wetland delineation & habitat assessment

WETLAND DELINEATION AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT ASSESSMENT REPORT

REDMOND 9 LAND-2018-01041 AUGUST 2018 REVISED APRIL 2019

WETLAND DELINEATION AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT ASSESSMENT REPORT

REDMOND 9 LAND-2018-01041 AUGUST 24, 2018 REVISED APRIL 8, 2019 PROJECT LOCATION

13437 & 13441 NE 100TH ST KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98033 PREPARED FOR

HARBOR HOMES ATTN: CHRIS BURRUS 400 N 34TH STREET SUITE 300 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98103 PREPARED BY

SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC

2907 HARBORVIEW DRIVE, SUITE D GIG HARBOR, WASHINGTON 98335 (253) 514-8952

1155.0029 – Redmond 9 i Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report April 8, 2019

Executive Summary Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) has been contracted by Harbor Homes (Applicant) to perform a wetland delineation and fish and wildlife habitat assessment to assist with planning for proposed site development on a 2.46-acre property located in the City of Redmond at 13437 and 13441 NE 100th Street in Kirkland, Washington. The subject property is situated in the Northwest ¼ of Section 3, Township 25 North, Range 5 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Numbers 0325059035, 0325059208, and 0325059211). This report incorporates comments made by the City of Redmond (City) to the previous report by SVC dated August 24, 2018. SVC investigated the subject property for the presence of potentially-regulated wetlands, aquatic areas, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species in June and July 2018. Using current methodology, the site assessments identified and delineated the boundaries of one potentially-regulated wetland (Wetland A) located on the southern portion of the subject property and a significant majority of the wetland area extends offsite to the east for which SVC does not have access. As noted in the City review comments of the August 2018 report by SVC, an assessment of the offsite portions of the wetland was conducted for the Rose Hill West Property. The City provided SVC with a technical memorandum by Raedeke Associates, Inc. (Raedeke) dated September 25, 2018, which addressed City comments for the Rose Hill assessment conducted by Raedeke in 2017. The 2018 Raedeke memorandum shows offsite portions of the wetland and identifies the wetland as a Category II riverine wetland with a 150-foot buffer. The Raedeke memorandum was a response to City comments and not the complete original assessment document. As such, the document provided to SVC did not contain any wetland ratings maps or data forms.

SVC delineated the OHW of one stream onsite identified as Stream Z, also known as Gun Club Creek, along the southern boundary of the subject property at the bottom of a steep slope. Based on field observations, Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) mapping, SVC identified the stream as transitioning from a perennial non-fish bearing Class IV stream to a fish-bearing, non-salmonid fish bearing stream Class III stream approximately 500 feet downstream of the subject property to the southeast. The City cited the Raedeke assessment which classified the stream as a Class II salmonid bearing stream; however, the original Raedeke report, which should contain a detailed assessment of the stream, was not provided to SVC by the City as a part of SVC’s public records request. In order to move the project forward, the Applicant has agreed to adopt the Raedeke wetland rating and stream classification and provide the same 150-foot standard wetland buffer and 100-foot stream buffer with an additional outer 50-foot stream buffer within Open Space Tract C. Since wetland ratings maps from the Raedeke assessment were not provided to SVC, the ratings maps as previously reported by SVC are provided in Appendix E. No other potentially-regulated wetlands, aquatic areas, or fish and wildlife habitat were identified within 300 feet of the site.

The Applicant proposes to develop a 9-lot short plat on the subject property, including the single-family residences, access road, utilities, stormwater mitigation facilities and other associated infrastructure. In order to avoid a potential erosion hazard associated with the steep slope located along the stream channel, the Applicant has agreed to discharge detained, treated stormwater generated by the plat at the bottom of the steep slope adjacent to Gun Club Creek using a dispersal trench with willow stakes planted downslope of the trench to provide additional slope stability and erosion control. With the exception of the stormwater discharge location, the proposed plat

1155.0029 – Redmond 9 ii Soundview Consultants LLCWetland Delineation & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report April 8, 2019

development is located entirely upland of the identified onsite wetland and stream and their associated protective buffers and building setbacks. The plat provides a protective open space tract across the onsite portions of the stream, Wetland A and their buffers. In addition, an open space protective tract between the buffers and the proposed plat development is provided to accommodate the steep slopes adjacent to the stream and wetland. With the conservative wetland and stream buffers and the increased buffering provided by the additional open space tract, this plat is not anticipated to impact Wetland A, the stream, or their associated protective buffers.

The table below summarizes the wetlands and streams and identifies the potential regulatory status by local, state, and federal agencies.

Wetland/Stream Name

Size/Length onsite

Category/ Type1

Regulated Under RZC 21.64.010

Regulated Under RCW 90.48

Regulated Under Clean Water Act

Wetland A 1,959 SF II Yes Likely Potentially Gun Club Creek 76 LF (onsite) Class II Yes Likely Potentially

Notes: 1. Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDOE) wetland rating methods (Hruby, 2014) and RZC wetland and stream

classification guidelines.

1155.0029 – Redmond 9 iii Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report April 8, 2019

Site Map

1155.0029 – Redmond 9 iv Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report April 8, 2019

Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2. Proposed Project ........................................................................................................... 2

2.1 Location ................................................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Project Description................................................................................................................. 2

Chapter 3. Methods ......................................................................................................................... 4 Chapter 4. Existing Conditions ....................................................................................................... 5

4.1 Landscape Setting ................................................................................................................... 5 4.2 Soils ........................................................................................................................................ 6 4.4 Vegetation .............................................................................................................................. 6 4.5 Local and National Stream and Wetland Inventories .............................................................. 6 4.6 Priority Habitats and Species .................................................................................................. 7 4.7 Precipitation ........................................................................................................................... 7

Chapter 5. Results ........................................................................................................................... 8 5.1 Overview of Findings ............................................................................................................. 8 5.2 Wetlands ................................................................................................................................ 8 5.3 Streams ................................................................................................................................. 11

Chapter 6. Regulatory Considerations ........................................................................................... 13 6.1 Local Critical Areas Requirements ........................................................................................ 13 6.2 State and Federal Considerations .......................................................................................... 13

Chapter 7. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas .............................................................. 15 7.1 Wildlife Habitat Assessment ................................................................................................. 15

Chapter 8. Closure ........................................................................................................................ 17 Chapter 9. References ................................................................................................................... 18

Figures

Figure 1. Vicinity Map. ................................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2. Aerial Photograph of the Subject Property. .................................................................. 5

Tables Table 1. Precipitation Summary1. .................................................................................................. 7 Table 2. Wetland Summary. .......................................................................................................... 8 Table 3. Wetland A Summary ...................................................................................................... 9 Table 7. Functions and Values of Identified Wetlands. .............................................................. 11 Table 8. Drainage Summary – Gun Club Creek. ......................................................................... 12

1155.0029 – Redmond 9 v Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report April 8, 2019

Appendices Appendix A — Methods and Tools Appendix B — Background Information Appendix C — Site Plan Appendix D — Data Sheets Appendix E — Wetland Rating Forms Appendix F — Wetland Rating Maps Appendix G — Plant Communities Map Appendix H — Wildlife Species List Appendix I — Qualifications

1155.0029 – Redmond 9 1 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report April 8, 2019

Chapter 1. Introduction Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) has been contracted by Harbor Homes (Client) to perform a wetland delineation and fish and wildlife habitat assessment to assist with planning for proposed site development on a 2.46-acre property located in the City of Redmond at 13437 and 13441 NE 100th Street in Kirkland, Washington. The subject property is situated in the Northwest ¼ of Section 3, Township 25 North, Range 5 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Numbers 0325059035, 0325059208, and 0325059211).

