify that sediment and erosion control specifications are met. Specifically, a qualified biologist
will verify that the existing buffer boundary has been clearly marked with sediment fencing to prevent
grading outside of the construction area limits (within the buffer).
state:
In order to restrict intrusion and disturbance, signs should be placed near the stream buffer that
"Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area
Do Not Disturb
Contact the City of Edmonds Regarding Uses and Restriction"
During plant installation, a qualified biologist will verify that plant materials are healthy and
consist of the correct species and sizes as designated on the planting plan and that they are placed in the
correct growing environments. When the plant installation is complete, the biologist will conduct an
inspection within 1 month and will provide detailed notes on any changes to the final mitigation plan.
This "as -built" plan will serve as the baseline for monitoring.
After construction, the mitigation areas will be monitored for a minimum 3 -year period, as
specified in the ECDC, in order to make certain that performance standards, and ultimately the mitigation
goals, are met. Monitoring will occur once between June 1 and September 15 to collect data on plant
cover, health, and mortality.
Monitoring will assess conditions in the mitigation areas based on data collected from permanent
data collection stations established along transects at regular intervals (three transects from north to south
with three data plots each). A minimum of two permanent photograph stations will be established and
10/5/06 \',Edmdata\Projects\942\001\FileRm\R\Fnal Buffer Mit RpMalcker Buffer Ntit_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
5-1
mapped in each buffer restoration area. These will be placed to provide a comprehensive visual
documentation of these areas as they change over the 3 -year period. Each monitoring station will be
monitored during summer (July to August) by the biologist in order to conduct an annual vegetation
evaluation that involves documentation of all woody plant mortality; areal coverage of tree, shrub, and
herb layers; invasive species coverage; and documentation of any colonization by native species.
Monitoring reports will be prepared once a year for 3 years. These reports will document site
conditions and evaluate the collected data to determine whether the perfonnance standards are being met.
Reports will be distributed to the applicant and all applicable regulatory agencies by November of each
year.
If a performance standard is not being met, the monitoring report will discuss the possible reasons
and recommendations for appropriate contingency plans will be provided. Any corrective measures will
be submitted in accordance with City regulations and/or permit conditions.
During Year 3 monitoring, evaluation of the functional performance of the buffer will be
conducted and compared to the pre -mitigation functional performance evaluation records to determine
whether the goals and performance standards have been attained. If it is determined at that time that the
goals were not obtained, the monitoring and maintenance program shall either continue for an extended
period of time or the contingency plans (described in Section 5.3) will be enacted, at the discretion of the
City of Edmonds.
5.2 MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
The objective of this wetland buffer mitigation project is to create an area that appears and
functions as a natural, high-quality, fimctioning wetland buffer. Landscape maintenance will need to be
done as needed for the successful establislunent of the plantings.
While species chosen for this mitigation proposal are adapted to conditions in western
Washington, supplemental irrigation will likely be needed during the first two growing seasons following
installation to ensure long-term survival of the planted communities. See the maintenance specifications
in Appendix A for the amount and duration during each year of irrigation.
The primary maintenance that would be required within the buffer creation area is removal of
weedy species and thinning of quickly growing species. Any exotic and invasive species should be hand -
weeded from the planted areas for the duration of the 3 -year monitoring period. All parts of the weeded
plants will need to be disposed of as outlined in Appendix A.
Allowance should be made for native volunteer species, which may colonize the site over time.
No mowing should be done within the planted areas. Some natural mortality is expected to occur during
the monitoring period. Any trees or shrubs that die over time should be left in place to provide additional
10 )06\tEdmdala\Projectsl9,12\001\FileRm9i\Final Buffer Mit Rptl Valcker Buffer Mit_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
5-2
wildlife habitat, unless they are aesthetically objectionable or pose a safety threat. Plants will be replaced
as needed to meet performance standards. All regulated streams located on property to be developed shall
be maintained in perpetuity by the property owner. Mr. Walcker would not be ultimately responsible for
the enhanced area within the right-of-way if the City decides to develop it in the fixture.
