The URL can be used to link to this page

20070404 Env Checklist 11282007SOUND ENGINEERING, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS �] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST • CREEK ROAD MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THURSTON COUNTY, WASHINGTON NOVEMBER 2007 PREPARED FOR: YELM CREEK APAR'T'MENTS, LLC 240 STADIUM WAY SOUTH TACOMA, WA 98402 PREPARED BY: STEPHEN K. BRIDGEFORD - LAND PLANNER SOUND ENGINEERING, INC. 1102 COMMERCE STREET, SUITE 300 TACOMA, WA 98402 (253) 573 -0040 PROJF;cr 07118.10 DA'1'HD 11.07 1 ' CITY OF YELM ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 1 A 1. ' 2. 3. 1 1 4. 5. ' 6. 1 7. CITY USE ONLY FEE: $150.00 DATE RECD BY: FILE NO. BACKGROUND Name of proposed project, if any: Creek Road Mixed Use Development Name of applicant: Yelm Creek Apartments, LLC. Address, phone number and email address of applicant and of any other contact person: 240 Stadium Way South Tacoma, WA 98402 Phone: (253) 428 -0800 Agent: Timothy D. Holdemlan P.E. Sound Engineering, Inc. 1102 Commerce Street, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98402 Phone (253) 573.0040 Date checklist prepared: - November 13, 2007 Agency requesting checklist: City of Yelm, Community Development Department Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Once_ all necessary approvals and permits are obtained, the project will be constructed. It is anticipated that construction will begin, weather permitting, in spring of 2008 and anticipated completion is summer of 2009. Construction will likely take place in two phases starting with multi - family component. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. There are no further plans for expansion or additions related to the proposed development. ' City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 7 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A geotechnical engineering study dated August 29, 2007 was prepared for this project by GeoResources, LLC. A Wetland Review and Delineation Study Dated August 26, 2007 was prepared for this project by Forest Pro, Inc. See Appendix for Geotechnical Engineering Study and Wetland Review and Delineation Study 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals or other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. ' To our knowledge, no other government approvals are pending that directly affects the property on which the proposed development will be constructed. 1 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit, Commercial Building Permits, Site Plan Review, and Site Development Permits 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. '. The proposal is to construct a 164 -unit multi - family residential and five commercial /retail strip buildings totaling 54,540 square feet. The total site area is ' approximately 17.08 acres. The development will include stomwater facilities, utilities, public and private roadways, parking lots and open space. The various components of the proposed development will be discussed further in this checklist. See Appendix for Site Plan ' City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 2 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. You need not duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Address: 10520 Creek Rd. SE, Yelm WA, 98567 Section 29 Township 17 Range 2E Tax Parcel Number 64303400400, -0501, and -0502 See Appendix for legal description and vicinity map. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth A. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other B. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope on the site is approximately 2 %. C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The on -site soils are Spanaway gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, McKenna gravelly silt loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes, and Spanaway stony sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent according to the National Cooperative Soil Survey for the Thurston County Area, Washington. See Appendix for the Soil Map, and Soil Descriptions D. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe: There is no indication that this site has had a history of unstabfe soils, or could any such indicator be located in the immediate vicinity. E. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Site preparation will require grading activities for access ways, building pads, parking lots and stormwater facilities. The grading areas will encompass the majority of the parcel. It is anticipate that approximately 50,000± cubic yards of fill and 1,500± cubic yards of cut will be necessary for the completed project. The source of any fill will be dependant on availability and pricing at the time of construction. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 3 ' F. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes. Removal of the existing vegetation and the demolition of the existing buildings could result in erosion primarily through dust escapement ' G. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction such as asphalt or buildings? ' Approximately 55 percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces once the project is constructed. ' H. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: ' As part of the forthcoming grading plan, a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan (TESC) will be prepared for approval by the City of Yelm. Erosion control features will be installed prior to construction and ' maintained until the threat of erosion ceases to exist. 2. Air A. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, ' automobile exhaust, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The future grading activities at the site will cause dust particulate to be emitted to the air. Vehicles and equipment used during all phases of construction can be a potential source of emissions. When the project is complete, the site may be the source of vehicle emissions from vehicles' using the site. B. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. ' Vehicles using the surrounding street system may, at times, be a source of emissions or odor. However, it is not anticipated that off -site sources of ' emissions or odor will impact the proposed development of this site. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Unwanted dust particulate can be controlled to a certain extent by the application of water before and during grading activities. It is assumed that construction vehicles used will be equipped with factory- installed mufflers ' and spark arresters that would control excessive emissions. There are no measures proposed to control emissions as a result of vehicles using the site after construction. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 4 3. Water A. Surface Water 1) Is there any surface water body or wetland on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, and ponds)? If yes, describe type and provide names. State what stream or river it flows into? Yes, Yelm Creek (a seasonal stream) is located along the eastern property line. The creek flows due north to approximately 2 miles to the Centralia Canal then approximately 2 miles to the Nisqually River from the nearest proposed developed area. Per the Forest Pro, Inc Wetland Review Yelm Creek is categorized as a Type "S" stream. In addition, there area also wetlands adjacent to the Yelm Creek; per the Forest Pro, Inc Wetland Review the wetlands are categorized as Class IV wetlands. See Appendix for Site Plan, Vicinity Map and the Forest Pro, Inc. Wetland Review dated August 26, 2007. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 300 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, the eastern portion of the project is located within 300 -feet of the Yelm Creek and the adjacent wetland. However, all development will be located outside the required buffers See appendix for Site Plan 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No fill or dredge material will be place in or removed from surface water or wetlands. 4) Will the proposed require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No, surface water withdrawals or diversions will not be required. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note elevation on the site plan. Yes, there is a 100 -year flood plain along the western portion of the site. The base flood elevation per FEMA is approximately 341 -feet (NGVD -29) See Appendix for Flood Insurance Rate Map. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 5 The proposal does not require any discharge of waste materials to surface waters. B. Groundwater: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No ground water will be withdrawn. At build out the site will be served by the Yelm Water Utility. The on site well will be decommissioned per current DOE and local jurisdictional requirements prior to any onsite construction activities. There will be an onsite underground stormwater infiltration system to handle run -off from roof drains, paved surfaces and landscaped areas. 2) Describe the underlying aquifer with regard to quality and quantity, sensitivity, protection, recharge areas, etc. As with the entire city of Yelm and its urban growth area the subject site is located within a highly susceptible critical aquifer recharge area. All applicable City of Yelm and DOE regulations with be implemented to protect the aquifer recharge area. 3) Describe waste material that will be discharged into or onto the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (such as domestic sewage; industrial byproducts; agricultural chemicals). The site will be served by the City of Yelm Sewer Utility. No waste materials will be discharged directly into the ground. However, the proposed on -site underground stormwater infiltration system may result in discharges but will be limited to that which is expected to occur with such a system. The proposed system will be designed by a professional licensed civil engineer and approved by the City of Yelm. C. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The primary source of runoff will be from stormwater and roof drains, although, minimal water runoff is anticipated to occur as a result of landscape watering and other maintenance activities. The proposed project site will contain an underground stormwater infiltration system. The stormwater will Flow into catch basins located within the drive aisles, then directed through a stormwater quality treatment system before being conveyed to the underground infiltration system. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Generally, a project of this type and size provides areas of landscaping as part of on -site amenities. If chemicals or fertilizers are used to maintain these areas are not handled properly, it is possible they could enter on -site stormwater facilities. To our knowledge, there are no other known sources of contaminants associated with this proposal. City or Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 6 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: All stormwater runoff generated from this project site will be collected, treated and infiltrated into the ground by means of a stormwater quality treatment filter and underground infiltration system. 4. Plants A. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, oak, aspen, other: cherry, cottonwood evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grasses Pasture crops or grains wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation B. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? It is anticipated that all existing landscaping, vegetation, grass and trees outside the wetland buffer will be removed as part of the grading process. C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. To our knowledge, there are no threatened or endangered plant species on or near the site. D. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: A professional licensed landscape architect will design the site incorporating some of the existing native vegetation as well as importing additional complimentary landscaping material. Animals A. Circle any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, ducks, eagle, songbirds, other: Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Fish: bass, salmon, trout, shellfish, other: B. List any priority, threatened or endangered species know to be on or near the site. To our knowledge there are no threatened or endangered species known to exist on or near the project site. ' City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 7 ' C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain: The site is located within the boundaries of the western flyway for migratory ' bird populations. D. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: 1 The landscape areas will include some vegetation amenities that may attract both birds and small mammals. ' 6. Energy and Natural Resources A. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, gasoline, heating oil, wood, solar etc.) ' will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, transportation, etc. ' The primary energy source required to meet the energy needs of the proposed multifamily development is electricity. It is not known at this time whether or not natural gas will be provided. Sufficient amounts of the ' available resources would be used to maintain a comfortable lifestyle and environment. B. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? ' If so, generally describe. No, it is not anticipated that this project will affect the potential for adjacent ' properties to use solar energy. C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this 1 proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: t The buildings will be constructed to meet or exceed current building and energy codes. 7. Environmental Health A. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spills of hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Typically, a residential development is not a source of environmental health hazards. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. While not anticipated to occur, the services of the local emergency service providers may be required at some time. No special emergency services are anticipated. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None are proposed. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 8 B. Noise What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? There are no known sources of off -site noise in the area that would affect the proposed development 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site During the short-term, construction activity at the project site will vary considerably because the noise produced on the site depends on the equipment being used. The noise would vary from day to day. Construction noise levels can be expected to range from 57 to 89 dBA. (Based on a construction activity noise model, described in Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances). Noise associated with construction operations on the site will occur roughly between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Long -term noise impacts will result from vehicles using the site and noises typical to a multi - family development. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Noise impacts associated with the construction phases of the project will be limited in duration. To mitigate general noise impacts during the grading phase, measures such as using and regularly maintaining efficient mufflers and quieting devices on all construction equipment and vehicles can be anticipated. No measures to mitigate noise impacts during the building phase are proposed. Construction hours will be limited to those hours set forth by the county. 8. Land and Shoreline Use A. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The subject site is composed of two parcels with one parcels containing a single-family residence with accessory structures. The other parcel contains a retail commercial use. The current use of adjacent land is as follows: North: Commercial South: SR -507, Commercial West: Commercial East: Single Family Residence and Agricultural City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 9 B. Has the site been used for mineral excavation, agriculture or forestry? If so, describe. - No, the site has not recently been used for mineral excavation, agriculture of forestry. ' C. Describe any structures on the site. Parcel 64303400400: single family residence, barn, mobile home, and sheds Parcel 64303400501 and -502: commercial building D, Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? ' Yes, two single family structures on parcel 64303400400 will be removed. ' E. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? C -1 Commercial Zone ' F What is the current zoning classification of the site? C -1 Commercial Zone G. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Per the City of Yelm Comprehensive Plan and the Thurston County Shoreline Master Program, Yelm Creek is designated as a shoreline of the state. H. Has any part of the site been classified as a "natural resource ", 'critical" ' or "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, Yelm Creek and the adjacent category IV wetlands along the ' eastern property line. The site is also located within an aquifer recharge area. See Appendix for Wetland Review by Forest Pro, Inc and Site Plan. ' I. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The proposed development could provide housing for approximately 410 individuals at an average rate of 2.5 people per unit. Approximately 40± individuals would work at the completed project. It should be noted that as exact tenants have yet to be identified this is purely an estimate. J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? ' The proposed development will displace approximately 5 people at a rate of 2.5 per unit. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 10 k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any None, the proposed development will provide more housing then ' what is being eliminated. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing ' and projected land uses and plans, if any: The project site is located on property zoned for multi - family development and will conform to the guidelines of the City of Yelm. 9. Housing A. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, ' middle, or low- income housing. The completed project site will contain 164 -units of low to middle income ' housing. B. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether ' high, middle, or low- income housing. Two low to middle income units will be eliminated. ' C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: 1 There are no measures proposed to control housing impacts. The proposed development will, in fact, create housing that will benefit a certain segment of the population in the City of Yelm. ' 10. Aesthetics A. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? 1 Buildings are not anticipated to exceed the maximum height allowed by the underlying zoning district of 40 -feet. ' B. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? ' The views in the immediate vicinity would be altered to that of a mixed use commercial /multifamily residential development. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The proposed project will be designed to be consistent with the City of ' Yelm Design Guidelines. ICity of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 11 1 1 11. Light and Glare A. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it 1 mainly occur? Light and glare will result from reflective surfaces, exterior building lights and streetlights. Interior lighting may be noticeable. The 1 occurrence of light impacts would be anticipated from dusk to dawn. Glare impacts, including those associated with sunny days and headlights reflecting off window surfaces, could be expected both day 1 and night. B. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere 1 with views? Onsite lighting will be designed to project downward therefore not 1 affecting surrounding areas. C. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? 1 There are no known off -site sources of light or glare that are anticipated to affect this proposal. 1 D. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: The exterior building lights will be of low intensity, typically used for safety 1 and security purposes. 12. Recreation 1 A. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are no known recreational opportunities in the immediate vicinity 1 of the proposed project. 1 B. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. 1 No, the project will not displace any recreational opportunities. 1 C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts or provide recreation opportunities 1 There are no measures proposed to reduce or control impacts to off -site recreational opportunities. 1 1 1 City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 12 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation A. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or ' local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. To our knowledge there are no known sites in the vicinity eligible for or ' listed in any jurisdictional historic register. B. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Does not apply. ' C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: ' There are no measures proposed to reduce or control impacts. However, if objects are unearthed during site work that may be culturally significant, the Washington State Office of Archaeology & Historic ' Preservation will be notified. 14. Transportation ' A. Identify sidewalks, trails, public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. ' The site will gain ingress and egress from Creek Street Southeast and 106`" Avenue Southeast. ' See Appendix for Site Plan. B. Is site currently served by public transit? By what means? If not, what plans ' exist for transit service? Yes there is transit service available along Creek Street Southeast via ' Intercity Transit Route 94. See Appendix for Intercity Transit Route 94 Map. tC. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? ' The proposed project will provide a total of approximately 527 parking stalls for the entire mixed use development. The proposed will eliminate only the parking stalls associated with the existing use and its accessory ' buildings. D. Will the proposal require any new sidewalks, trails, roads or streets, or ' improvements to existing sidewalks, trails, roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). ' The proposed will not require any new roads or streets. Frontage improvements will be provided along Creek Street Southeast. ' City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 13 ' E. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No, the proposed is not in the immediate vicinity of water, rail, or air transportation. F. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? ' The City of Yelm will be conducting a Traffic Study for this project at a later date. The number of Vehicular Trips per day will be available at the conclusion of this study. G. If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. ' Unknown at this time H. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any ' At this time there are no proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts. 15. Public Services A. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example . fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: Yes, Whenever a residential development is constructed, the need for ' public services, such as police and fire protection, increases. There will also be an increased demand on the School District. It is also anticipated that further demand will be made on local health care ' providers. B. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if ' any. Impacts will be controlled by the increase in tax base, tax assessments ' paid to the public services, and impact fees 1 City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 14 16. Utilities A. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. B. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. The proposed project will use the following utilities: Electricity: Puget Sound Energy Water: City of Yelm Refuse Service: Pacific Disposal Telephone: Qwest Communications Sanitary Sewer: City of Yelm Septic System Not Applicable C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the City of Yelm is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 15 SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions.) When answering these questions, be aware of the extent of the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. I. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Does not Apply Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are Does not Apply 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Does not Apply Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Does not Apply 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Does not Apply Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are Does not Apply 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect critical or environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection, such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or natural resource areas? Does not Apply Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are Does not Apply 1 City of Yelm Environmental Check list Page 16 i 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Does not Apply Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Does not Apply 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Does not Apply Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: Does not Apply 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Does not Apply City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 17 APPENDIX Table of Contents EXHIBIT SitePlan ..................................................................... ............................... VicinityMap .... ... .... ................................ ................ ............................. .... ...I I Legal Description ........................... ............................... ............................III SoilMap ...................................................................... ............................... IV SoilDescription .......................................................... ............................... V FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map .............................. ............................... VI Geotechnical Report by GeoResources, LLC. dated Aug. 29, 2007......... VIII Wetland Review and Delineation by Forest Pro, Inc. dated Aug. 26, 07.... IX ' City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 1B GRAPHIC SCALE CREEK ROAD MIXED USE A PORTION OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW 114 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 17 N, RANGE 02 E, W.M. CITY OF YEIM, THURSTON COUNTY, WASHINGTON CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN r � 1 � °m Rik I WIN m�I II K CREEK ROAD MIXED USE A PORTION OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW 114 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 17 N, RANGE 02 E, W.M. CITY OF YEIM, THURSTON COUNTY, WASHINGTON CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN Jill r � 1 � °m Rik I m�I II K Cc p IDEWRLK L - � EENLE (TYP) m m m m m n - cc e - (D) �, 10500 50 FT � ^N 9 f 2 L Jill � 1 � °m m�I II SEI SOUND ENGINEERING, INC wuacv�•woullm lmmwmm,mnn REEORO mirx. m P W_vmPII orn zvar m arzw�wmn nncr� m,ulo CDNCEP SUE PION cP -1 1 1 1 1 1 1102 cwo aZSt, Sat 300 Creek Road Development `�OUND T.,.9eaoz A3" Bus' Izvl 573-000 NGINEERINC, /nc. Fax: t2651 670m42 �.aEaa �µnouN.aRa F�� =W�remezo,n Vicinity Map u N I y�' I ro• t l r f— - -- - -- -- - -- a1 ---- -- - -- R -24 eaawAr ge` f 3 -3 r r app = ^y ' e'•. w ,i�'!''� I', •}. r v � I bT•SBY J GrJTN LI 100 `x ill HyGt. ` S FO S1 VE% WI: Et. F.I. Cd°uftiJ'Lh' OP t f sT . 'yp", .,fl ____'_ FIE. 10380 ST.. L, 103FC ,%P a� O C �I LLJ �..• A. I �A.s7 as rx I rrE.n!ctEes r�'.� � I r pea nT= �dn I' I I Si. Sc. : =F 4 Site If W NP29. 59 \1125.97 -z� -10 Map by Ro dRuaner Maps 1995 Legal Description PARCEL 'A' LOT 4, BLOCK 34 OF MCKENNA IRRIGATED TRACTS, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 OF PLATS, PAGE 43; PARCEL'B' LOT 5 IN BLOCK 34 OF MCKENNA IRRIGATED TRACTS AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 OF PLATS, PAGE 43; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WEST 387.2 FEET AND EXCEPTING ALSO THE SOUTH 10 FEET FOR SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 5 -H AND EXCEPTING ALSO THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO STATE OF WASHINGTON BY DEED RECORDED APRIL l5, 1985 UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 8504150149; IN THURSTON COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 1102 Commerce st Suite 300 `�OUND ama,wnee oz Creek Road Development Lj, Bus: t2&u 5730040 NGINEERING, /nc. Fax: 1201sr3 -0142 USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Description �NEeAS �oPaNn,Eas une�sauneenernc com 65- McKenna gravelly silt loam, 0 to 5 percent. This moderately deep, poorly drained soil is in depressions and drainage ways. It formed in glacial drift. The native vegetation is mainly hardwoods. Elevation is 50 to 500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 45 to 55 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 50 degrees F, and the average front -free period is 150 to 180 days. Typically, the surface is covered with a mat of leaves and twigs about 3 inches thick. The surface layer is black grav- elly silt loam about 9 inches thick. The upper 4 inches of the subsoil is very dark grayish brown gravelly silt loam, the next 8 inches is dark brown very gravelly silt loam, and the lower 15 inches is dark brown and dark yellowish brown, mottled very gravelly loam. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is grayish brown, dense glacial till, which crushes to very gravelly loam. Depth to the glacial till ranges from 20 to 40 inches. Included in this unit are small areas of Alderwood and Kapowsin soils on till plains, Bellingham and Norma soils in depressions, and Everett and Skipopa soils on terraces. Included areas make up about 10 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is moderate above the dense glacial till in the McKenna soil and very slow through the till. Available wa- ter capacity is moderate. Effective rooting depth is about 20 to 40 inches. A perched seasonal high water table is near or above the surface from November to April. Runoff is forded or very slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. Most areas of this unit are used as woodland. A few areas are used for hay and pasture. Red alder is the main woodland species on this unit. Among the trees of limited extent are wester red cedar and west - em hemlock. On the basis of 50 -year site estimated growth rate of an unmanaged, even -aged stand of red alder is 101 cubic feet per acre per year at 40 years of age. The main limitation affecting the harvesting of timber is the muddiness caused by seasonal wetness, Use of wheeled and tracked equipment when the soil is wet results in ruts and soil compaction. Unsurfaced roads and skid trails are soft and can be impassable when wet. Logging roads require suitable surfacing material for year -round use. Rock for road construction is not readily available on this unit. The seasonal high water table and the pending limit the use of equipment to dry periods. Disturbance of the protective layer of duff can be minimized by the careful use of wheeled and tracked equipment. Seedling mortality is the main concern in the production of timber. Reforestation can be accomplished by planting western red cedar seedlings. If the stand includes seed trees, natural reforestation by red alder occurs readily in cutover areas. The high water table and the pending inhibit root respiration and thus result in high seedling mortality. When openings are made in the canopy, invading brushy plants can delay the establishment of planted western red cedar seed- lings. Because the rooting depth is restricted by the high water table, trees are subject to frequent windthrow. Common forest understory plants are salmonberry, devilselub, vine maple, trailing blackberry, and sedges. The main limitations affecting hay and pasture are