The purpose of this revised wetland and fish and wildlife habitat assessment report is to document the presence of potentially-regulated wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species on or near the subject property. As noted in the City review comments of the August 2018 report by SVC, an assessment of the offsite portions of the wetland was conducted for the Rose Hill West Property. The City provided SVC with a technical memorandum by Raedeke Associates, Inc. (Raedeke), dated September 25, 2018, which addressed City comments for the Rose Hill assessment conducted by Raedeke in 2017. The Applicant is proposing to develop a plat for nine single-family residential lots on the subject property and has chosen to adopt the wetland rating and stream classifications provided by in the 2017 Raedeke assessment.

This report provides conclusions and recommendations regarding:

• Site description and area of assessment; • Background research of potentially-regulated critical areas and habitats within the vicinity of

the proposed project; • Identification and assessment of potentially-regulated wetlands and other hydrologic features; • Identification and assessment of potentially-regulated aquatic areas and other fish and wildlife

habitat; • Standard buffer recommendations, building setbacks, and development limitations; • Existing site map detailing identified critical areas and standard buffers; and • Supplemental information necessary for local regulatory review.


Chapter 2. Proposed Project

2.1 Location

The subject property is located in the City of Redmond at 13437 and 13441 NE 100th Street in Kirkland, Washington (Figure 1). The subject property consists of two parcels situated in the Northwest ¼ of Section 3, Township 25 North, Range 5 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Numbers 0325059035 and 0325059208).

To access the site from I-405 North from Bellevue, take Exit 18 for WA-908 East towards Redmond. Merge onto NE 85th Street and proceed for 0.8 mile. Turn left onto 132nd Avenue NE and continue for 0.7 mile. Turn right onto NE 100th Street, and the subject property will be on the right in 0.2 mile.

Figure 1. Vicinity Map.

2.2 Project Description

The Applicant proposes to develop a plat on the subject property with nine single-family residential lots, a storm tract adjacent to the frontage road north of the site, and two open space tracts in the south portion of the site containing a Category II wetland, a Class II stream as previously assessed by Raedake (2017), and steep slopes. The Applicant agrees to adopt the wetland rating and stream

Subject Property Location


classification and provide a 150-foot wetland buffer and a 100-foot standard and 50-foot outer stream buffer within Open Space Tract C. A site plan illustrating the identified critical areas and buffers is included in Appendix C.


Chapter 3. Methods SVC investigated and assessed wetlands, drainages, and other potentially-regulated fish and wildlife habitat on and within 300 feet of the subject property on June 22, 2018 and July 11, 2018. All wetland and stream determinations were made using observable vegetation, hydrology, and soils in conjunction with data from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey, King County iMAP, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) and SalmonScape mapping tools, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) water typing system, the Soil Survey of King County (Snyder et al., 1973), City of Redmond Maps-Critical Area Mapping, local precipitation data, and various orthophotographic resources. Appendix A contains further details for the methods and tools used to prepare this report.

Wetland boundaries were determined using the routine approach described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and modified according to the guidelines established in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (USACE, 2010). Qualified wetland scientists marked the boundary of the onsite wetland with orange surveyor’s flagging labeled alpha-numerically and tied to 3-foot lath or vegetation along the wetland boundary. Pink surveyor’s flagging was labeled alpha-numerically and tied to 3-foot lath or vegetation at formal sampling locations to mark the points where detailed data was collected (DP-1 and DP-2). Additional tests pits were excavated at regular intervals inside and outside of the wetland boundary to further confirm the delineation.

SVC classified all wetlands using both the hydrogeomorphic (Brinson, 1993) and Cowardin (Cowardin, 1979; Federal Geographic Data Committee, 2013) classification systems, and generally assessed using the Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear Projects (Null et al., 2000). Following classification and assessment, WSDOE-trained scientists rated and categorized all wetlands using the Washington State wetland rating system for western Washington – Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 04-06-029 (Hruby, 2014) and definitions established in RZC 21.64.030.A.

The OHW mark determinations were made using the WSDOE’s method detailed in Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for Shoreline Management Act Compliance in Washington State (Anderson et al, 2016) and the definitions established in the Shoreline Management Act (Revised Code of Washington [RCW] 90.58.030(2)(b) and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-22-030(11). To mark the OHW of the stream, blue surveyor’s flagging was alpha-numerically labeled and tied to vegetation or wooden stakes.

The fish and wildlife habitat assessment was conducted during the same site visits by qualified fish and wildlife biologists. The experienced biologists made visual observations using stationary and walking survey methods for both aquatic and upland habitats noting any special habitat features or signs of fish and wildlife activity.


Chapter 4. Existing Conditions

4.1 Landscape Setting

The subject property is located in a residential setting in the Kirkland area of the City of Redmond, Washington (Figure 2). The subject property is currently developed with two single-family residences and associated infrastructure. Adjacent properties consist of single-family residential properties with maintained lawns, fields, and forested areas and undeveloped properties. The subject property abuts NE 100th Street to the north.

Topography on the site generally slopes downward to the south, with elevations ranging between approximately 295 feet above mean sea level (amsl) in the northern portion of the site to 240 feet amsl in the southern portion of the site. A King County topographic map is provided in Appendix B3. The site is located within Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 8 – Cedar-Sammanish.

Figure 2. Aerial Photograph of the Subject Property.



4.2 Soils

The NRCS Soil Survey of King County identifies three soil series on the site: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes; Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes; and Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes. A soil map is provided in Appendix B4.

Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes (AgB) According to the survey, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes is a poorly drained soil. It is nearly level and undulating. Alderwood soils generally have surface and subsoils that are very dark brown, dark brown, and grayish-brown gravelly sandy loam about 27 inches thick. This soil is very similar to Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes, but it some places the surface layer is up to 3 inches thicker. Some areas include as much as 15 percent Norma, Bellingham, Tukwila, and Shalcar soils. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes is listed as non-hydric on the King County Hydric Soils List (NRCS, 2001). Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes (AgC) According to the survey, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam is a rolling soil that is moderately well drained and formed in glacial till. In a typical profile, the surface layer (0 to 1.5 inches) is very dark grayish brown gravelly sandy loam overlain with a thin mat of undecomposed needles and wood fragments. The subsoil and the upper part of the substratum (1.5 to 38 inches) are dark yellowish brown, brown, and dark grayish brown gravelly sandy loam. The lower part of the substratum (38 to more than 60 inches) is weakly cemented, compact glacial till. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes, is listed as non-hydric on the King County Hydric Soils List (NRCS, 2001).

Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes (AgD) According to the survey, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam is a moderately steep that is moderately well drained and formed in glacial till. In a typical profile, the surface layer (0 to 1.5 inches) is very dark grayish brown gravelly sandy loam overlain with a thin mat of undecomposed needles and wood fragments. The subsoil and the upper part of the substratum (1.5 to 40 inches) are dark yellowish brown, brown, and dark grayish brown gravelly sandy loam. The lower part of the substratum (40 to more than 60 inches) is weakly cemented, compact glacial till. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, is listed as non-hydric on the King County Hydric Soils List (NRCS, 2001).

4.4 Vegetation

Vegetation on the subject property is dominated by maintained lawn and forest communities. The forest community is dominated by a canopy of Douglas fir (Pseudostuga menziesii) and bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) with an understory of vine maple (Acer circinatum) and sword fern (Polystichum munitum).

4.5 Local and National Stream and Wetland Inventories

The King County wetlands and streams inventory (Appendix B2) does not identify any wetlands or streams on or within 300 feet of the subject property. The DNR stream typing map (Appendix B7) identifies an offsite stream that is non-fish bearing within 300 feet of the subject property. The USFWS NWI map (Appendix B1) identifies one offsite wetland associated with the offsite stream that is within 300 feet of the subject property. City of Redmond Critical Area Mapping identifies one


Class IV stream onsite No other streams or wetlands are identified on or within 300 feet of the subject property.

4.6 Priority Habitats and Species

The WDFW SalmonScape map (Appendix B5) does not identify any salmon-bearing streams or within 300 feet of the subject property. The WDFW PHS map (Appendix B6) does not identify any priority species or habitats in the vicinity of the subject property. No other priority habitats or species are identified on or within 300 feet of the subject property.

4.7 Precipitation

Precipitation data was obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Weather Service weather station at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport in order to obtain percent of normal precipitation during and preceding the investigations. A summary of data collected is provided in Table 1.

Table 1. Precipitation Summary1.

Date Day of

Day Before

1 Week Prior

2 Weeks Prior

Last 30 Days

(Observed/Normal) Year-to-Date2

(Observed/Normal) Percent of Normal3

06/22/18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.43/1.71 18.96/18.70 25.14/101.39 07/11/18 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.27/1.14 19.21/19.33 23.68/99.37

Notes: 1. Precipitation volume provided in inches. Data obtained from NOAA (http://w2.weather.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=sew)

for Sea-Tac Airport. 2. Year-to-date precipitation is for the calendar year from January 1 to the onsite date(s). 3. Percent of normal is shown for the last 30 days and year-to-date.

Precipitation levels for the June and July 2018 site investigations were below statistical normal for the last 30 days and at approximately normal levels for the 2018 calendar. This data suggests that relatively slightly drier than normal conditions were encountered during the time of the site visits. Such conditions were considered in making professional wetland boundary determinations.


Chapter 5. Results

5.1 Overview of Findings

SVC investigated the subject property for the presence of potentially-regulated wetlands, aquatic areas, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species in June and July 2018. Using current methodology, the site assessment identified and delineated the boundary of one potentially-regulated onsite wetland (Wetland A) and one potentially-regulated onsite stream flagged as Stream Z and known as Gun Club Creek was also identified along the southern boundary of the subject property. No other wetlands, aquatic areas, or priority habitats or species were observed on or in the vicinity of the subject property during the site investigations.

5.2 Wetlands

5.2.1 Overview The site investigations delineated one potentially-regulated wetland (Wetland A) on the subject property. The identified wetlands contained indicators of wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation according to current wetland delineation methodology. Wetland data forms are provided in Appendix D. Wetland rating maps are provided in Appendix F and wetland ratings from the Rose Hill assessment by Radeke (2017) have been adopted by the Applicant. Table 2 summarizes the wetland identified during the site investigation.

Table 2. Wetland Summary.

Wetland Predominant Wetland Classification / Rating

Wetland Size Onsite (acres)

Buffer Width (feet)5 Cowardin1 HGM2 WSDOE3 City of

Redmond4

Wetland A PFO/SSD Slope II (Raedeke, 2018)

II (Raedeke, 2018) 0.025 150

Notes: 1. Cowardin et al. (1979), Federal Geographic Data Committee (2013), or NWI Class based on vegetation: PFO = Palustrine

Forested, PSS = Palustrine Scrub-Shrub; Modifiers for Water Regime: D = Continuously Saturated. 2. Brinson, M. M. (1993). 3. Prior WSDOE rating (Hruby, 2014). 4. RZC 21.64.030.A wetland ratings definition. 5. RZC 21.64.030.B.2 buffer standards. Assumes high-impact land use.

Wetland A

Wetland A is approximately 1,098 SF square feet (0.025 acre) in size onsite and is located on the southern portion of the subject property extending offsite to the south and east. Hydrology for Wetland A is provided by surface sheet flow, direct precipitation, and groundwater seeps. Wetland vegetation is dominated by vine maple (Acer circinatum), salmonberry (Rubus spectablis), American skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanus). Wetland A is a Palustrine Forested/Scrub-Shrub, Continuously Saturated wetland (PFO/SSD). Per RZC 21.64.030.A and Raedeke (2017), the onsite Wetland A is considered a Category II riverine wetland. Table 3 provides a detailed summary of Wetland A.


Table 3. Wetland A Summary WETLAND A – INFORMATION SUMMARY

Location: Located in the southern portion of the subject property extending offsite to the south.

Local Jurisdiction City of Redmond

WRIA 8 – Cedar Sammanish

WSDOE Rating (Hruby, 2004) II (Raedeke, 2017) City of Redmond Rating II (Raedeke, 2017) Buffer Width Required/Provided 150 feet

Wetland Size 1,098 SF (onsite) Cowardin Classification PFO/SSD

HGM Classification Riverine (Raedeke, 2017)

Wetland Data Sheet(s) DP-1W

Upland Data Sheet (s) DP-2U Boundary Flag color Orange

Dominant Vegetation

Wetland vegetation is dominated by vine maple, salmonberry, and American skunk cabbage.

Soils Hydric soil indicators A4 (Hydrogen Sulfide).

Hydrology Hydrology for Wetland A is provided by surface sheet flow, direct precipitation, and groundwater seeps.

Rationale for Delineation

Wetland boundaries were determined by a transition to a hydrophytic plant community.

Rationale for Local Rating

Local rating is based upon Hruby (2014) rating system per RZC 21.64.030.A.

Wetland Functions Summary Water Quality Wetland A has a moderate potential to improve water quality due to its slope and

persistent, ungrazed vegetation that covers greater than half of the wetland.

Hydrologic Wetland A has a low potential to reduce flooding and erosion due its lack of dense, uncut, rigid plants and distance from areas generating excess surface runoff.

Habitat

Wildlife habitat functions provided by the wetland may include small mammal and bird forage and cover. Wetland A exhibits some interspersion of habitats with the presence of two Cowardin classes and also contains special habitat features such as large woody debris and undercut banks.

Buffer Condition

The buffer surrounding Wetland A is undeveloped and forested with species such as Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) and salmonberry.


5.2.2 Wetland Buffers Wetland A is considered a Category II wetland (Raedeke, 2017) under RZC 21.64.030.A. Per RZC 21.64.030.B.2, Category II wetlands within areas of high impact land use are subject to standard 150-foot buffers.