5.3 CONTINGENCY PLAINS
A contingency plan may be necessary if monitoring determines that perfonnance standards are
not being met as stated in ECDC 23.40.130 (E), Contingency Plan. In this case, the monitoring report
will include a discussion of potential causes for failure to meet performance standards and will
recommend appropriate actions to address the problem. The proposed contingency actions will depend
on the problem being addressed. For example, if all plants of a single species die, a more appropriate
replacement species will be determined for the site conditions. If weeds are out -competing the native
vegetation, additional weed control efforts may be warranted. Under certain conditions, irrigation may be
necessary. If contingency plans are determined to be necessary, all proposed actions will be designed and
submitted to permitting agencies for approval before they are implemented. As stated in the Stream
Buffer Enhancement Agreement (Landau Associates 2006), if Mr. Walcker's buffer enhancement plans
are not implemented, Eaglewood Homes (730 Daley Street) agrees to plant $1,000 worth of plants in
accordance with an approved buffer enhancement plan.
5.4 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
Mr. Walcker will post a security bond based on the installation and monitoring cost estimate
provided to the City in compliance with Edmonds Municipal Code 23.40.130 (F), Financial Guarantees,
as stated below:
"The mitigation plan shall include financial guarantees, as necessary, to ensure that the
mitigation plan is fully implemented. Financial guarantees ensuring fulfillment of the
compensation project, monitoring program, and any contingency measures shall be
posted in accordance with ECDC 23.40.290, Bonds to ensure mitigation, maintenance,
and monitoring [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]."
It was not within the scope of this task to provide a landscaping bid or cost estimate for
implementation of the project, although this will be needed to determine the amount of the performance
bond required.
103106bFdmdata\ProjectsN942\001\FlleRm\R\Final Buffer blit Rpt\Walcker Buffer N5t_4t.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
5-3
5.5 CONCLUSION
The current design plan for the proposed development does not impact in -stream wildlife habitat.
After buffer reduction and averaging, no construction will occur within the riparian buffer. As
compensation for buffer reductions, riparian buffer enhancement will be performed at the 742 Daley
Street property immediately adjacent to the onsite portion of Shell Creek, which has potential for
increased functions due to its location within an urban watershed and presence of anadromous
(downstream) and non-anadromous (within the mitigation site) fish species. The planting plan presented
in this report is expected to enhance several characteristics of this system, including its lack of understory
vegetation coverage in several areas and the growing presence of invasive species. Vegetation
enhancement may have more far-reaching positive impacts to the landscape, including enhancements to
salmonid habitat and erosion control downstream. We have prepared a solid mitigation plan that includes
clear goals, objectives, performance standards, and contingency plans to ensure success of the
enhancement project. The proposed riparian buffer mitigation plan will allow for reasonable use of the
property while protecting functions fish, stream, and wildlife habitat.
10/5/06PLeLndata\Projccts'942\001\FileRm\R\Final Buffer blit RpMalcker Buffer Mit_Rpt.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
5-4
6.0 USE OF TRIS REPORT
This wetland mitigation report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. Dennis Walcker.
No other party is entitled to rely on the information, conclusions, and recommendations included in this
document without the express written consent of Landau Associates. Further, the reuse of information,
conclusions, and reconunendations provided herein for extensions of the project or for any other project,
without review and authorization by Landau Associates, shall be at the user's sole risk. Landau
Associates warrants that within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been
provided in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the
profession currently practicing in the same locality under similar conditions as this project. We make no
other warranty, either express or implied.
This document has been prepared under the supervision and direction of the following key staff.
LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC.
2annon Moore
Senior Project Biologist
--t"
Sacha axwell
Staff Scientist
10i5m6 BOW hfit_Rpt.d- LANDAU ASSOCIATES
6-1
7.0 REFERENCES
Bruce. 2004. Letter: Geotechnical Evaluation/Foundation ReconnnendationS, Reasonable Use
Exemption, Eaglervood Homes proposed 3 residence development. From Dennis M. Bruce, P.E., to
Eaglewood Homes. July 4.
City of Edmonds. 2006. Current Edmonds Zoning Map. Available online at:
http•//www ei edmonds wa us/CityDepartments/PlanningDept/Zoning Map 2006-01-12 pdf. Accessed
on April 10, 2006.
City of Edmonds. 2005. City of Edmonds, TVashington Municipal Code. Available at
littp:Hsearch.mrse,org/iixt/ atg eway.dlI/edmdnic?templates&fn=edmdpage.litm$vid
=municodes:Edmonds. Edmonds Community Development Code. Accessed on September 23.
