Loading...
REVIEWED BLD ENG BLD2021-0940+Geotech report+7.2.2021_12.45.02_PM+2281835i Technical Memorandum July 1, 2021 To: Sam and Lin Felton 8415 Talbot Rd, Edmonds, WA 98026 cc: Alexandra Immel From: Kate Knox Machata, PWS 7K Environmental, LLC PO Box 497 Hobart, WA 98025 Kate&7KEnvironmental. com Re: Wetland delineation update and Critical Areas report for two parcels at 8415 Talbot Rd, Edmonds WA 7K Environmental LLC was commissioned to assist with reviewing and updating the waters and wetlands delineation for the parcel located at 8415 Talbot Road in Edmonds, Washington (Parcel Number = #0059440001600) and adjacent vacant lot (Parcel Number = #0059440001500) (Figure 1). This report has been completed as part of permit application documentation for City of Edmonds for a proposed garage addition on the south side of the existing residence on this parcel. A wetland delineation was completed on both parcels in 2014. The City typically requires an update to delineation determinations that are more than 5 years old. This report includes an analysis of relevancy of the prior delineation in light of existing conditions, an updated wetland boundary determination, rating of the wetland using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication No. 14-06-029) and analysis of buffer width regulated under City of Edmonds code Section 23.50. The following parcel background documents were reviewed: • Felton Wetland Determination letter report prepared by Skillings Connolly, Inc. dated December 19, 2014 • City of Edmonds Critical Areas Determination (CA-93-125 & CA-02-46) Dated March 14, 2002 • City of Edmonds Municipal Code Chapter 23 • Snohomish PDS map viewer • Snohomish County tax lot information • On-line street -view and aerial imagery (Google earth 2021) • SalmonScape and StreamStats stream mappers • NRCS soil survey and hydric soils list (MRCS 2021) • National wetland inventory (NWI) map (USFWS 2021) Site Description and History The study area is located in Township 27N, Range 4E, Section 7 at 8415 Talbot Road in the City of Edmonds and includes a 0.58-acre parcel and the adjacent vacant lot on a 0.62-acre parcel (Figure 1). The parcel #0059440001600 is generally a rectangle oriented north to south with slight off -set counter- clockwise. North to south the parcels are each about 300 feet long and about 200 feet wide. Elevation ranges from approximately 7 feet in the northern part of the parcel to approximately 35 feet in the southwest. The parcels are in a residential neighborhood and are bordered on the south by Talbot Road, to the east and west by residential parcels, and to the north by the railroad right-of-way and then Puget Sound. The Mean Higher High Water of Puget Sound is about 100 feet north of the parcel boundary and more than 260 feet north of the residence. The existing house sits in the southern half of the western parcel. The proposed garage addition is located south of the existing residence more than 300 feet from Puget Sound. A wetland delineation report was completed for the two parcels by Skillings Connolly dated December 14, 2014. This report documented a single wetland, named Wetland A, on the northern portion of the parcel. This wetland was rated by Skillings Connolly Inc in 2014 as a Category III wetland using the 2008 version of the Wetland Rating form for Western Washington. Slopes on the parcels are less than 15% and soils are mapped soils as "Alderwood Urban Land Complex, 2-15% slopes" (USDA 2021). The nearest NWI Mapped Feature is Perrinville Creek about 450 feet to the east (NWI 2021). The City of Edmonds maps this stream as well as a wetland in the vicinity of Wetland A on the northern part of the subject parcels and extending off -site all the way to Perrinville Creek to the east (Figure 3). Given extent of development to the east of the subject parcel, it is not likely that this mapped wetland extent is accurate under current developed conditions in this area. Field Methods A field site visits was completed on June 1, 2021 by Professional Wetland Scientist Kate Machata (PWS #2104). The site visit included a site walk on the subject parcels to review possible presence of waters and/or wetlands on and in the vicinity of the subject parcel. As the parcels are located in a densely developed urban area, off -site review of waters/wetlands was done to the extent possible without trespass. Adjacent parcels within 200 feet could be viewed from public roadways without trespass and from aerial imagery. The parcel #0059440001500 immediately to the east of the existing residence, is owned by a member of the Felton family, and access was granted to complete this wetland delineation update and thus is included in this report. No soils observations were done off of the subject parcel beyond this adjacent parcel. This site visit was conducted during the growing season under normal precipitation conditions for this time of year. We also reviewed data from the wetland delineation completed in November 2014 at this site with photographs to compare site conditions and surface water level to infer additional information about wet season conditions of this wetland. This wetland delineation was conducted using the Routine Determination Method for delineating wetlands described in the 1987 Corps of Engineers manual for delineating wetlands (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (USACE 2010). The Routine Determination Method examines three criteria, hydrology, vegetation, and soils, to determine if jurisdictional wetlands are present in the study area. The State of Washington has adopted the Regional Supplements as the standard for wetland delineations within the state and City of Edmonds defers to the state for delineation protocols. Specifically, we completed the following (1) review