the high water table and the pending. Wetness limits the choice of plants and the period of cutting or grazing and increases the risk of winterkill. Grazing should be delayed until the soil has drained sufficiently and is firm enough to withstand trampling by livestock. Grazing when the soil is wet damages the plants and results in compaction of the surface layer. Subsurface drains, open drains, or both can lower the water table if a suitable outlet is available. Periodic mowing helps to maintain uniform growth, discourages selective grazing, and controls weeds. Animal manure can be applied periodically during the growing season. Areas that receive heavy applications should be harrowed at least once a year. This map unit is in capability subclass Vlw. 1102 Cm s. smre sae §NOGUND Creek Road Develo ment tzsntsrnTa, p ensroma wA 9saoz -oow INEERING, /na Fax: (253) 573m42 USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Description �xEEasaouaaEaa 00��oumarema.zom 111- Spanaway gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 15 percent slope. This very deep, somewhat excessively drained soil is on terraces. It formed in glacial outwash and volcanic ash. The native vegetation is mainly grasses, ferns, and few conifers. Elevation is 100 to 400 feet. The average annual precipi- tation is 45 to 55 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 51 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 150 to 200 days. Typically, the surface layer is black gravelly sandy loam about 15 inches thick. The subsoil is dark yellowish brown very gravelly sandy loam about 5 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is dark yellowish brown extremely gravelly sand. Included in this unit are small areas of Alderwood soils on till plans and Everett, Indianola, and Nisqually soils on ter- races. Also included are small areas of Spanaway soils that have a stony sandy loam surface layer and small areas of Spanaway gravelly sandy loam that have slopes of I to 3 percent. Included areas make up about 20 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is moderately rapid in the subsoil of the Spanaway soil and very rapid in the substratum. Available water capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. The unity is used mainly as hayland or pasture, as a site for homes, or as a source of gravel. It is also used as wood- land. The main limitation affecting hay and pasture is the low available water capacity during the growing season. Proper grazing practices, weed control, and fertilizer are needed to ensure maximum quality of forage. Rotation grazing helps to maintain the quality of forage. Periodic mowing helps to maintain uniform growth, discourages selective grazing, and controls weeds. Animal manure can be applied periodically during the growing season. Areas that receive heavy applications should be harrowed at least once a year. In summer, irrigation is needed to maxi- mum production of most forage crops. Sprinkler irrigation is the best method of applying water. The amount of water applied should be sufficient to wet the root zone but small enough to minimize the leaching of plant nutrients. This unit is suited to homesites. The main limitation is the slope. Cutbanks are not stable and are subject to sloughing. A plant cover can be established and maintained through proper fertilizing, seeding, mulching and shaping of the slopes. Pebbles and cobbles should be removed, particularly in areas used for lawns. In summer, irrigation is needed for law grasses, shrubs, vines, shade trees, and ornamental trees. Mulch, fertilizer, and irrigation are needed to estab- lish lawn grasses and other small- seeded plants. Topsoil can be stockpiled and used to reclaim areas disturbed during construction. The main limitation affecting septic tank absorption fields is a poor filtering capacity in the substratum. If the density of housing is moderate or high, community sewage systems are needed to prevent the contamination of water supplies caused by seepage from onsite sewage disposal systems. The slope hinders the installation of the absorption fields. Absorption lines should be installed on the contour. Douglas -fir is the main woodland species on this unit. Among the trees is limited extent are Oregon white oak, ]edge - pole pine, and red alder. Douglas -fir and Scotch pine are grown on Christmas tree plantations. On the basis of a 100 - year site curve, the mean site index for Douglas -fir is 140. On the basis of a 50 -year site curve, it is 108. The highest average growth rate of an unmanaged, even -aged stand of Douglas -fir is 145 cubic feet per acre per year at 65 years of age. ...........continued on next page ................. „o: Comm— s,.. a 840° Creek Road Develop ment ` OUVD rama, WA eeaaa ass: (253)5734040 NGINEERING,/nC. Fea. tzsztsnms: USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Description „._ °_ 1-11P—S mme@swnee,gmo.cwn I 11- Spanaway gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 15 percent slope., continued. This soil is suited to year -round logging. Unsurfaced roads and skid trails are slippery when wet. Logging roads require suitable surfacing material for year -round use. Rounded pebbles and cobbles for road construction are readily available on this unit. Disturbance of the protective layer of duff can be minimized by the careful use of wheeled and tracked equipment. Seedling establishment and seedling mortality are the main concerns in the production of timber. Reforestation can be accomplished by planting Douglas -fir seedlings. If the stand includes seed trees, natural reforestation of cutover areas by Oregon white oak and lodgepole pine occurs infrequently. Droughtiness in the surface layer re- duces the seedling survival rate. When openings are made in the canopy, invading brushy plants can delay the establishment of planted Douglas -fir seedlings. Common forest understory plants are cascade Oregon - grape, salal, western brackenfern, western swordfem, In- dian plum, and Scotch- broom. - This map unit is in capability subclass Ns 1102 C—rce St Sui1B 300 OUVD �ma.wnsaooz Creek Road Development Ta Bus: (263) 6734W §NGIN_6RING, Inc. Fax: (253( 5734142 USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Description iuEEps ur.o a�ss.xEVS xound@,ou�eeWnccom 112- Spanaway stony sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes. This very deep, somewhat excessively drained soil is on terraces. It is formed in glacial outwash and volcanic ash. The native vegetation is