Landau Associates 2006. Report: Stream Br. ffer Enhancement Agreement, 742 Daley, Edmonds
Washington. Letter addressed to Steve Bullock, City of Edmonds, Washington.
Landau Associates 2005. Critical Areas Site Reconnaissance 742 Daley Street, Edmonds, Washington.
August 2005
NRCS. 2001. Hydric Soils List. Available at http://www.wa.nres.usda.gov/technicaUsoits/hydric lists/
hydsoil-wa-661.pdf. National Resource Conservation Service. Accessed on January 22.
NRCS. 1983. Soil Survey Report of Snohomish County Area, Washington. Available at
http://www.or.nres.usda.gov/pnw soiUwa reports.html. National Resource Conservation Service.
Accessed on January 22.
Sound Native Plants. 2005. Nursery Inventory. Available online at http://www.soundnativeplants.com/
catalogtrees.htm. Olympia, Washington. Accessed on April 6.
Watson, G.W. and E.B. Himelick. 1997. Principles and Practice of Planting Trees and Shrubs.
International Society of Arboriculture.
WSDOT. 2000. Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear Projects (previously known as
Wetland Functions Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) Tool). http://wNvw.wsdot.wa.gov/enviromnent/
biology/docs/bpjtool. pdf
10.!5/06 \Td,.data\Projeot 1942\00 I\FileRmiR\Final Buffer Mit Rpt,Walcker Buffer hGl Rpt.dac LANDAU ASSOCIATES
7-1
0
0
N
Map from Det-orme Street Atlas USA, 2002
J
Project Location
Edmonds Spokane
Tacoma
0 Y2 1
Scale in Miles
Walcker Buffer Mitigation Plan
LANDAU Edmonds, Washington Vicinity Map
[A ASSOCIATES
Washington
Figure
DALEY ST.
x a° "°" x x x Edge of Asphalt
x
Right -of -Way
x
CL
m
N Legend
0
g 75 -Foot Stream Buffer for Shell Creek per ECDC
5 (Type F, Non-Anadromous Fish -Bearing Stream)
0
'o
s Buffer Reduction and Averaging
4 Existing Large Trees
S
m X:j Trees to be Removed
6 h A
>W
Walcker Buffer Mitigation Plan
LANDAU Edmonds, Washington
ASSOCIATES
After
\ Vomer
Property
Boundary
�0 20 40
Scale in Feet
Base map source: PCSI Design 2006; Tri -County Land Surveying 2005
Figure
Stream Buffer Widths
DALEY ST.
LANDAU
AssOCLATES
Page 1 of 1
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF BUFFER REDUCTION AND ENHANCEMENT
WAL:CKER BUFFER MITIGATION PLAN
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
Impact Area Impacted Area within Buffer Reduction Impacted Area within Enhanced Riparian
Original (75 -ft) Buffer Reduced (37.5 -ft) Buffer Area
Buffer
I0/5/06 \\Edrudata\Projects\942\WITileRm\RTinal Buffer NGt RpMaleker Buffer Mir Rpl_Th I.doe LANDAU ASSOCIATES
At least 5,000 sf
742 Daley Streetn
Approx. 1,250 sf
<50 /n (1,100 sf)
(0.12 acre)
(0.03 acre)
>38 It average width
0
An additional 950 sf
within the Daley Street
right-of-way
730 Daley Street Approx. 1,000 sf
Eliminated from
0 0
(0.02 acre)
property
I0/5/06 \\Edrudata\Projects\942\WITileRm\RTinal Buffer NGt RpMaleker Buffer Mir Rpl_Th I.doe LANDAU ASSOCIATES
Z
W
2
W
U
Z
a
2
Z Z
W
� J
W IL
U- Z
LL. O
00 P
Za
O
04
J a
a Q' W
E-LL'U-
O:D
IL m
vi Q/
Z W
O
F- U
(L Q
U
W
W
U
W
a
N n
a_ O
a
O
`0
C
�
a
N
O
3 N
m
c
_
a 3
O
N
m 0
C(D
'0 a
ro
ro
o>
w Z 3
ro c
o ro
a) o
m
a)
iii o o
� 0
ro ami 3
3
c > m
0
o ao
n m
o a W
L
N N
ro ro
C
ro
a
!n
C9
o o
C N
ro a c
U
ro N
s
m>
m a) o
C Q)
O n
(0 E ro
C -
ro a
N 4
C O)
__
n
a N a
n
o
E
-O o
0 C
ro 0
a
C
ro
C
> c
C— O
m— o
m
>
c o
m
ro
a)
ro�
N c
Nw
a)
3 C
o
m
N a N
U
"•
ro a
(0 N
O .