site topography on and in the vicinity of the subject parcel (2) identify dominant and sub -dominant plant species in particular looking for hydrophytic species, (3) review soils within at least 18 inches of the surface to inspect for hydric soils using a soil auger and shovel, and (4) assess presence of hydrology indicators of wetlands. No streams were observed on or within the vicinity of the subject parcel. This wetland delineation included observations of the wetland from the subject parcels and characterizing buffer condition within 2 the subject parcels. We recorded plant species and estimated cover by trees, shrubs and herbaceous species. We documented condition at a single pair of plots to show wetland boundary determination and reviewed site conditions for consistency with data collected in the Skillings Connolly (2014) delineation report. We rated the wetland using the 2014 Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby 2014). Results As reported by Skillings Connolly, we observed one wetland on the northern portion of the subject parcels. Puget Sound shoreline lies about 100 feet to the north of the subject parcels beyond the railroad right-of-way. No other streams or wetlands were observed on or within 200 feet of the subject parcels. The Site Plan included in Figure 4 shows the mapped wetland boundary. This mapped wetland extent is very similar to the boundary from the 2014 Skillings Connolly wetland delineation. In 2021 we mapped a small additional area of wetland on the southeast corner of the wetland on the eastern parcel which extends further to the south than mapped in the 2014 delineation. Photographs 1-8 show current condition of the wetland on the subject parcel. This wetland delineation verified and confirmed findings from 2014 study on this site so relies on plot data from that effort as well as from one pair of plot data taken in June 2021 to verify the mapped wetland boundary. Below we summarize findings of soils, hydrology and vegetation in the wetland. Soils Soils observations were consistent with observations from the 2014 Skilling Connolly delineation with dark soil matrix color at 10YR 2/2 in wetland soils with high organic matter content in the upper part. In upland soils, matrix color was lighter brown with minimal to no accumulation of organic matter in the upper part with sandy loam to loamy sand texture. Hydrology Wetland hydrology was determined based on saturation within 12 inches of the surface and roughly aligned with a topographic contour near the toe of slope from the adjacent upland. The wetland receives overland flow from surrounding uplands and direct precipitation. Development of adjacent parcels with extensive structure and impervious or nearly impervious surfaces such as lawn and developed hardscape beyond the structures has likely contributed to greater hydrology inputs to this wetland. The railroad embankment crosses between the wetland and Puget Sound where historically the wetland was likely connected. We did not observe any outlet for water to leave this isolated depression. No ponding was observed during the site visit. Water depth in wet season appears to average less than 6 inches. Ve etg ation Wetland vegetation includes several species of willow (Salix spp.), Douglas spirea (Spirea douglasii), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens) and others. Native conifer trees including western red cedar (Thuja plicata) and Douglas fir (Pseudostuga menziesii) provide canopy cover over much of site beyond the wetland boundary. Table 6 in the Skillings Connolly report lists other species found on the site. Wetland Functions Analysis Wetland functions can be assessed using the Hydrogeomorphic approach following Brinson (1996) which looks at Hydrology, Biogeochemistry, Plant Community and Habitat/Faunal Support functions of wetlands. In terms of wetland hydrology, the site is a closed depression with no surface connection to downstream adjacent Puget Sound due to the railroad embankment and geomorphic location in a closed basin at the toe of slope. The site is located in a densely developed urban neighborhood and has been physically disconnected from the adjacent landscape from the railroad and continual encroachment of development in surrounding parcels. The wetland receives overland flow from the adjacent landscape but 3 does not have connection to downstream waters. In terms of water quality, the density of vegetation in the wetland will provide nutrient uptake and transformation to improve water quality. While the wetland provides water detention function, there is no risk of flooding to adjacent structures due to the depth of the depression and proximity to sea level relative to adjacent upslope structures. The plant community is predominantly native shrubs in the wetland as site owners have been working to control encroachment by Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) for many years. In terms of habitat/faunal support functions, the wetland and adjacent buffer hosts several native shrubs and herb species and provides habitat for many bird and small mammal species (e.g., coyote, deer, mountain beaver, ducks, etc) Using the Wetland Rating System for Western Washington, Wetland A has a high score for water quality site potential because it a closed depression with no outlet and has persistent ungrazed vegetation throughout and seasonal ponding across much of the site. The wetland has a medium score for water quality and hydrologic landscape potential by low value due to its proximity to sea level and lack of physical surface connection to downstream waters. Because the site is located along the railroad embankment and is uniform in structure, it has low to medium habitat ratings. Proposed Project Edmonds City Code Section 23.030.17 