Loading...
REVIEWED PLN BLD2023-0273+BIOLOGIST REPORT+3.2.2023_12.39.48_AM+3396830RECEIVED ; --Reviewed - - Mar 15 2023 BLD2023-0273 City of Edmonds ; PlanningDivision CITY OF EDMONDS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DEPARTMENT Altmann Oliver Associates, LLG AOA PO Box 578 Carnation, WA 98014 Office (425) 333-4535 Fax (425) 333-4509 December 5, 2018 Paul Trieu paul.trieu@live.com Environmental Planning & Landscape Architecture SUBJECT: Wetland Delineation and Rating for 7011 Lake Ballinger Way Edmonds, WA (Parcel 00488800801100) Dear Paul: On July 13, 2017 1 conducted an initial wetland reconnaissance on your subject property utilizing the methodology outlined in the May 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0). The site is located on the south shore of Lake Ballinger and the southern portion of the property is developed with your single- family residence and associated accessory structure. The remainder of the property consisted primarily of a mowed lawn that generally slopes gently down to the water's edge and your existing dock. Wetland Hydrology Monitoring Since the majority of the lawn area throughout the northern portion of the site contained historic peat soils, it was my recommendation that a hydrology review be conducted throughout the wet season to monitor water levels in association with a wetland delineation. As part of the hydrology review, 6 shallow groundwater monitoring wells were installed to a depth of about 18 inches within the lawn area. These wells were then monitored every few days from January 30, 2018 through March 31, 2018 (i.e., typically when groundwater levels are highest). Precipitation for this time period was considered within the normal range. Based on the groundwater monitoring, none of the installed wells currently meet the hydrology criterion to be classified as a wetland and the presence of peat appears to be a relic of historic wetland prior to Lake Ballinger water level manipulations and development. Paul Trieu December 5, 2018 Page 2 Groundwater Monitoring Data All wells installed approximately 18 inches deep. Date of measure Well 1 Depth to Water inches I Well 2 Well 3 Well 4 Depth to Depth to Depth to Water Water Water inches inches (inches) Well 5 Depth to Water inches Well 6 Depth to Water inches 1/30/18 Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry 2/1 Dry Dry Dry Dry 15 15 2/3 Dry Dry Dry 17 14 14 2/5 Dry Dry Dry 16 13 13 2/7 Dry Dry Dry 16 13 12 2/8 Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry 12 2/9 Dry Dry Dry 16 15 12 2/11 Dry Dry Dry 17 14 13 2/13 Dry Dry Dry 17 15 14 2/15 Dry Dry Dry 17 15 14 2/17 Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry 17 2/19 Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry 2/21 Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry 2/23 Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry 2125 Dry Dry Dry 17 17 17 2/27 Dry Dry Dry 17 17 16 3/1 Dry Dry Dry 15 14 10 3/3 Dry Dry Dry 14 12 8 3/6 Dry Dry Dry 15 15 14 3/9 Dry Dry Dry 15 14 15 3/10 Dry Dry Dry 17 16 16 3/12 Dry Dry Dry 17 17 16 3114 Dry Dry Dry 16 15 15 3/17 Dry Dry 17 18 17 16 3/18 Dry Dry Dry 18 Dry 17 3/20 Dry Dry Dry 18 17 17 3123 Dry Dry Dry 17 17 17 3/25 Dry Dry Dry 18 16 15 3/27 Dry Dry Dry 17 16 14 3/29 Dry Dry Dry 17 16 16 3131 Dry Dry Dry 17 16 15 Paul Trieu December 5, 2018 Page 3 Wetland A Following a review of the shallow groundwater monitoring data, one wetland (Wetland A) was identified and delineated along the lake shore on October 25, 2018. The wetland boundary and monitoring well locations (SL#) were subsequently surveyed and are depicted on Figure 1. Attachment A contains data sheets prepared for a representative location in both the wetland and upland. These data sheets document the vegetation, soils, and hydrology information that aided in the wetland boundary delineation. Vegetation within the on -site portion of the wetland consisted primarily of a narrow emergent fringe of mowed grasses, yellow iris (Iris pseudacorus), and bird's -foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus). In addition, a Palustrine Aquatic Bed (PAB) extends out into the lake and it appears that the wetland likely includes a scrub -shrub component located along the shoreline off -site to the east (although off -site access was not obtained on private property). Wetland A meets the criteria for a Category III wetland with 5 habitat points (Attachment B) and requires a standard 60-foot buffer per EMC 23.50.040.F.1.e if all of the applicable requirements of EMC 23.50.040.F.1.f (below) are met. If these measures are not implemented, then an 80-foot standard buffer would be required EMC 23.50.040.F.1.g. Paul Trieu December 5, 2018 Page 4 EMC 23.50.040.F.1.f f. Required Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands (All Measures Are Required If Applicable to a Specific Proposal). Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts Lights Direct lights away from wetland Noise • Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland • If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation planting adjacent to noise source For activities that generate relatively continuous, potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy industry or mining, establish an additional 10-foot heavily vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the outer wetland buffer Toxic runoff Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while ensuring wetland is not dewatered Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 feet of wetland • Apply integrated pest management Storm water Retrofit storm water detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development runoff • Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer Use low -intensity development techniques (for more information see storm water ordinance and manual) Change in water • Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and regime new lawns Pets and human • Use privacy fencing or plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance disturbance using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a conservation easement Dust Use best management practices to control dust Paul Trieu December 5, 2018 Page 5 If you have any questions regarding the wetland delineation or rating, please give me a call. Sincerely, ALTMANN OLIVER ASSOCIATES, LLC John Altmann Ecologist Attachments z M z� M Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC AOA PO Box 578 Carnation, WA 98014 Office (425) 3334535F. (425) 333-4509 1 E-inn nlenl Planning & Landscape Architecture WL A ti WL A 3 �S�6, WLA1 WLA2 _ g' � ��- �. 