mainly grasses, ferns, and a few conifers. Elevation is 200 to 400 feet. The average annual pre- cipitation is 40 to 50 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 51 degrees f, and the average frost -free period is 150 to 200 days. Typically, the surface layer is black stony sandy loam about 16 inches thick. The subsoil is very dark brown gravelly sandy loam about 6 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is grayish brown extremely gravelly sand. Included in this unit are small areas of Aldersood soils on till plains, Baldhill soils on terminal moraines, and Evertt, Indianola, and Nisqually soils on terraces. Also included are small areas of Spanaway soils that have a gravelly sandy loam surface layer and small areas of Spanaway stony sandy loam that have slopes of 3 to 15 percent. Included areas make up about 15 percent of the total acreage. Permeabilitv is moderately rapid in the subsoil of the Spanaway soil and very rapid in the substratum. Available water capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. This unit is used mainly for hayland, pasture or homesites. The main limitations affecting hay and pasture are the low available water capacity and the stones on the surface. Proper grazing practices, weed control, and fertilizer are needed to ensure maximum quality of forage. Rotation grazing helps to maintain the quality of the forage. Because of the Sur- face stones, spreading animal manure, mowing, and seeding are difficult. In summer, irrigation is needed for maximum production of most forage crops. Sprinkler irrigation is the best method of applying water. The amount of water ap- plied should be sufficient to wet the root zone but small enough to minimize the leaching of plant nutrients. This unit is well suited to homesites. Pebbles, cobbles, and stones should be removed, particularly in areas used for lawns. In summer, irrigation is needed for lawn grasses, shrubs, vines, shade trees, and ornamental trees. Mulch, fertil- izer, and irrigation are needed to establish lawn grasses and other small - seeded plants. Cutbanks are not stable and are subject to sloughing. . The main limitation affecting septic tank absorption fields is a poor filtering capacity in the substratum. If the density of housing is moderate or high, community Sewage systems are needed to prevent the contamination of water supplies caused by seepage from onsite sewage disposal systems. This map unity is in capability subclass IVs Soil Map— Thurston County, Washington (Creek Road Mixed Use Devel(pement) 7i s � i Y+ Y F s �� I IV Y � p�1 AL r a N 'ers A o o Ztoo s X00 f0 aao 150 boip ee NSa1 Natural Resources M Conservation Service Web Soil Survey 2.0 11/12/2007 National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3 Soil Map - Thurston County, Washington (Creek Road Mixed Use Developement) Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.0 11112/2007 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Am as Msmr peal m Very Stony seal Original sail survey map sheets warts prepared at Publication scab. ED Area Of Interest peo0 Viewing scab and printing scab, however. may vary from the 8o1b y wet Spot anginal. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for proper . Other map measurements. J Soil Map Lure; Spsdcl unary Source Map: Natural Conservation 9ParlY Point F.W. ,_ cuxy d Web Soil Survey DRC. htlp: /Mebsoiburvay.nres.ueda.gov hp Q elowout Coordinate System: UTM Zone ION Shod Sleep Slope ® Borrow Pit This product is generated from me USDA -NRCS mNFlee data as of X Day Spot Other the version carets) listed below. a Clad D epreeaion Poetical Features Soil Survey Area Thurston County, Washington Munlelpalelas Survey Area Data Version 0, Doc 12, 2006 X Gravel Pit 0 Coles Carets) aerial images were photographed. 62111990 -, 711011990 :. GravMy spot O Uman Areas The odhophoto or Omer be. map on which the soil lines were ® LaMfill Water Features compiled and digitizes probably differs from the background A Lava Flow Oceans imagery displayed on these maps. AS a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. as MaRh ` Streams and Canals y Maisano., Trsnseoination Rids ® Mancellaneous Water Funds ® Perennial Weler I In1RAate Highways I Rock Outcrop US Routes } Saline Spot State Highways SahMY Sisal H Local Roads s Severely Eraled Spot goer Roads p Sinkhole js Slbe in Slip j Sods Spot Spoil Area o Stony Spot Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.0 11112/2007 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3 ' Sail Map— Thurston County, Washington Map Unit Legend Creek Road Mixed Use Developement Thurston County, Washington (WA067) Map Unit Symbol p Unit Name Percent ofI 65 gravelly silt loam 0 to nt slopes 44 11.1% 110 gravelly sandy loam, ercent slopes E3percent 7AcmsinAOJ 23.0 58.5% gravelly sandy loam, percent slopes 0.9 2.2% 112 stony sandy loam, 0 cent slopes 11.1 28.2% Totals for Area of Interest (AOI) 39,3 100 0% N atural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.0 11/12/2007 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 EX ZONE X ZONE X T-7i I AE VEX ?J ZONE ZONE APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 500 0 500 SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS INUNDATED BY 100, YEAR FLOOD ZONE No lose flood elevations determined. ZONE AS Base flood elevation determined. ZONE AN Flood depths of l.m 3 feet (usually areas W -cm k; base food ele.a dons determined. ZONEAO Flood depths of t re 3 feet usually shoe Bow n sloping to ain); averaged edits drer- n:ned. For ar as d all.A.1 fan lRedit, talsdties also determined ZONE A99 To be pm ested,frmn 1W -year Flood by Feaeal flood pmteaion system under rnn- da edon no base flood elevauoru dnet- ZONE V Coastal flood with velocity hazard waave auionp no base floodelezdondedermined. ZONE VE Coastal flood wish velocity haeard (wave moll; bas flood elevadon determined. FLOODWAY AREAS IN ZONE AE ZIOTHER FLOOD AREAS ZONE X Areas of Sill} year hood; areas of loll-year flt wnhamragedepthofl¢ to lfawt with drainage area lam than t square mile; and areas protected W levee from 100-yee flood. OTHER AREAS ZONE X as plain. erminedrobeourside5tlbyearfood- plain. ZONE O Areas In which flood Final me unddm traded. UNDEVELOPED COASTAL BARRIERS} ® F \\ identified Idednf" aherwlse t %l Im Protected Areas par basis, area, am dmmally lmmd wnhm or adjacent in special food ed area. Floodplars Sound, -- Floodway Boundary -- Zone D Boundary - Boundary Dividing Special Nord Hazard , nal and Il undary Dwours, Areas