requires a critical areas report for wetlands with an analysis of site and proposal -related information. The project proposal will be to remove the existing carport and construct a garage south of the existing residence. Construction of the garage will result in an addition of 1761 square feet of new impervious surface on the parcel. No part of this proposed work occurs within regulated shoreline or buffer. The proposed project will have no impact on wetland or buffers. The proposed project work is more than 100 feet from the wetland boundary. Recommended Wetland Management Practices The wetland should be protected from impacts and encroachment. As described in the Skillings Connolly (2014) report, wetland management should (1) limit pruning of any native wetland vegetation and (2) continue maintenance to reduce invasive species such as Himalayan blackberry. Regulatory Considerations Development activities are subject to the Edmonds Municipal Code (EMC) Chapter 23 which protects critical areas and their buffers. Wetlands have regulated buffers with widths based on their rating category and by the habitat score within the given category. The wetland on the subject parcel is rated as a Category III wetland with a habitat score of 5. Thus, under table 23.50.040.F.e., the regulated wetland buffer width is 60 feet. No work is proposed to occur within or near the wetland buffer as the proposed garage addition lies more than 100 feet from the wetland boundary. Conclusions We have identified and mapped a single wetland on the subject parcel and no other wetlands or waters within the vicinity of the proposed project. We concur with the previous wetland delineation and found only minor difference to the wetland boundary as determined under the 2014 wetland delineation. The buffer for this Category III wetland with a habitat score of 5 is 60 feet under City of Edmonds Code section 23.50.040.F.e. Findings are based on best professional judgment and are the result of the discrete site visits in a single season. No other warranty, expressed or implied is made. These conclusions will be subject to review by applicable agencies. Note that additional review of steep slopes and landslide hazard, as another type of regulated critical area, will be required by the City of Edmonds 0 For additional information or questions regarding any of the information described in this report, please contact Kate Knox Machata of 7K Environmental LLC at 206-683-7229 or at Kate k7KEnvironmental. com. References Brinson, M.M. 1996. Assessing wetland functions using HGM. National Wetlands Newsletter January -February 1996. Pp 10-16. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. US Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Skillings Connolly Inc. Wetland Determination and Enhancement, Felton Residence letter report. Dated December 19, 2014, 56 pp. Snohomish County. 2021. Snohomish PDS GIS Database web mapping. Accessed online at http://gismaps.snoco.org/Html5Viewer/Index.html?viewer=pdsmapportal StreamStats. 2021. StreamStats web mapping portal. https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2021. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey. Accessed online at http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/ United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021. USFWS Wetlands Mapper for National Wetlands Inventory Map Information. Accessed online at http://wetlandsfws.er.usgs.gov 5 FIGURES Figure 1. Subject Parcels aerial imagery from 2020 (Google Earth 2021). Figure 2. NWI mapped features in vicinity of project area. G City of Edmonds 8415 Talbot Road 0" 4� Legend A = Creeks ' ® Seismic Hazard Areas Earth Subsidence and Landslide I zz TAt S-0 R L I Minimum Buffer Adjacent to Ha, Wetlands Wetlands Boundary Wetland Doundares Not Completel Wetland Known EMents / 0 Floodplains ® vE i `tq - PHS Public Points PHS Public Lines PHS Public Polygon Outlines Subject Parcels g o AS MAPPED �� Masked \\ soli �■ a..s PHS Public Polygons AS MAPPED "� r, �\ �� _T ' \✓= ..... SECTION o � 0522 WV1 �g„s QTR-TWP ❑ TOWNSHIP 'U534 I 0 � � 8107 _ - _ rer-FiffY Ccee Notes 1: 3,031 O 0 252.60 505.2 Feet 4,514 376.2 Thls ma dstaticout from an Internet ma dis for pisauser generate put Aping site an ref erence only. Data layers thatappear on thls map mayor maynot It —curate, WGS_1984_Web_Merca[or_Auxiliary_8phere © City of Edmonds rent, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION Figure 3. City of Edmonds mapped extent of critical areas WETLANDS 15,137.96 sq ft S ss —s— — 'S sSEWER MAIN MANHOLE (E)7' WIDE BOARDWALK LOT INFORMATION PARCEL: 00594400001600 ADDRESS: 8415 TALBOT RD, EDMONDS, WA 98026 ZONING: RS-20 OCCUPANCY: R3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: TALBOT PARK BLK 000 D-00 - LOT 16 PARCEL AREA: 25,264.8 SQ. FT. / .58 ACRES LOT COVERAGE: 35% OF PARCEL AREA MAX HT: 25' MAX. FOR ATTACHED GARAGE SEE ENLARGED SITE PLAN, SHEET A1.2, FOR SITE CALCULATIONS PLOT 1W FLOODPLAINS I , J' PLOT 1 U I 10 I � i I 1 (E)SEWER 1 I 1 LINE 0 � 1 � I O 1 15 WETLANDS BUFFER � II I I � I NhI O I zl I 120co Lo CIJ 1 �I N I y AIN FL -i 25 (E)TWO-STORY SF O MAIN FL; RESIDENCE O > , I DECK, I SITE LEGEND MANHOLE U NEW CONSTRUCTION j I 0 PAVINGMALKWAY i WETLANDS DELINEATION rtl' I FLOODPLAINS X FENCE — SS - (E) SIDE SEWER IN30 — I WATER LINE \�MEL RES/qF OAP � � �O .j i -j n Q Z k�l R De, '9T T�F WA - 206 z 0 W w w 0 w 0 O w CO N w_ V Q CL N 0 u z 0 Q loe w Cie Iu L6w Cie w t/) wol = PRINT DATE: 7/1/21 vDRAWING ISSUE: DATE: Q PRELIM. PRICING SET 2/19/21 z PERMIT SET 6/27/21 0 0 Q DRAWN BY: NC REVIEWED BY: TLR Z O 0 z 0 w w Z Cie Lu w > J 0Cie ^ 0 Lu Q Cie U) z O V FIRE HYDRANT_ — — — DATUM POINT USED FOR HEIGHT CALaATION— _ — - - --- - - WATER METER --------________- — �n CATCHB,35 — Al _ — — STORM LINE — — — SITE PLAN ■ 1 SCALE: 1" — CATCH BASIN Photographs 3 _ V Photograph 1. Looking southeast from northwest corner of parcel across Wetland A. PPFP' -4 Photograph 3. Looking east from southwestern part of wetland. Railroad embankment on photo left. Photograph 5. Looking north from near center of parcel. f Photograph 2. Looking generally east across Wetland A. Photograph 4. View of Plot lwet. Photograph 6. Looking north at plot lup (yellow arrow) with Plot 1 wet (green arrow) in the background near wetland boundary. E Photograph 7. Southern boundary of Wetland A looking east. Photograph 8. Looking northeast across Wetland A. 10 Wetland name or number _A RATING SUMMARY - Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): _Wetland A Date of site visit: _6/1/21 Rated by Kate Machata Trained by Ecology?