5.2.3 Wetland Functions

Using the rapid assessment method (Null et al., 2000), Wetland A may provide some water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functions (Table 7). However, these functions are limited by wetland size and the position of the wetlands within the landscape.

Wetland A provides limited water quality and hydrologic functions. Onsite portions of Wetland A do0 not provide significant surface water storage and does not provide opportunities for sediment and nutrient/toxicant removal. The presence of dense herbaceous and shrub layers in the Wetland A and the wetland’s location adjacent to a stream likely slow water movement that contributes to erosion along the stream. Wetland A provides moderate habitat function. Wetland A contains dominant native vegetation with a moderate degree of habitat interspersion that provides habitat diversity within the wetland. Wetland A’s provision of general habitat suitability is limited by the surrounding landscape, which is predominantly developed with single-family residences.

The identified wetlands likely do not provide any function of educational value, uniqueness, or heritage to the best of our professional judgement.


Table 7. Functions and Values of Identified Wetlands.

Function / Value1 Wetland

A Water Quality Functions

Sediment Removal -

Nutrient and Toxicant Removal -

Hydrologic Functions Flood Flow Alteration - Erosion Control & Shoreline Stabilization x

Habitat Functions Production & Export of Organic Matter +

General Habitat Suitability x

Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates -

Habitat for Amphibians -

Habitat for Wetland-Associated Mammals -

Habitat for Wetland-Associated Birds -

General Fish Habitat -

Native Plant Richness +

Special Characteristics Educational or Scientific Value -

Uniqueness and Heritage -

Notes: 1. “-“ Means the function is not present; “x” means that the function is present and is of lower quality; and “+” means

the function is present and is of higher quality.

5.3 Streams

5.3.1 Overview The site investigation identified one potentially-regulated, onsite stream (Stream Z-also known as Gun Club Creek) along the southern boundary of the subject property.

Onsite Stream Z- Gun Club Creek The site investigation identified Gun Club Creek running along the south boundary of the subject property. Gun Club Creek is mapped by DNR as originating approximately 56 feet to the southwest of the subject property. The stream is intermittant with an approximate average bank full width of five feet and an approximate 25-acre contributing basin consisting predominantly of urban residential development. DNR identifies the upper reaches of Gun Club Creek as non-fish-bearing, and the lower reaches as fish-bearing approximately 500 feet southeast and downstream of the subject property. Six known fish passage barriers are mapped by WDFW downstream of the site within Gun Club Creek prior to its confuence with the Samamish River. The WDFW Salmonscape map identifies Gun Club Creek as non-salmon-bearing. The stream is being treated as a Class II stream per the prevoius assessment by Raedeke (2018). Salmonid species located within the Samamish River include Kokanee Salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka), Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), Chinook Salmon


(Oncorhynchus tshawytsch), Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarkia), Steelhead Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Sockeye Salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka).

Table 8. Drainage Summary – Stream Z-Gun Club Creek. DRAINAGE INFORMATION SUMMARY

Feature Name Stream Z-Gun Club

Creek

WRIA 8 – Cedar Sammamish

WA Stream Catalog # 1221397476872

Local Jurisdiction King County

DNR Stream Type Type N – Non-Fish Bearing

Local Stream Rating Class II (Raedeke, 2017)

Buffer Width Required/Provided 150 feet

Documented Fish Use None

Location of Feature Stream Z is located onsite along the southern boundary of the subject property.

Connectivity (where water flows from/to)

The DNR stream typing map identifies Gun Club Creek as originating approximately 56 feet to the southwest of the subject property. Gun Club Creek flows through forested areas and an urbanized area consisting of a system of storm pipe and ditches before connecting with the Sammamish River approximately 1.50 miles downstream. Per WDFW, there are three known partial fish passage barriers (GCM140, GCM050, GCM030) and three total fish passage barriers (GCM120, GCM110, GCM040) between onsite portions of the stream and the Sammamish River.

Riparian/Buffer Condition

The onsite buffer areas are generally comprised of intact native plant assemblages that include canopy cover of Douglas fir and big-leaf maple with an understory of vine maple and western swordfern. The existing undisturbed buffer condition is capable of providing adequate shade and temperature regulation, steam bank stability, water quality and hydrologic function, nutrient cycling, and woody debris recruitment.

5.3.2 Stream Buffer Gun Club Creek has been classified by Raedeke as a Class II stream under RZC 21.64.020.A.2.d. Per RZC 21.64.020.B.3, Gun Club Creek will be protected using a 150-foot buffer.


Chapter 6. Regulatory Considerations

6.1 Local Critical Areas Requirements

The results of the 2018 site investigations identified one onsite Category IV wetland (Wetland A) and an onsite Class IV stream transitioning to a Class III stream approximately 500 feet southeast of the subject property (Gun Club Creek); however, large portions of the wetland are offsite and could not be directly observed. As such, the Applicant has agreed to adopt the wetland ratings of an assessment conducted for the neighboring property to the east conducted by Raedeke in 2017. The Applicant has also agreed to adopt the stream classification of the same assessment by Raedeke. No other potentially-regulated wetlands, aquatic areas, or fish and wildlife habitat were identified on or near the subject property.

RZC 21.64.030.A has adopted the 2014 wetland rating system. For ratings information, see the 2017 assessment by Raedeke and the wetland ratings maps in Appendix F.

The Applicant proposes to locate the nine single-family residences, access roadway, utilities, and associated infrastructure for the plat upland of the identified Wetland A and Gun Club Creek and associated protective buffers. The plat includes providing an open space tract across the 150-foot buffer from Gun Club Creek. This open space tract will also include the entirety of the onsite buffer for Wetland A. With the conservative 150-foot wetland and 150-foot stream buffers and the increased buffering provided by the additional open space tract outside of these buffers, this plat is not anticipated to impact Wetland A, Gun Club Creek, or their associated protective buffers.

6.2 State and Federal Considerations

In a December 2, 2008, memorandum from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and USACE, joint guidance is provided that describes waters that are to be regulated under section 404 of the CWA (USACE, 2010). This memorandum was amended on February 2, 2012 where the EPA and USACE issued a final guidance letter on waters protected by the CWA. The 2012 guidance describes the following waters where jurisdiction would be asserted: 1) traditional navigable waters, 2) interstate waters, 3) wetlands adjacent to traditional navigable waters, 4) non-navigable tributaries of traditional navigable waters that are relatively permanent meaning they contain water at least seasonally (e.g. typically three months and does not include ephemeral waters), and 5) wetlands that directly abut permanent waters. The regulated waters are those associated with naturally occurring waters and water courses and not artificial waters (i.e. stormwater pond outfalls). The 2012 memorandum further goes on to describe waters where jurisdiction would likely require further analysis: 1) Tributaries to traditional navigable waters or interstate waters, 2) Wetlands adjacent to jurisdictional tributaries to traditional navigable waters or interstate waters, and 3) Waters that fall under the “other waters” category of the regulations. In addition, the 2012 guidance identifies thirteen waters or areas where jurisdiction will not be asserted: 1) Wet areas that are not tributaries or open waters and do not meet the agencies regulatory definition of “wetlands,” 2) Waters excluded from coverage under the CWA by existing regulations, 3) Waters that lack a “significant nexus: where one is required for a water to be jurisdictional, 4) Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to upland if the irrigation ceased, 5) Artificial lakes or ponds created