6` Q > M - O \o \m S<S Q)> rn p `m Ux 3 285 72 \ \ 10 ��/ , - -- _ _91 34, / AYLICNT = -k 296 \\f 2a9� \- gUILDIN� -- \ 291 \I 292 -� I III SLAB iI \\\\,`✓ \303 f 293 - �� 1111 CAN \ x\ \\ f 294 295 296 1 x c 2g7 29$ \\ 299 A ,300 301 3p6 302 307 3 0 - 305 I -' --- - / 3p9 - - - / - —Ofi _ _ ----_ _ 310 G 30 308 J09 FIGURE I: GRITIGAL AREAS MAP TRIEU PROPERTY rt0II LAKE BALLIN6ER kgAY EDMONDS, WA DRAWN I PROJECT I SCALE DATE 12-04-10 REVISED 5483-MIT-12-04-18.dwg ATTACHMENT A DATA SHEETS WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: 7011 Lake Ballinger Way City/County: Edmonds/ Sampling Date: 10/25/18 Applicant/Owner: Trieu State: WA Sampling Point: DP 1 Investigator(s): Altmann Section, Township, Range: Sec. 32, T 27N, R4E, W.M Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation ❑, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ❑, significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No ❑ Are Vegetation ❑, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ❑, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing samplinq point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Hydric Soil Present? Yes ® No ❑ Is the Sampled Area Yes ® No ❑ within a Wetland? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑ Remarks: Plant community is periodically mowed emergent fringe adjacent lake shore. VEGETATInN — IJwa srienfifir names of nlantsa Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet: % Cover Species? Status 1 Number of Dominant Species 3 (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 3 (B) 4, Species Across All Strata: 50% = 20% _ = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 100 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1. 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = 20% _ = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x5 = 1. Holcus lanatus 30 ves FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Iris aseudacorus 30 ves OBL Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 3. Lotus coniculatus 20Les FAC 4. ❑ 1 — Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. ® 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6• ❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.0' 7. ❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting g data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ❑ 5 - Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. — 50% = 20% = 80 = Total Cover 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2 Hydrophytic Vegetation Yes ® No El = 20% _ =Total Cover Present? % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 Project Site: Trieu SOIL Samolino Point: DP 1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc' Texture Remarks 0-16 Peat 'Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 'Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': ® Histosol (Al) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 'indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions ( F8) p wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes ® No ❑ Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) ® High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) ® Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (1311) ❑ Drainage Patterns (1310) ❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ Iron Deposits (135) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): 8 Saturation Present? Yes ® No (includes capillary fringe) ❑ Depth (inches): 4 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑ Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 • • • • WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: 7011 Lake Ballinger Way City/County: Edmonds/ Sampling Date: 10/25/18 Applicant/Owner: Trieu State: WA Sampling Point: DP 2 Investigator(s): Altmann Section, Township, Range: Sec. 32, T 27N, R4E, W.M Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation ®, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ®, significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No ❑ Are Vegetation ❑, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ❑, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No ❑ Hydric Soil Present? Yes ® No ❑ Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No within a Wetland? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: Plant community is mowed lawn. Delineation is based largely on presence/absence of hydrology. VFGFTATInN — IJwa srienfifir names of nlantsa Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet: % Cover Species? Status 1 Number of Dominant Species (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant (B) 4, Species Across All Strata: 50% = 20% _ = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1. 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = 20% _ = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x5 = 1. Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. ❑ 1 — Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. ❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6• ❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.0' 7• ❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting g data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ❑ 5 - Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. — 50% = 20% = 80 = Total Cover 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2 Hydrophytic Vegetation Yes El No El = 20% _ =Total Cover Present? % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Plant community consists entirely of mowed unidentified grassses - no yellow iris or other obvious hydrophytic vegetation. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 Project Site: Trieu SOIL Samolino Point: DP 2 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' LocZ Texture Remarks 0-16 Peat 'Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': ® Histosol (Al) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions ( F8) p wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes ® No ❑ Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) ❑ High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (1311) ❑ Drainage Patterns (1310) ❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ Iron Deposits (135) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No (includes capillary fringe) ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Delineation based largely on hydrology review during wet season. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 ATTACHMENT B WETLAND RATING Wetland name or number A RATING SUMMARY — Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): 7011 Lake Ballinger Way Date of site visit: 10/25/2018 Rated by Altmann Trained by Ecology? o Yes❑ No Date of training 03/08 & 03/15 HGM Class used for rating Lake Fringe Wetland has multiple HGM classes? ❑ Yes o No NOTE: Form is not complete with out the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map PDS Map Portal OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY III (based on functions o or special characteristics ❑ ) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS Category I - Total score = 23 - 27 Category II - Total score = 20 - 22 X Category III - Total score = 16 - 19 Category IV - Total score = 9 - 15 Improving Hydrologic Habitat FUNCTION Water Quality List appropriate rating (H, M, Q Site Potential M L M Landscape Potential H L L Value H M M Total Score Based on 8 4 5 17 Ratings 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC Category Estuarine Wetland of High Conservation Value Bog Mature Forest Old Growth Forest Coastal Lagoon Interdunal None of the above X Score for each function based on three ratings (order of ratings is not important) 9=H,H,H 8=H,H,M 7=H,H,L 7 = H, M, M 6 = H, M, L 6 = M, M, M 5=H,L,L 5 = M, M, L 4=M,L,L 3=L,L,L Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 1 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015 Wetland name or number A HGM Classification of Wetland in Western Washington For questions 1 -7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1 - 7 apply, and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? o NO - go to 2 ❑ YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe -go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? ❑ NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) ❑ YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. o NO-goto3 ❑ YES - The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? o The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; o At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). ❑ NO - go to 4 o YES - The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ❑ The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), ❑ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. ❑ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. ❑ NO - go to 5 ❑ YES - The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ❑ The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, ❑ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. ❑ NO - go to 6 ❑ YES - The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 3 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015 Wetland name or number A LAKE FRINGE WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality L 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? L 1.1. Average width of plants along the lakeshore (use polygons of Cowardin classes): Plants are more than 33 ft (10 m) wide points = 6 Plants are more than 16 ft (5 m) wide and < 33 ft points = 3 6 Plants are more than 6 ft (2 m) wide and < 16 ft points = 1 Plants are less than 6 ft wide points = 0 L 1.2. Characteristics of the plants in the wetland: Choose the appropriate description that results in the highest points, and do not include any open water in your estimate of coverage. The herbaceous plants can be either the dominant form or as an understory in a shrub or forest community. These are not Cowardin classes. Area of cover is total cover in the unit, but it can be in patches. Herbaceous does not include aquatic bed. Cover of herbaceous plants is > 90% of the vegetated area points = 6 1 Cover of herbaceous plants is > 2/3 of the vegetated area points = 4 ❑ Cover of herbaceous plants is >'/3 of the vegetated area points = 3 ❑ Other plants that are not aquatic bed > 2/3 unit points = 3 Other plants that are not aquatic bed in >'/3 vegetated area points = 1 Aquatic bed plants and open water cover > 2/3 of the unit points = 0 Total for L 1 Add the points in the boxes above 7 Rating of Site Potential If score is: ❑ 8 -12 = H o 4 - 7 = M ❑ 0 - 3 = L Record the rating on the first page L 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? L 2.1. Is the lake used by power boats? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 L 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of wetland unit on the upland side in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 L 2.3. Does the lake have problems with algal blooms or excessive plant growth such as milfoil? Yes = 1 No = 01 1 Total for L 2 Add the points in the boxes abovel 2 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 0 2 or 3 = H ❑ 1 = M ❑ 0 = L Record the rating on the first page L 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? L 3.1. Is the lake on the 303(d) list of degraded aquatic resources? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 L 3.2. Is the lake in a sub -basin where water quality is an issue (at least one 1 aquatic resource in the basin is on the 303(d) list)? Yes = 1 No = 0 L 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality? Answer YES if there is a TMDL for the lake or 2 basin in which the unit is found. Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for L 3 Add the points in the boxes above 4 Rating of Value If score is: 0 2 - 4 = H ❑ 1 = M ❑ 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 5 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015 Wetland name or number A LAKE FRINGE WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to reduce shoreline erosion L 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce shoreline erosion? L 4.1. Distance along shore and average width of Cowardin classes along the lakeshore (do not include Aquatic bed): Choose the highest scoring description that matches conditions in the wetland. > 3/4 of distance is Scrub -shrub or Forested at least 33 ft (10 m) wide points = 6 4 ❑ > 3/4 of distance is Scrub -shrub or Forested at least 6 ft (2 m) wide points = 4 o >'/4 distance is Scrub -shrub or Forested at least 33 ft (10 m) wide points = 4 Plants are at least 6 ft (2 m) wide (any type except Aquatic bed) points = 2 Plants are less than 6 ft (2 m) wide (any type except Aquatic bed) points = 0 Rating of Site Potential If score is: ❑ 6 = M o 0 - 5 = L Record the rating on the first page L 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the hydrologic functions of the site? L 5.1. Is the lake used by power boats with more than 10 hp? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 L 5.2. Is the fetch on the lake side of the unit at least 1 mile in distance? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 Total for L 5 Add the points in the boxes above 0 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: ❑ 2 = H ❑ 1 = M o 0 = L Record the rating on the first page L 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? L 6.1. Are there resources along the shore that can be impacted by erosion? If more than one resource is present, choose the one with the highest score. There are human structures or old growth/mature forests within 25 ft of OHWM of the shore in the unit points = 2 ❑ There are nature trails or other paths and recreational activities 1 within 25 ft of OHWM points = 1 o Other resources that could be impacted by erosion points = 1 There are no resources that can be impacted by erosion along the shores of the unit points = 0 Rating of Value If score is: ❑ 2 = H o 1 = M ❑ 0 = L NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 6 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015 Wetland name or number These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of % ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked. o Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 2 o Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 o Scrub -shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points - 1 ❑ Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If the unit has a Forested class, check if: ❑ The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub -canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or'/4 ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods ). ❑ Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 ❑ Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 2 ❑ Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 ❑ Saturated only 1 types present: points = 0 ❑ Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland ❑ Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland o Lake Fringe wetland 2 points ❑ Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points H 1.3. Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2. Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle 1 If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 5 - 19 species points = 1 < 5 species points = 0 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. (:D (:: O e 3 None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams in this row are HIGH = 3 points Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 7 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015 Wetland name nr numher A H 1.5. Special habitat features: Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points. o Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long) o Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland ❑ Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m) 3 ❑ Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) o At least'/4 ac of thin -stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg -laying by amphibians) ❑ Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of strata) Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes abovel 11 Rating of Site Potential If Score is: ❑ 15 - 18 = H o 7 - 14 = M ❑ 0 - 6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat function of the site? H 2.1 Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: 0 % undisturbed habitat + ( 13 % moderate & low intensity land uses / 2) = 6.5% If total accessible habitat is: 0 > 1/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 20 - 33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2 10 - 19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1 < 10 % of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. Calculate: 0 % undisturbed habitat + ( 23 % moderate & low intensity land uses / 2) = 11.5% Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 1 Undisturbed habitat 10 - 50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2 Undisturbed habitat 10 - 50% and > 3 patches points = 1 Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.3 Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (-2) -2 <_ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above -1 Rating of Landscape Potential If Score is: ❑ 4 - 6 = H ❑ 1 - 3 = M o < 1 = L Hecord the rating on the tirst page H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score that applies to the wetland being rated. Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2 ❑ It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page) ❑ It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists) ❑ It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species ❑ It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources ❑ It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) with in 100m points = 1 Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0 Rating of Value If Score is: ❑ 2 = H o 1 = M ❑ 0 = L Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 8 Record the rating on the first page WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015 Wetland name or number A WDFW Priority Habitats Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/lis Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat. El Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha). o Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report). ❑ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. El Old-growth/Mature forests: Old -growth west of Cascade crest — Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi -layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests — Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old -growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest. Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 — see web link above). El Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. El Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non -forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 — see web link above). El Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. El Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report — see web link on previous page). Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. El Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. El Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. o Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 9 WSDOT Adapted Form - January 14, 2015 o Off -Site pcess 11 iow 9 ilw1114 m Ao ,J m Subje Acces High Intensity Habitat 77% Low —Moderate Intensity Habitat 10% Relatively Undisturbed Habitat 0% Figure A 0 485 970 1,940 2,910 3,880 US Feet Sno C Sub ® Wetland Rating Unit 150' Pollution Buffer for Wetland A Pollution Generating Surfaces for Wetland A 48% Figure B 0 30 60 120 180 240 US Feet N A December 3, 2018 303d r 224th St L0 SW 2281h St SW 228th St SW r 5 � Q — Te ce L Coek 0 CC, r sa - Esperance c Mountlake'v nl t S., �:. Terrace L a eterans E !] 3 M Memorial n (U Park 1 L 236th St SVV a ��ee w L Fry r_ �o Nile Golf Q �0 d Country 4GO " Club dy HONIISH SNOHOPAIStI N-205th St_ _ 1r����NE --J 2OSth t NE 205th SI G KING Aurora �aa Village z Bd �/i Living N 200th St Ba II inge r d Commo ood �� Wisdom z Cemeter Cemetery e� School z r d �� w SITE - w dy` Aklercrest G z ti� Annex N 155th St ° _ " a� c (Closed] _ Q � A CRISTA Ministries 0 d King's z S? z y Shoreline !� Schools .v }_ zPark a� Q Shoreline E Q r Q s 0 Center r5 w t`1i_ Foerklrt_t N. 3 °I raj NE 185th St y Z Q t0�`t a r c'e Q u- o a� rJ 4) a Q Assessed Waters/Sediment Water IWIII Category 5 - 303d Category 4C Category 4B Category 4A Category 2 Category 1 Sediment ® Category 5 - 303d ® Category 4C ® Category 4B ® Category 4A fir. Category 2 ® Category 1 Miles Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, 0 0.25 0.5 1 DEPARTMENT OF FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri ECOLOGY Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, © OpenStreetMap State of Washington 8/25/2018 . _ . TMDL Project Information for WRIA 8 1 WA State Department of Ecology http://,. ecy. byWria/tmdl-wria08.html Go NOV MAR OCT 4) 0 15 captures , 30 , 26 Jul 2009 - 24 Oct 2017 2015 2017 2018 DEPARTMENT OF illiliiall! ECOLOGY State of Washington Homy. Water Quality & Supply Waste & Toxics Air & Climate Water Quality Improvement > Water Quality Improvement Projects by WRIA > WRIA 8: Cedar-Sammamish WRIA 8: Cedar-Sammamish The following table lists overview information for water quality improvement projects (including total maximum daily loads, or TMDLs) for this water resource inventory area (WRIA). Please use links (where available) for more information on N 0 H C N. H a project. • - 0 p N F'ING MILES A Counties • King 1z • Snohomish Waterbody Name Pollutants Status** TMDL Lead Ballinger Lake Total Phosphorus Approved by EPA Tricia Shoblom 425-649-7288 Bear -Evans Creek Basin Fecal Coliform Approved by EPA Joan Nolan 425-649-4425 Dissolved Oxygen Approved by EPA Temperature Cottage Lake Total Phosphorus Approved by EPA Tricia Shoblom Has an implementation 425-649-7288 plan Issaquah Creek Basin Fecal Coliform Approved by EPA Joan Nolan 425-649-4425 Little Bear Creek Fecal Coliform Approved by EPA Ralph Svrjcek Tributaries: 425-649-7036 Trout Stream Great Dane Creek Cutthroat Creek North Creek Fecal Coliform Approved by EPA Ralph Svrjcek Has an implementation 425-649-7036 plan Pipers Creek Fecal Coliform Approved by EPA Joan Nolan 425-649-4425 Sammamish River Dissolved Oxygen Field work starts summer Ralph Svrjcek Temperature 2015 425-649-7036 Swamp Creek Fecal Coliform Approved by EPA Ralph Svrjcek Has an implementation 425-649-7036 plan ** Status will be listed as one of the following: Approved by EPA, Under Development or Implementation For more information about WRIA 8: • Waterbodies in WRIA 8 - using the Water Quality Assessment Query Tool • Watershed Information for WRIA 8 * The Department of Ecology and other state resource agencies frequently use a system of 62 "Water Resource Inventory Areas" or "WRIAs" to refer to the state's major watershed basins. http://web. arch ive.org/web/20170330212555/http:/www. ecy.wa.gov:80/programs/wq/tmd I/TM DLsbyW ria/tmd I-wriaO8. htm I About us I Contact us Clednup & Spills 1/2