_X_ Yes No Date of training_3/2019_ HGM Class used for rating_Depression Wetland has multiple HGM classes?Y _X_N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map Google Earth 8/14/2020 OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY _III_ (based on functions_X_ or special characteristics_) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS Category I —Total score = 23 - 27 Category II — Total score = 20 - 22 XCategory III —Total score = 16 - 19 Category IV — Total score = 9 - 15 FUNCTION Improving Hydrologic Habitat Water Quality Circle the appropriate ratings Site Potential H M L H M L H M L Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL Score Based on Ratings 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV 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 1 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number _ A_ Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions. Figure # Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1. 1, H 1.4 D.1 Hydroperiods D 1.4 H 1.2 D.1 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to anotherfigure) D 2.2 D 5.2 D.2 Map of the contributing basin 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 D.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 D.4 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 D.5 Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Ponded depressions R 1.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to anotherfigure) R 2.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2 Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to anotherfigure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3 Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to anotherfigure) L 2.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3 Slone Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants (can be added to figure above) S 4.1 Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number _A_ HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the 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? 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 Ifyour 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. NO-goto3 YES - The wetland class is Flats Ifyour 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? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at anytime of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; _At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). NO - go to 4 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-goto5 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). S. 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. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number _A_ 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 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at sometime during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO - go to 8 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM class to use in rating Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary of depression Depressional Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE Ifyou are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or ifyou have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number _A DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). points = 3 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet. points = 2 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 1 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1 D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions). Yes = 4 No = 0 D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub -shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes): Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > Yz of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants <1/10 of area points = 0 D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is > Yz total area of wetland points = 4 Area seasonally ponded is > % total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is < % total area of wetland points = 0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:12-16 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1-D 2.3? Source Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:3 or 4 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub -basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 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 basin in which the unit is found)? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 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 Wetland name or number _ A DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outletpoints = 2 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points = 1 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 0 D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands with no outlet measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part. Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 5 Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 3 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland points = 3 Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in) points = 0 D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself. The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points = 5 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit points = 3 The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0 Entire wetland is in the Flats class points = 5 Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:_12-16 = H _6-11 = M _0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site? D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at >1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest score if more than one condition is met. The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down -gradient into areas where flooding has damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds): • Flooding occurs in a sub -basin that is immediately down -gradient of unit. points = 2 • Surface flooding problems are in a sub -basin farther down -gradient. points = 1 Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub -basin. points = 1 The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why points = 0 There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points = 0 D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes=2 No=O Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1= M 0 = L Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Record the rating on the first page Wetland name or number _ A 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. Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 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 % 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 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0 Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland 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 some 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 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. C:) (:: O :) (*) ( - None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams O*D .... ... .. in this row are HIGH = 3points Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number _ 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. Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long). 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) 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) At least % 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 above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 15-18 = H 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 functions of the site? H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] _ % If total accessible habitat is: > 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: % undisturbed habitat_+ [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2]_ _ % Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 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) <- 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 4-6 = H _1-3 = M _< 1= L Record the rating on the first 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) within 100 m points = 1 Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0 Rating of Value If score is:_2 = H _1 = M _0 = L Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Record the rating on the first page 14 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: httl2:I/wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/12hs/list/) 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. Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha). 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. 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). Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. 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). 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. 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. Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. — 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. — 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 15 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number _ A CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? —The dominant water regime is tidal, —Vegetated, and — With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes -Go to SC 1.1 No= Not an estuarine wetland SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 1.2 Cat. I SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? —The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25) Cat. —At least % of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. —The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or Cat. II contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I No = Category II SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV) SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High Conservation Value? Yes - Go to SC 2.2 No - Go to SC 2.3 Cat. 1 SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? http://wwwl.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf Yes - Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No = Not a WHCV SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on their website? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV SC 3.0. Bogs Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes - Go to SC 3.3 No - Go to SC 3.2 SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or pond? Yes - Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30% cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog No - Go to SC 3.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory, you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog. Cat. 1 SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy? Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number _ A SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. — Old -growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi -layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more. — Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm). Yes = Category I No = Not a forested wetland for this section Cat. I SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? — The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks —The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom) Cat. Yes - Go to SC 5.1 No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? —The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100). Cat. II —At least % of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. —The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2) Yes = Category I No = Category II SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: — Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103 — Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105 Cat — Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 Yes - Go to SC 6.1 No = not an interdunal wetland for rating SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M Cat. II for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger? Yes = Category II No - Go to SC 6.3 Cat. III SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac? Yes = Category III No = Category IV Cat. IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics None If you answered No for all types, enter "Not Applicable" on Summary Form Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 'T. o Tom• fir.. Figure DA Wetland Vicinity Map. Note wetland boundaries are approximated See Site Plan map for accurate mapping of boundary. Figure D.2. Contributing Basin map with approximated wetland and basin shown. Figure D.3: 1 KM polygon map f'an an ���•� trelro.r > hr1 � a W1r E an,onas ���. n18r Mam SI R1F �M F fn Jiwn. J.EiI. E�µGWulwmp �I. OoenSv<nMap cmvw�ors. aye 168th S1' ., 1161h SI SW / 31801n515W 3 a a a 1881h St sw Lynnwood t R a 1561n 51 t IOJM 20 Ln til �;^ Assessed Water/Sediment Water Category 5 - 303d VIVO Category 4C %O Category 4B ./ Category 4A Category 2 y Category 1 Sediment ® Category 5 - 303d ® Category 4C ® Category 4B ® Category 4A vi Category 2 CO Category 1 rECOLOGY Figure DA 303(d) List Map showing no listed waterways in downstream vicinity g li, linger Lakg Total Phosphorus EPA approved Tricia Shoblom 425-649-7288 Bear -Evans Creek Basin Fecal Coliform EPA approved Ralph Svricek 425-649-7165 Dissolved Ralph Svricek Bear -Evans Creek Basin Oxygen EPA approved 425-649-7165 Temperature Dissolved Heather Khan French and Pilchuck Creeks Oxygen Underdevelopment 425-649-7003 Temperature Under development as a straight to implementation 7ncia Shoblom Lake Ketchum Total Phosphorus project 425-649-7288 Under development as a straight to Implementation Tdcia Shoblom Lake Loma Total Phosphorus project 425-649-7288 Little Bear Creek Fecal Coliform EPA approved Ralph Svricek 425-649-7165 North Creek Fecal Coliform EPA approved and Ralph Svricek Has an implementation plan 425-649-7165 Old Stillaguamish Channel Dissolved On hold j3ialoh Svricek Oxygen 425-649-7165 River Mph Svricek Snohomish Dioxin EPA approved 425-649-7165 Dissolved Ralph Svricek Snohomish Rivet: Estuary Oxygen EPA approved 425-649-7165 Snohomish River: Tributaries Fecal Coliform EPA approved and Ralph Svricek Has an implementation plan 425-649-7165 Ammonia-N Fecal Coliform FAItthSvr e Snoqualmie River pH Dissolved EPA approved 425 649 7165 Oxygen Snoqualmie River Temperature EPA approved and Ralph Svricek Has an Implementation plan 425-649-7165 Arsenic Dissolved Oxygen EPA approved and Ralph Svricek Stillaguamish River Fecal Coliform Has an implementation plan 425-649-7165 MefCllN PH Temperature FAllph Svricek Swamp tree Fecal Coliform EPA approved and Has an implementation plan 425-649-7165 Figure D.S: TMDL list for Snohomish County Appendix B: Wetland Delineation Forms WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region Project/Site: 8415 Talbot Road City/County: Edmonds King Sampling Date: 6/1/2021 Applicant/Owner: Felton State: WA Sampling Point: Plot 1w Investigator(s): Kate Machata Section/Township/Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace etc.): depression Local relief: flat Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47°50'30.36" Long: 122°20'51.02" Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood-Urban Land NWI classification: 0 Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation ,Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? answers in remarks) Yes X No SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Fs Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No n a wetland? Yes X No Remarks: Plot is located 5 foot north of Flag 11 just inside wetland boundary. Plot is marked with red and white striped flag. VEGETATION Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) %Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1 Thuja plicata 20 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Total Cover: 20 Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) Percent of Dominant Species 1 • Rubus spectabilis 10 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1000% (A/B) 2. Prevalence Index worksheet: 3. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 4. OBL species 0 x 1 = 5. FACW species 0 x 2 = Total Cover: 10 FAC species 85 x 3 = 255 Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) FACU species 0 x 4 = 1 - Equisetum arvense 30 Yes FAC UPL species 0 x 5 = 2. Ranunculus repens 15 Yes FAC Column Totals: 85 (A) 255 (B) 3. Athyrium filix-femina 10 No FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.00 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 4. 