o
0).2) O)
a
T O
O C>@
y0
r m
N c
a) ro
o
�a
— m c
C
c> ro
E
- a
�'o
m 0 E
rno nE
o :2N
n
=
C
O
m n
v
Q
o N 3
a
a rn
m (n
W �_
: a
0 E 0
` 3
a) o a
N
a S2
m > E
a)
C 0
a) w
O C S)
c
N
> M
a) C
-0 C N cu
m
a aNi
c
ro m
'N c E
aa)) c `0
0` m ro
m m
o
> N 3 N
a
- m
a) a
4) E
N ro
C O
N LL- -
z •p -0
rn
0
.;n •`n rn ro
N O)
m
m
o t
m
E w
Y s ro
Q)
E_ No
C)
'o
a) 3
m `o
c
@ a) m
o U
c�
a 0 3
-
L U C
.-. m
N >> Y
w E o
C 7 ro
E
N
U N T
O
3 0
ro
0 @
E a d
N N T
N a)
ui
O 6)
O ? ai
m co L�
—_ C
fa
m 0)
T
3 o
c
ro Y
N aai N
E�
3 -0 ,� ro
0
w E
o T
m o a-roi
3 z r y
U)
m m u)
.N
a s
o
C U
rn ro c
vi N
c N c W
a2 m
3 c a
n c 0
c vi
3 ro a
N
m E ro
c
(n o
m fl m
N
C
0 0
ro-
c -N
c
o
`
C N
c a)
° c
N N>
0
m ti
O
ai
EDS
� cn
�c
vuoico
)°0
a
�
w_a
U N>
N D.0
C
N ro
'a N
m
3
o m
iv ��
-g U o'E
c Y
o :32 CL
Q vni a
n n
)
3
C7 t:; CL r)
IT -o C7 -0H
U z
o 2 E
0- o
m
a
._
c
Z
Z
ro
ro
U)
o c
o
a
0
= 3
m0
_
o
a
c°
m a) c
a) Z
m
r
_.
O
0.
CL rZ0
N
•o
C
0 to
0
v1
0 0
N N
_ -
(n (�
o
=3_0
z;in
o
O
U
C O
E
C O
N E
C O
cf E v
O
E
C
o) m
O
E
C O
N E
C
r-
75N
j a)
N >.
ro N
n
N
7 N Z'
_0
N
N
N
vim-
� Y
N O
ca
N
N (_5
N Y
45
Y
N
a
O
=3O
7 O a
U) Y
� O O
7 O
N .O
:3 O a
N
7 0
N E
0
N E
0
N 0 E 0
oa c
N 0 E N
0-a a
N a) E.
o -o
N E a)
o c
N E
o
n�
n-
n m-�
a m- ro
n m= •0
CL
a.