by excavating and/or diking dry land to collect and retain water and which are used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing, 6) Artificial reflecting pools or swimming pools excavated in uplands, 7) Small ornamental waters created by excavating and/or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons, and puddles, 8) Water-filled depressions created incidental to construction activity, 9) Groundwater, including groundwater drained through subsurface drainage systems, 10) Erosional features (gullies and rills), 11) Non-wetland swales, 12) Ditches that are excavated wholly in uplands, drain only uplands or non-jurisdictional waters, and have no more than ephemeral flow, and 13) Ditches that do not contribute flow, either directly or through other waterbodies, to a traditional navigable water, interstate water, or territorial sea. Wetlands A and Gun Club Creek likely have surface and/or subsurface connections to waters of the United States; therefore, these features are potentially regulated under Section 404 of the CWA. The WSDOE also regulates wetlands and natural surface waters under RCW 90.48. However, as the plat will likely avoid direct impacts to all wetlands and streams, permitting will not likely be required from USACE or WSDOE.


Chapter 7. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas

7.1 Wildlife Habitat Assessment

Vegetative Cover Types, Site Conditions, and Topography An assessment of the vegetative cover types has been conducted and a map of the three general plant communities found on site is provided in Appendix G. The first plant community encountered proceeding south from the access point at NE 100th Street is landscape and lawn area associated with the two existing single family residences. This plant community extends offsite to the east and west where there is adjacent residential land use. This area slopes moderately to the south and contains the driveways, the two homes and outbuildings. The vegetation is this area is comprised of lawn area, invasive blackberry, and native and ornamental trees and shrubs. The majority of the proposed site development will occur within this plant community area. The second plant community is generally located to the south of the landscape and lawn area and consists of native upland forest cover. This plant community extends offsite to the east and west of the site south of the adjacent homesites. The forest community is dominated by a canopy of Douglas fir (Pseudostuga menziesii), western red cedar (Thuja plicata), and bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) with an understory of vine maple (Acer circinatum) salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) and swordfern (Polystichum munitum). This plant community is common to western Washington in areas of low to mid elevation. Most of this area slopes steeply to the south towards Gun Club Creek and will be preserved within the steep slope, stream, and wetland buffers. The third plant community is located at the bottom of the steep slope and consists of a narrow riparian area transitioning from a wetland plant community adjacent to Gun Club Creek to the upland plant community on the slope. This plant community extends east of the site and is associated with offsite portions of Wetland A. Because of the abrupt slope, the wetland transitions to uplands with no distinct riparian plant component. This area will be preserved within an protective tract along with the stream, wetland, and steep slope buffers. Understory vegetation within the wetland is dominated by vine maple (Acer circinatum), salmonberry (Rubus spectablis), and American skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanus) with the upland forest canopy on the slope extending over the understory. Species Descriptions and Habitat Assessment In addition to searches of DNR Natural Heritage Database and WDFW Priority Habitats, a review of WDFW Threatened and Endangered Species List has been conducted to determine which priority, threatened, endangered, candidate, species of concern, and species of local importance might be found onsite based on the native range and habitat requirements of each species. A list of the potential wildlife species is included in Appendix H. The search of the DNR and WDFW databases yielded no positive indicators. With the onsite and adjacent properties containing wetland areas and a stream, once protected through regulatory mechanisms, these critical areas and their buffers would be considered Core Preservation Areas. These areas onsite will be set aside in an open space tract and designated as a Native Growth Protection Area which will preserve higher quality habitat areas found onsite associated with the wetland, stream, and their buffers.


Potential habitat corresponds to the three vegetative communities. Due to the level of human activity and disturbance in the landscape and lawn plant community associated with the two single family residences, this area is likely not habitat for any of the species listed in Appendix H and would only be suitable for urban adapted species. The upland forest and wetland/riparian plant community areas are characterized by a transition from increased disturbance closer to the homesites, where a portion of the forest canopy extends into and is surrounded by the adjacent disturbed areas, to an increasingly undisturbed forest area proceeding south towards the wetland and stream within the steep slopes of the site. The north end of the upland forest contains invasive Himalayan blackberry at the edge and is subject to impacts associated with the adjacent residential land use. With a more complex layering in the understory, the forested areas within and at the bottom of the steep slopes could potentially provide habitat to the listed species. The forest structure in these areas varies from a sparse swordfern understory to as more vertically complex structure containing multiple layering in the understory and intermediate canopy, including herbaceous groundcover, swordfern, salmonberry, vine maple and western red cedar saplings growing under a dominant tree canopy of second growth Douglas-fir and bigleaf maple. While there is potential habitat within the wetland and stream buffers, except for a small snag, no direct observations or potential indirect indicators of the listed species were found during the onsite investigation. The proposed project will completely avoid impacts to higher quality habitat areas, the wetlands, and stream by limiting site development activities to upland areas outside critical areas and their buffers. During construction, best management practices will be used to prevent erosion and sediment delivery to the protected areas. Potential changes in site hydrology from the proposed development will be mitigated for by the proposed stormwater facility design. Runoff from the plat will be treated for water quality and detained to match the discharge rate of a forested canopy which more closely matches native conditions than the existing residential land use. In addition, the stormwater outfall is designed to prevent erosion and sediment delivery to the critical area by avoiding discharge at the top of the steep slope. Instead, a dispersion trench will be provided at the bottom of the slope with willow stakes planted downslope of the trench. This outfall design will fully dissipate stormwater discharge to prevent erosion and sediment delivery to the stream. See Chapter 5 for further assessment regarding the Wetland A and Gun Club Creek.


Chapter 8. Closure The findings and conclusions documented in this report have been prepared for specific application to this project. They have been developed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill normally exercised by members of the environmental science profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the area. Our work was also performed in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in our proposal. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are professional opinions based on an interpretation of information currently available to us and are made within the operation scope, budget, and schedule of this project. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. In addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or laws may occur. Due to such changes, our observations and conclusions applicable to this project may need to be revised wholly or in part.

All wetland boundaries identified by SVC are based on conditions present at the time of the site inspection and considered preliminary until the flagged wetland boundaries are validated by the jurisdictional agencies. Validation of the wetland boundaries by the regulating agency provides a certification, usually written, that the wetland boundaries verified are the boundaries that will be regulated by the agencies until a specific date or until the regulations are modified. Only the regulating agencies can provide this certification.

As wetlands are dynamic communities affected by both natural and human activities, changes in wetland boundaries may be expected; therefore, wetland delineations cannot remain valid for an indefinite period of time. Local agencies typically recognize the validity of wetland delineations for a period of five years after completion of a wetland delineation report. Development activities on a site five years after the completion of this wetland delineation report may require revision of the wetland delineation. In addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or laws may occur. Due of such changes, our observations and conclusions applicable to this site may need to be revised wholly or in part.