5. X Dominance Test is >50% 6. X Prevalence Index is <_3.01 7. Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting $ data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Total Cover: 55 Wetland Non -Vascular Plants Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 5 ft) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1 ' Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be 2 present. Total Cover: 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Present? Yes X No Remarks: Tree is horticultural arborvitae (Thuja occidentais) planted at property boundary. SOIL Sampling Point: Plot 1w Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (in.) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-20 10YR 3/2 100 mucky modified much organic 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (Al) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) X 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 (Al2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Depth Remarks: Soil has high organic content and is very wet in June. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (any one indicator is sufficient) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except NW coast) Water -Stained Leaves (139) (NW coast) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (1311) Drainage Patterns (1310) X Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (613) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (61) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (132) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Frost -Heave Hummocks (D4) Iron Deposits (135) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Other (Explain in Remarks) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (in): Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (in): 18" Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (in): 101, Yes X No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Soil profile is moist to near surface WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region Project/Site: 8415 Talbot Road City/County: Edmonds King Sampling Date: 6/1/2021 Applicant/Owner: Felton State: WA Sampling Point: Plot I Investigator(s): Kate Machata Section/Township/Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace etc.): depression Local relief: convex Slope (%): <1 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47°50'30.22" Long: 122°20'50.99" Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood-Urban Land NWI classification: upland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation ,Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? answers in remarks) Yes X No SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X Fs Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X n a wetland? Yes No X Remarks: Plot is located 6 feet south of flag 11 just upslope from wetland boundary. VEGETATION Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) %Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1 • Thuja plicata 20 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 2- Acer macrophyllum 15 Yes FACU 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Total Cover: 35 Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) Percent of Dominant Species 1 • Rubus spectabilis 2 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75% (A/B) 2. Prevalence Index worksheet: 3. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 4. OBL species 0 x 1 = 5. FACW species 0 x 2 = Total Cover: 2 FAC species 32 x 3 = 96 Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) FACU species 15 x 4 = 60 1 - Equisetum arvense 10 Yes FAC UPL species 0 x 5 = 2. Column Totals: 47 (A) 156 (B) 3. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.32 4. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. X Dominance Test is >50% 6. Prevalence Index is <_3.01 7. Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting $ data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Total Cover: 10 Wetland Non -Vascular Plants Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 5 ft) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1 ' Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be 2 present. Total Cover: 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 80 % Present? Yes X No Remarks: Plot has several inches of wood mulch across it. SOIL Sampling Point: Plot 1u Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (in.) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-4 wood mulch 4-10 10YR 3/2 100 sandy loam 10-20 7AYR 4/4 100 loamy sand 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: 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 (Al2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X Depth Remarks: Soil profile analysis discounts the 4 inches of bark mulch. Soil is not high in organic. No evvidence of redoximorphic concentrations or depletions anywhere in the profile. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (any one indicator is sufficient) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except NW coast) Water -Stained Leaves (139) (NW coast) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (1311) Drainage Patterns (1310) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (613) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (61) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (132) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Frost -Heave Hummocks (D4) Iron Deposits (135) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Other (Explain in Remarks) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (in): Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth (in): Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth (in): Yes No X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Soil is moist starting at 6 inches by not saturated anywhere in the profile.