W w
W In
W ('cn to a
W (ncn N
W (n V) E
W U) a
W In
v7
r
((o
ro
N
m
O
0
0
co
O
C
d)
to
c
Q)
'aO
D
a
m N
p
WQN3
N
roN �
cNn
a)
N
O
t
O
N
2
O N
G
U
O
O
a)
•.O-
.0
70 ]
`
C
N
ro
.0
'O -
U @
'OO
6
m
-eL
O
U
a) •C
o N
a)
a
W
S r-
a) E
p N
a)
p
a) U
=
m
E
o
a)
z
a)
3
c
n
m
o Z
no
m
N
N
�
E
0
m
W
co
-C
a
E
O
U
-O
U
C)
o
N
O
c
y7
a
'0
m
a
aNi
00
�
m
E
o
ro
m
z
o
Z3
aw)
m
m
ro
C
cn
a)
m
c
,
c
a
10
c
0
0
m
a
F -
Z
W
2
W
U
Z
Q
Z
Z Z
W Q
wa
LL. Z
LL O
ma
Z
Q �
NIleP
LUQ2
CL w
a Q' W
LL
O]
LL m
oe
Z W
O .�
F -U
CL J
Q
U
W
0
W
U
W
CL
U)
Z
O
F-
0
Z_
Y
N
0
Z
O
W
m
E '3
a)
L >° 'o
-
N
a
a c
ro o
Y 3 m c
"
ro
m
m o o
`O
N
Y
iT N N
_
E
N0
C C
U
7
2
O C
E S'
7
o
C
N
cz
m
(aT)
w
c
m
Y
y C:
3
E m a)
-
7 0
v o 0
E a c
O ri
o
ma
cm) c
N a)
0
N a
C
N
w
-0
7
L C
coZ
aJ }— 1
C>
a) d-0
N N
a
co
>
3 a)
N
n m
3
m
- c a)
0
ro
a N
!Lm
cCL
m
aci N
�c
t' E
`� m
v o
a0i�
0. T7
L N m
C O)
C— O
to > N
•c
y
v
?
o
c
`o m
Y 0 o
m
�
m tf 0)
a o
o 0 N
>>i o'
Q
o
c
ami c
-
E m
a)
w
I>
c T
a c o
o>
m rn-a
0 E 3 3 0
a)
1E -0
m 0n
m o
3
0 m
L ro
c
w �
0 m
c
m 7
.q
c
m
0 Q
c
o
°D -
() 0)o
y 7 a)
O U
c ._
`w
n aro
3 x 0
o
T aj o
0 3
0
c°
o v m
c
c m
o `o
c T
ro
ro0o
0
~pDni
3
ti
>
m
o
>
t
m
0N
o m
a) o
N
>U m
a)0
O
)
Ln�0Uoo>
Cymm
o� v
cE2 vi
o m
c
(1)
3>eto
o
I
O
E o
o0aoL U
(a
C0°
m
a)
o
C
oct-N
n a)
c O
c aamni
E ma)
N
n C
0
7
-oO N O U
O
t0
'2 OT
N =
t7 r •�
T
ca
2 a)
to 0
0 c
C m O
m
L 7
m a N
L
0 0 Qf
m
w C
m p) U T
N O C
iro •0
o 0
o Cc`
o (D
I-0 3 V)
V)
ro c
YT
-0m
TL
oU
0. CL
-o o
m 0
a)r
U' T.
0
m m
0
U)
a)
a) a
m 3
0
070
m E
m
t0
r •o
m a)
m
o
CL o
0.
to E
n
a)
_0 o
a m
0
o m
a
o v
`n
O
C r0-�
C O
C
C 'O
O
C O
N O
U
ai
N y
ai 3
i E
E
u7 E
E
rn
co
m
5 0i
� �i
7
ro �i
a
-
of
'�
m ai
w
to
N (n
�
O N
O U
O O
c-
7
0 a) D
O -O
7
0 m y
O -O
7 0
0 E
O
7 0 'O
to E ro
O
7 O
0 o E
0-0
7 O N
0 m E o
0-0
7 O _N
O ro E o
0-0
N
CL L •o
N
a •o
CL
C
n .o •�
fl- m
CL m E
Cl m- E
W u) E
W co E
W <n
W cn v
W h in
W� cn °
W Lv cn° 0
CL
7
o?
0
0
c
O
o
CO
o
s
c
m
0
(D
N
E
m
O.
-0.LJ
=$
O
N
`)
.O
i
O
w0
U
L
L
N
U
L
C
a)
Q
U)
7
C
N
N
7
O
U)
7
N
7
C
N
D
a)
2'_0,
ro LO
v
rn
N
j N
M
O` `-
N
O
>
U
W
m
U
W v
v
E
ro
Z
Z
a
N
cE
C
T
c
a)
c
0)
o
m
E
a)
c
E
a0)i
o
c
w3
3
n
n.
U
N
U
C
w
N
Y
O
0
a
(n
cn
m
N
0
c
J
'�-
COI
U
CO
U
t
E
N
@
N
:3
U
tp
i
•Tij
L
U
m
m
O
4
4
F -
z
W
2
W
U
Z
Q
Z
z
W
w
U.