Chapter 9. References Anderson, P.S., S. Meyer, P. Olson, and E. Stockdale. 2016. Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark

for Shoreline Management Act Compliance in Washington State. Publication No. 16-06-029. Final Review Draft. Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program, Washington State Department of Ecology. Olympia, Washington.

Brinson, M. M. 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands, Technical Report WRP-DE-4, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

City of Redmond Zoning Code (RZC). RZC 21.64 Critical Areas Regulations. Website: http://online.encodeplus.com/regs/redmond-wa/doc-viewer.aspx#secid-1046. Effective on October 17, 2015.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Washington D.C.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2013. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FGDC-STD-004-2013. Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal Geographic Data Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.

Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State wetland rating system for western Washington – Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 04-06-029.

Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X

Munsell Color, 2000. Munsell soil color charts. New Windsor, New York.

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2001. Hydric Soils List: King County, Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington D.C.

Null, W., G. Skinner, and W. Leonard. 2000. Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear Projects. Washington State Department of Transportation. Olympia, Washington.

Raedeke Associates, Inc. 2018. Critical Areas Report Update.

Snyder, Dale E., Philip S. Gale, and Russell F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. Soil Conservation Service United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Washington Agricultural Experiment Station. Natural Resource Conservation Service.

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

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), NRCS. 2017. Field Indictors of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 8.1. L.M. Vasialas, G.W. Hurt, and C.V. Noble (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2019. Threatened and Endangered Species.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/species-habitats/at-risk/listed

1155.0029 – Redmond 9 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report April 8, 2019

Appendix A — Methods and Tools

Table A-1. Methods and tools used to prepare the report. Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference

Wetland Delineation

USACE 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual

http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/elpubs/pdf/wlman87.pdf

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Regional Supplement to the Core of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0)

http://www.usace.army.mil/CECW/Documents/cecwo/reg/west_mt_finalsupp.pdf

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 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.

Wetland Classification

USFWS / Cowardin Classification System

http://www.fws.gov/nwi/Pubs_Reports/Class_Manual/class_titlepg.htm https://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/wetlands/nvcs-2013

Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2013. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FGDC-STD-004-2013. Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal Geographic Data Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.

Hydrogeomorphic Classification (HGM) System

http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/wetlands/pdfs/wrpde4.pdf

Brinson, M. M. (1993). “A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands,” Technical Report WRP-DE-4, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Wetland Rating City of Redmond Code

http://online.encodeplus.com/regs/redmond-wa/doc-viewer.aspx#secid-1046

Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State wetland rating system for western Washington – Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 04-06-029.

Wetland Indicator Status

2014 National Wetland Plant List http://wetland_plants.usace.ar

my.mil/

Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X

Stream Classification

Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Water Typing System

Forest Practices Water Typing: http://www.stage.dnr.wa.gov/forestpractices/watertyping/

Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 222-16-030. DNR Water typing system.

Plant Names USDA Plant Database

http://plants.usda.gov/ Website

Soils Data NRCS Soil Survey http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx

Website GIS data based upon: Snyder, Dale E., Philip S. Gale, and Russell F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. Soil Conservation Service United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Washington Agricultural Experiment Station. Natural Resource Conservation Service.

Hydric Soils Data

King County Hydric Soils List

http://soils.usda.gov/use/hydric/

NRCS. 2001. Hydric Soils List: King County, Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington D.C.


Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference

Threatened and Endangered Species

Washington Natural Heritage Program

http://data-wadnr.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/wnhp-current-element-occurrences

Washington Natural Heritage Program (Data published 07/19/17). Endangered, threatened, and sensitive plants of Washington. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Washington Natural Heritage Program, Olympia, WA

Washington Priority Habitats and Species

http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phspage.htm

Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (Data requested on 09/18/17). Map of priority habitats and species in project vicinity. WDFW.

USFWS species lists by County

http://www.fws.gov/westwafwo/se/SE_List/endangered_Species.asp

Website

WDFW GIS Data http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/salmonscape/

Website

WDFW Threatened and Endangered Species

https://wdfw.wa.gov/species-habitats/at-risk/listed

Website

Report Preparation

City of Redmond Zoning Code (RZC)

http://online.encodeplus.com/regs/redmond-wa/doc-viewer.aspx#secid-1046

RZC Title 21.64 – Critical Areas Regulations.


Appendix B — Background Information

This Appendix includes a USFWS NWI map (B1); King County Wetland and Stream Inventory Map (B2); King County Topographic Map (B3); NRCS Soil Survey map (B4); WDFW SalmonScape Map (B5); WDFW PHS Map (B6); and DNR Stream Typing Map (B7).


Appendix B1. USFWS NWI Map



Appendix B2. King County Wetland and Stream Inventory Map



Appendix B3. King County Topographic Map



Appendix B4. NRCS Soil Survey Map



Appendix B5. WDFW SalmonScape Map



Appendix B6. WDFW PHS Map



Appendix B7. DNR Stream Typing Map



Appendix B8. City of Redmond Critical Areas Map



Appendix C — Site Plan

àààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààà

àààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààà

ààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààà


a a a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

aa

a

aa

a

aa

aa

aa

'&

'&

A-8A-9

Z-9A-7

A-6Z-8Z-7Z-6

A-4A-3

Z-5

A-1Z-4

Z-3Z-2

Z-1

Z-13Z-12Z-11

Z-10

DP-1W

DP-2U

Pictometry, King County

REDMOND 9 - EXISTING CONDITIONS

¢

13437 & 13441 NE 100TH ST KIRKLAND, WA 98033

KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS:0325059035 & 0325059208

REDMOND 9 DATE:JOB:BY:SCALE:FIGURE NO.

4/8/20191155.0029

DLS

1

PRELIMINARYINFORMATION ONLY

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMES

NO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FORCONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, ORESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET

www.soundviewconsultants.com

2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954

Soundview ConsultantsEnvironmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions

LLC

0 50 10025 Feet

1 " = 50 '

'& Data PointOHWMWetland Flag50' OuterStream BufferStandard 100'Stream Buffer

a a OHWStandard 150'Wetland BufferSite Boundary

àààààààààààààààà

àààààààà

Wetland


àààààààà

Offsite Wetland

Wetland A

Stream Z

àààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààà

àààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààà



a a a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

aa

a

aa

a

aa

aa

aa

a a a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

aa

a

aa

a

aa

aa

aa

'&

'&

2 1

43

5

6

7

TRACT AOpen Space & Storm Drainage

8 9

Tract BOpen Space

DP-2U

DP-1W

REDMOND 9 - PROPOSED SITE PLAN

¢




4/8/20191155.0029

DLS

2

0 50 10025 Feet


NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMES

NO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FORCONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, ORESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET




LLC

1 " = 50 '

'& Data PointStorm WaterManagementSystem50' OuterStream BufferStandard 100'Stream Buffer

a a a OHWStandard 150'Wetland Buffer

ààààààààààààààààààà

àààààààà

Wetland

àààààààààààààààààààà

àààààààààààà

Offsite WetlandSite Boundaries

Wetland A

Stream Z

DispersionTrench

REDMOND 9 - PLANTING PLAN




4/8/20191155.0029

DLS

3www.soundviewconsultants.com



LLC

a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

aa

aa

aa

aa

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

aa

aa

a

a

a

a

a

aa

aa

aa

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

a

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

a

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa

aa


àààààààààààà

àààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààà

àààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààà

@!R@

@@

!R !R!R

DISPERSION TRENCH

Plantings!R Sitka Willow

@ Hooker's Willow

N/A

Wetland A

1 " = 6 '

Plant NamePlanting

Area180 SF

Salix hookeriana Hooker's willow FACW 4 4 - 5 ft 2 - 4 ft Stakes Moist/WetSalix sitchensis Sitka willow FACW 4 4 - 5 ft 2 - 4 ft Stakes Moist/Wet1 - Scientific names and species identification taken from Flora of the Pacific Northwest, 2nd Edition (Hitchcock and Cronquist, Ed. by Giblin, Ledger, Zika, and Olmstead, 2018).2 - All plants are suitable for replacement pending project biologist's approval.3 - All plans and schedules are conceptual for regulatory review and impact analysis. Final plans may be needed for construction, and may be subject to regulatory approval.

Shrubs

Spacing Size Condition Planting AreaScientific Common Plant Status

LIVE STAKE PLANTING DETAILNOT TO SCALE

NOTES:

STORAGE OF LIVE STAKESALL WOODY PLANT CUTTINGS COLLECTEDMORE THAN 12 HR PRIOR TOINSTALLATION, MUST BE CAREFULLYBOUND, SECURED, AND STORED OUT OFDIRECT SUNLIGHT AND SUBMERGED INCLEAN FRESH WATER FOR A PERIOD OFUP TO TWO WEEKS.OUTDOOR TEMPERATURES MUST BE LESSTHAN 50 DEGREES F AND TEMPERATUREINDOORS AND IN STORAGE CONTAINERSMUST BE BETWEEN 34 AND 50 DEGREES F.IF THE LIVE STAKES CANNOT BEINSTALLED DURING THE DORMANTSEASON, CUT DURING THE DORMANTSEASON AND HOLD IN COLD STORAGE ATTEMPERATURES BETWEEN 33 AND 39DEGREES F FOR UP TO 2 MONTHS.

1. LIVE STAKES TO BE 1 TO 2 INCH DIAMETER 24 TO 32 INCHES LENGTH.2. USE 1/2 INCH DIAMETER REBAR OR ROCK BAR TO MAKE PILOT HOLE.3. INSTALL LIVE STAKES TAPER END DOWN WITH BUDS POINTED UP.4. MINUMUM TWO BUDS ABOVE GRADE.5. SET LIVE STAKES WITH DEAD-BLOW HAMMER.6. WATER IMMEDIATELY AFTER INSTALLATION.

70-80

% O

F STA

KEIN

STAL

LED

BELO

W GR

ADE

Planting Schedule


Appendix D — Data Sheets

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: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.

Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No

Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No

Remarks:

VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. 2. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum

Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)

Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B)

Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:

Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting

data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)

1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.

Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No

Remarks:

1155.0029 - Langford Kirkland / King 07/11/2018

Harbour Homes WA DP-1

Emily Swaim, Erin Harker 3, 25N, 5E

Hillslope None 5

A2 47.6874844112905 -122.161326618001 WGS 84

Alderwood gravelly sandy loam Riverine

Wetland A plot. All three wetland criteria observed.

Acer macrophyllum 55 Yes FACU 5Thuja plicata 15 Yes FAC

6

70 83%

Rubus spectabilis 50 Yes FACAcer circinatum 25 Yes FACOemleria cerasiformis 5 No FACU

80

Athyrium cyclosorum 30 Yes FACEquisetum arvense 20 Yes FACLysichiton americanus 5 No OBLCardamine oligosperma 1 No FAC

56

044

Hydrophytic vegetation criteria observed through dominance test.


SOIL Sampling Point:

Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:

Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.

Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________ Depth (inches):________________________

Hydric Soil Present? Yes No

Remarks:

HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)

Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)

Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe)

Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No

Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks:

DP-1

0 - 8 10YR 2/1 100 - - - - SaLo Fine sandy loam with organics

8 - 16 2.5YR 4/1 100 - - - - SaLo With organics

None

Hydric soil criteria observed through indicator A4.

None1210

Hydrologic criteria observed through primary indicators A2, A3, and C1.


WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.

Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No

Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No

Remarks:

VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. 2. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum

Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)

Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B)

Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:

Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting

data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)

1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.

Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No

Remarks:

1155.0029 - Langford Kirkland / King 07/11/2018

Harbour Homes WA DP-2

Emily Swaim, Erin Harker 3, 25N, 5E

Hillslope Concave 30

A2 47.687830893 -122.161040086167 WGS 84

Alderwood gravelly sandy loam N/A

Upland plot to Wetland A. No wetland criteria observed.

Acer macrophyllum 75 Yes FACU 1Thuja plicata 5 No FAC

4

80 25%

Rubus spectabilis 20 Yes FACOemleria cerasiformis 5 Yes FACU

0 00 025 75

25 180 7200 0

Polystichum munitum 100 Yes FACU 205 795

3.88

100

00

No hydrophytic vegetation criteria observed.


SOIL Sampling Point:

Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:

Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.

Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________ Depth (inches):________________________

Hydric Soil Present? Yes No

Remarks:

HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)

Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)

Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe)

Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No

Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks:

DP-2

0 - 6 10YR 2/2 100 - - - - GrSaLo Gravelly sandy loam

6 - 12 10YR 3/2 100 - - - - GrSaLo

12 - 16 10YR 4/4 100 - - - - GrSaLo

None

No hydric soil criteria observed.

NoneNoneNone

No hydrologic criteria observed.


Appendix E — Wetland Rating Forms See Raedeke (2018). Critical Areas Report.


Appendix F — Wetland Rating Maps


REDMOND 9 - WETLAND RATING MAP

¢

13437 & 13441 NE 100TH STKIRKLAND, WA 98033


REDMOND 9




LLC

DATE:JOB:BY:SCALE:FIGURE NO. of 4

4/8/20191155.0029

DLS

1

0 175 35087.5 Feet

1 " = 175 '

Cowardin MapSite Boundary330' BoundaryForestedScrub-Shrub

a

a

a

a

a

aa

aa

aa

aa

a

aa

a

a

aa

a

a

a

a

aa

aa

aa

a



¢



REDMOND 9




LLC


4/8/20191155.0029

DLS

2

0 175 35087.5 Feet

1 " = 175 '

Hydroperiod Map

a a Gun CreekSite Boundary150' BoundarySaturated



¢



REDMOND 9




LLC


4/8/20191155.0029

DLS

3

0 1,500 3,000750 Feet

1 " = 1,500 '

Habitat MapSite Boundary1 KM PolygonHigh IntensityModerate & Low IntensityUndisturbed Habitat

Abutting Undisturbed Habitat 0.74%Abutting Moderate & Low Intensity Land Uses 10.63%Accessible Habitat 6.06%

Undisturbed Habitat 20.05%Moderate & Low Intensity Land Uses 14.71%Undisturbed Habitat in 1 KM Polygon 27.41%

High Intensity Land Use in 1 KM Polygon 65.24%

H.2.2

H.2.3

H.2.0 Wetland AH.2.1


¢



REDMOND 9




LLC


4/8/20191155.0029

DLS

41 " = 3 mi

303d MapCategory 4A Assessed WatersCategory 5 Assessed WatersSub Basin

0 3 61.5 Miles

SITE


Appendix G — Plant Communities Map

PROJECT BOUNDARY

NE 100TH ST

LEGEND

LANDSCAPED AND

RESIDENTIAL HOME SITES

UPLAND VEGETATION

COVER

WETLAND AND RIPARIAN

VEGETATION COVER

REDMOND 9 - PLANT COMMUNITIES MAP

1

RE

DM

ON

D 9

13441 N

E 1

00T

H S

T.