LL
Cli
Q
N
W Q
JCL
Q �
O
LL
Z
O
H
a.
U
w
W
V
W
0..
U)
4z
J
O..
00
Q �
p
�L' Q
W
LL U)
LL Q
m z
O
W
YW
U
J
Q
*1
t n
U)
O)
L (p
!n
7
(n C
C
-
N
m 0 �
N
L
-
L
a N
E
E
0 7
_ ro
O ro
7 N
O C
'�
m -0 7
N a Y
U
0
a c (UC
7
L
Ill C (Q ..
a) c
>. O
ro ro
O 9
o ro ro U
N .0
E
y N
N
O 'rop
t3. ,-C.--.
a cu
.
a) N E
n
7 m
aoi 2'
o N '>
y o 3
c
ro o o n`i
s 3
N
w a I`p
aro O
N C .O
cn ro
-= O N O E
N
@ �`
D_"-
-O a d
a@
ro 7 N E
U
a ro
o vo m
c mo
IO
N
4 N
m 3
E
o ro
N aa)
oL
N
L o c
j, a
= a) o
X
c ro al
•cV
0 c io D rn
ro
Q
N
C O O
ro C -O
(On
a)
N Y
ro d
c a)
O a)
U N
E O ro
o a
0 0
"O N ro
N C
Q
(Lj t
a) L 7
N 0,
a .L-�
N C (0 N
OU
.O N
ro >
N
ro
C N
ro 0 o ai
C aJ
E c
N C N
E o
� E
N O
7 C O N
n> a) 0 0
N .� -0
3 o a)
a
(n
E 5 m N
C° (°
-0
7 N N
0
O C
>
.11 •> N
p
`o) c
ron
m a 0
C
0 o ro
`)
..U)
o ro N �
— a
3
Not
3 0 0
O n Y b
a
� m
c a � o�
y
0
C p N3
"O O OU
N
ro a)
3 r
�_ ro
+=
ro p
0 O
ti
CL
'D m E
7
N _a)
ro (n —
m a y
3.0m
@
=
Nn.
CD tma)m
y ro
o c)
a'aa))'o(pn
(DN
ro •-
Q1
>
L N y-
caro
al ro y
N
m a
0) N
0
-0 O N
E
(0 O N
aNi n m
ro>
N
m
ro- a) 0_
o v
ro a
(p C N N
v—
c ro
Y c
ro
<o
v
ro
a)7Z6
•O - w
w N
C)
p) .j
CO
C
7�
a)
N N L
Q= ro
a) C= c
O
C E' ro E 'O
N>
L
O CL
Y "' ,
N a)
a) ,� -C
a) L L
3 U
N C N—
3 n
N p U C
p
C)
N ro C-0 N
fl
-O O
coo
Ni
0
0 0 �0
N
on v
o
7 N
ro
o
�o
m
C7 U)
a` U) (nn N
FL- I
(n m
Q E c.)aN) Z
IL- aro)
Z
-o
C
ED w0
Z,
o Z,@
N
y0 uj
m O
0
0 '0
CL a)
0) a
= o
a) a
a 0
m o
0. E
a) o
a E
m a
0 ro
v
o m
o
�
0 0
•� o
o io
O
U
c 7
on of
C .0
of E
N .0
E
C
w 3
N
3
C
N
%
U))
v �i
ro ai
n
w
a
v
Y
NN
y
w
N
7
�n ro
y
N
N
a
•O
o� E
'0
o- E
7 •O
o- E
7 •o •C
o� E.`L
'0
o� E
7 'o
o� E
0-(a— o
X
CL (U
0 (n—
0_ ro =
0.ro =
n
0 ro..o
U)Q)E
w v cn
W m<n
wLNin0
w U) CO
w ncn E
�
a
CD
$
�
a✓
c
p
(D
—
CD
CA
(Oo
O
O
p
o
(0
i-�
O
p
.D
.a
-2
O
ro
ro
2
2
4)
a
N
C
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Q
7
ro
ro
7
O
7
0
7
p
7
O
'00
'U
W M
O
v
ro
a
m
Z
o
p
O
E
E
o
N
a
n
3
O
U
Y
iT
Y
O
E
4=-
0
m
7
o
ro
o
o
m
o
(U
m
m
Z
U)
d
a)
E
c
co
y_
Au
Z
E
N
4
U
y
U
N
@
O
@
C
�2
121Z3
Z3
m
C13
Z
�r
I
O
m
W
F -
z
W
2
w
U
z
Q
z z
W
w Q.
LL z z
:0 0 0
`°ate
z
cv
..wQ
Qo:CL
w�
H W 0
LL 0
0 m z
®Y w
F -U
d J
Q
U�
w
clw
U
W
D..
(i)
E
X
0
c
E
0
0
Y
m
CL
0
.76-
a
O
2SZN
5
a
L
Y
0
_
O
-o ai . 0 0
(�
0
U
o u
d -p
0
aNi
E4)
O
o
Y O a)
v
O N O
a) N US
E rn
N N
a) 7 3
E L_
o
3 `oro n
m
c o
o away
N °"= 3
3 m c
c v E
t-0
ya N
o
E> m o)p
m N
C°
y
@
.�
N t
Q
w L
O
c
U
0) L N:
O (6
p
3 C
V1 U .n a)
° .O N
C a)
A)
O 'C '� O U
NC
-- N y r
p
N
'� ro
(/) >
�
n E .N o
C .
° o
u°, m o
c (Ln
a
a
w (c)):
0
o c 0 0
wo
N L 0 Y
m in
Y
c o
c aNi
- a Z n
c 0)
ro °� c>
'O
C
C i6 O p
> O
(0 o E
O U
N 4=i Q
NN
N Qi N "O
a) OC
N (U
'Y U) a) L
o :��° 3
N o 0
N 0 0
o coN
2 -o
m m
n, Z y L—
CL :3
o f 0
o w
U E N-
w
0
3> N
=
n=
0 0 o_
> o N
E-
3
Z
i
o m
crnca)
E 0 0)
o
w o s
0
a
;0
v
c0)
c o rn
a)
N 3 m
rn
o c E a> 3
o n c
°
m
0 cm N
a w m
c rN
mai
i;
E
0 m
v °
N m
o 'c
0 o
c c
ro c
N
a) c 3 °) o
w n c
3
'o C:,)-
(U C C
m m
.0 a n co
O C C
o a) @ '-
N
O t (U •C
E N m O)
O_
Ll N •N
N N (U
(6 .� O
—
N
U a) •N N
'O d
N O .O
>
c>
(U > L
N UJ �'
C
T m
Z' U
t
'D C
E
N
r .5..•
N •0 G O>
E2U
'O
a) p_ O ui
N
C m N 3 C
(En C
f
N 0) (U M O
0 y° m a�
a) C N
0> ons
-0� O>
a v>
O N -p N
m v) 0
N V '` N
3- 0 0 N
a) C m a)
Q U1 a) l9
E
N 7 D) N
C N C_
>aNi a)
N� 'y N
a) N
(i N L .0 E
K N> L
(n U7 t
> C
y>
J T
o
m
m
�o
t0
m
y0 c
0 N
CL m
(no
0
n
(ten o
0
a E o
0
-0o E
•o
0
o �
c a
o N
•o
o f
(0 o
•c o�
m
•c o
N E
c
m E
c
(n> 3
N
3
c
ai
w o
n 00 ai
C
n
1 0
N m U)
n
o f
o f
o f
a)
o E m
� N 'o
o E
n
nL.o.o
.
X 0
X.
a
0 .0 0
X 0
a
xao)'o
w Znw E
w
wU)
w-oU
w-ocn
a✓
a=
a
C
N
N
(0
N
O
00
0
N
a)
N
U
N
N
E
N
i
N
a)
>
N
>
>
>
>
0
o
o
_0
a
a
0o
CDcq
a`?o
C
C N
o
o
o B
o°
0
zU
O
C
O
E
U
70
E
E
—
y
C
C
°m
U
a)
3
:?
Y
Cl)
a
o
to
Q)
'S
j
a)
E
y
o
m
m
z
N
m
o
o
s
.2
N
c
�
m
0
0
�
0
Q)
°
Q
Q
a)
a3
co
C
E
X
0
c
E
0
0
Y
m
CL
0
.76-
a
O
2SZN
5
a
L