KIR

KL

AN

D, W

ASH

ING

TO

N

TH

E N

W 1

4 O

F S

EC

TIO

N 3

, T

OW

NSH

IP 2

5N

,R

AN

GE

5E

, W

.M.

DATE: 4/9/019

BY: DB

JOB: 1155.0029

SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC

SO

UR

CE

S:


NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMESNO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FORCONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, ORESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET

SHEET OF 4MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 2

PROJECT BOUNDARY

LEGEND

LANDSCAPED AND


UPLAND VEGETATION

COVER


VEGETATION COVER

2SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC

SO

UR

CE

S:




SHEET OF 4


RE

DM

ON

D 9

13441 N

E 1

00T

H S

T.

KIR

KL

AN

D, W

ASH

ING

TO

N

TH

E N

W 1

4 O

F S

EC

TIO

N 3

, T

OW

NSH

IP 2

5N

,R

AN

GE

5E

, W

.M.

DATE: 4/9/019

BY: DB

JOB: 1155.0029

MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 3


PROJECT BOUNDARY

150' STREAM BUFFER

150' WETLAND BUFFER

LEGEND

LANDSCAPED AND


UPLAND VEGETATION

COVER


VEGETATION COVER

3SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC

SO

UR

CE

S:




SHEET OF 4


RE

DM

ON

D 9

13441 N

E 1

00T

H S

T.

KIR

KL

AN

D, W

ASH

ING

TO

N

TH

E N

W 1

4 O

F S

EC

TIO

N 3

, T

OW

NSH

IP 2

5N

,R

AN

GE

5E

, W

.M.

DATE: 4/9/019

BY: DB

JOB: 1155.0029



PROJECT BOUNDARY

GUN CLUB CREEK

WETLAND A

APPROX. OHW

LEGEND

LANDSCAPED AND


UPLAND VEGETATION

COVER


VEGETATION COVER

4SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC

SO

UR

CE

S:




SHEET OF 4


RE

DM

ON

D 9

13441 N

E 1

00T

H S

T.

KIR

KL

AN

D, W

ASH

ING

TO

N

TH

E N

W 1

4 O

F S

EC

TIO

N 3

, T

OW

NSH

IP 2

5N

,R

AN

GE

5E

, W

.M.

DATE: 4/9/019

BY: DB

JOB: 1155.0029



Appendix H — Wildlife Species List

Common Name Scientific Name Animal Type State Species Status Federal Species status

Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Birds Species of concern

Bull trout Salvelinus confluentus Fish Candidate Threatened

Great arctic Oeneis nevadensis gigas Butterflies and moths Candidate Species of concern

Marbled murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus Birds Endangered Threatened

Mardon skipper Polites mardon Butterflies and moths Endangered Species of concern

Margined sculpin Cottus marginatus Fish Sensitive

Oregon silverspot butterfly Speyeria zerene hippolyta Butterflies and moths Endangered Threatened

Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus Birds Species of concern

Townsend’s big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii Mammals Candidate

Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Birds Endangered Threatened


Appendix I — Qualifications All field inspections, jurisdictional wetland determinations, habitat assessments, and supporting documentation, including this Wetland Delineation and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report prepared for the Langford project site, were prepared by, or under the direction of Don Babineau of SVC. In addition, site inspections were performed by Richard Peel, and report preparation was completed by Laura Livingston.

Don Babineau Environmental Planner/Project Manager Professional Experience: >12 years

Don Babineau is an Environmental Planner and Project Manager with a diverse background in urban and commercial forestry, land planning, landscape architecture, stormwater monitoring and civil engineering. Don has experience as a Forester with Washington State Department of Natural Resources stream typing and delineating stream protection zones, as well as implementing Washington State’s Habitat Conservation Plan to foster the creation of old-growth forest characteristics on state trust lands. Don earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Forest Ecosystems Management and a Bachelor of Landscape Architecture degree, both from the University of Idaho.

Don has been formally trained by the Washington State Department of Ecology in the use of the Washington State Wetland Rating System. In addition, he has received formal training in wetland delineation from the Northwest Environmental Training Center and has experience as certified erosion and sediment control lead (CESCL). He is also a Pierce County qualified Professional Forester.

Richard Peel Wetland Scientist Professional Experience: 6 years

Richard Peel is a Wetland Scientist with diverse professional experience in wetland ecology, monitoring, and delineation throughout Washington and Oregon. Richard is Washington State trained in conducting wetland delineations, assessing wetland systems, mitigation planning and design, implementation of monitoring programs, mitigation monitoring and reporting. He also has extensive experience in an analytical laboratory using state-of-the-art equipment in bacteriological and chemical analysis of soil and water samples.

Richard is a graduate of The Evergreen State College, with dual degrees in Ecology and Economics. He has focused his academic career on ecology, disturbance ecology, chemistry, and the economic impacts of current environmental management. Richard has extensive training and field experience in wetland-related disciplines and has wetland delineation experience both east and west of the Cascades. He has been trained by the Washington State Department of Transportation’s (WSDOT) Wetland Ecology and Monitoring team in the use of wetland delineation, mitigation, monitoring, and restoration techniques. In addition, he was directed by WSDOT’s Wetland Protection and Preservation Policy to ensure wetlands are preserved and protected whenever possible. This direction


ensures no net loss in the quantity or quality of wetlands in the future and minimization of impacts to wetlands in the present.

Richard is a certified Professional Wetland Scientist (#2858). He has been formally trained in the use of the Washington State Wetland Rating System, Shoreline Stabilization, Eelgrass Delineation, and several other critical area assessment and restoration projects from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Washington State Department of Ecology. He is also a Pierce County Qualified Wetland Specialist, and he holds similar qualifications from other jurisdictions.

Laura Livingston Staff Environmental Planner Professional Experience: 1 year

Laura Livingston is a Staff Environmental Planner with a background in water quality monitoring, invasive species monitoring, wildlife monitoring, wilderness stewardship, and erosion control projects. Laura has field experience working on natural resources projects, with an emphasis on stream and river projects, in the Northwest, Northeast, and Southwest United States. She has also worked on a variety of environmental science research, grant, and teaching projects requiring scientific writing, science communication, laboratory work, and statistical analysis. She currently performs wetland, stream, and shoreline delineations and fish and wildlife habitat assessments; conducts environmental code analysis; and prepares environmental assessment and mitigation reports, biological evaluations, and permit applications to support clients through the regulatory and planning process.

Laura earned a Master of Science degree in Environmental Science from Washington State University, Pullman.