of Dlf. fl rims Within f Cs N game Flood a rem az Special Flood Ha card Zones. ece FbM Elevation Une; Elevation in Feet- -�� Cass Section Line IEL 9871 Gaze Flood El—for in fee Whet. Uniform W,INh Zones Ril partner Reference Mark am 1.5 River Mile ed uama F -MIT on-u no This map bites nm,en at whim mar dare bean mom sonewi n 1. Fat the lareal ort Inlo,maunn smrnt Nine GeoResources, LLC Ph. 253 - 896.1011 5007 Pacific Hwy. E., Ste. 20 Fx. 253- 896.2633 Fife, Washington 98424.2648 Sound Engineering, Inc. 1102 Commerce Street, Ste. 300 Tacoma, WA 98402 Mr. Jeremy Haug August 29, 2007 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Creek Road Residential Development NE Creek Road SE Yelm, Washington JobNo:Avila.CreekRd. RG INTRODUCTION This preliminary report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering and hydrogeologic services for the proposed Creek Road Residential site to be constructed east of NE Creek Road and north of SR 507 in Yelm, Washington. The location of the site is illustrated on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. Our understanding of the project is based on our discussions with you, our review of the documents provided and our experience in the site area. We understand that the site will be developed as a multi - family development with access from both Creek Road and SR 507. The site development will include typical roadways, parking areas, and utilities. We further understand that stormwater infiltration systems are proposed for the site. The exact number and locations of the stormwater systems have not been determined at this time. This report provides preliminary geotechnical engineering recommendations and design criteria, and preliminary storm water infiltration rates for the site. A site plan was not available at the time of our report. We have included a general site layout as Figure 2. Our services were provided at your request. The purpose of our services is to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site to develop geotechnical recommendations and design criteria for the proposed site development, and to determine a preliminary design infiltration rate for on -site stormwater infiltration. Specifically, our scope of services includes the following: 1. Review the available geologic, hydrogeologic and geotechnical data for the site area. 2. Explore the shallow subsurface conditions at the site by monitoring the completion of a series of trackhoe test pits at the site. 3. Collect select soils samples from the explorations, several of which will be submitted for laboratory testing. 4. Address the appropriate geotechnical regulatory requirements for the proposed site development, per any Pierce County requirements. 5. Provide geotechnical recommendations for site grading including site preparation, subgrade preparation, fill placement criteria, suitability of on -site soils for use as structural fill, temporary and permanent cut and fill slopes, and drainage and erosion control measures. OCT i a 200? Avila — Creek Road August 29, 2007 Page 2 5. Provide recommendations and design criteria for conventional foundation and floor slab support, including allowable bearing capacity, subgrade modulus, lateral resistance values and estimates of settlement. Specific criteria can be provided based on your building design loads, if provided. 7. Provide recommendations and design criteria for the design of conventional subgrade /retaining walls, including backfill and drainage requirements, lateral design loads, and lateral resistance values. B. Provide recommendations for pavement subgrade preparation. 9. Provide our opinion with regard to the feasibility of on -site stormwater infiltration /dispersal, and if appropriate provide individual infiltration rates for each system. 10, Provide appropriate IBC seismic design parameters for the proposed residential structures. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions - The project site is located in the central portion of the Yelm glacial outwash plain. The site is currently developed with a single family residence and trailer in the west, commercial buildings in the southeast with the remaining portions as pasture land. A BPA transmission line traverses the east portion of the site. The area is bounded by existing commercial and residential development and vacant lots. The site has been historically used as agricultural pasture. The southeast portion of the site was recently developed as a commercial building with a infiltration pond to the north. The storm water facilities are approximately 4 to 5 feet below grade. A paved roadway traverses the south portion of the site, related to several commercial properties. Several stockpiles of waste materials are located in the south portion of the site, likely related to previous construction activities. The ground surface at the site is generally flat. We observed a broad drainage swale with localized surface water in the east portion of the site at the time of our reconnaissance. The swale is identified as Yelm Creek which flows to the south. We understand that a wetland area has been mapped adjacent to the creek. The site is vegetated with pasture grass with scattered brush and isolated evergreen trees. The northwest portion of the site has a cluster of trees. A larger number of trees also occurs along the east drainage swale area. Geologic Conditions The site is situated in the central portion of the Yelm glacial outwash plain. The existing topography, as well as the surficial and shallow subsurface soils in the area, are the result of the most recent Vashon stade of the Fraser glaciation that occurred between about 12,000 and 15,000 years ago, and weathering and erosion that has occurred since that time. A description of the surficial soils is included in the "Site Soils" section of this report. In general the site is underlain by Vashon glacial recessional outwash. The recessional outwash material consists of sandy gravel with cobbles and occasional boulders, and minor silt. The outwash material is in a loose to medium dense condition near the surface (0.5 feet to approximately 2 feet) and becomes medium dense to dense below that depth. Based on our experience in the area, we expect that the site area is underlain by glacial till at depth, likely several 10s of feet. Avila - Creek Road August29, 2007 Page 3 Site Soils The NCRS - SCS (Thurston County Soil Conservation Survey) has mapped the soils in the site area as Spanaway gravelly sandy loam (110) and Spanaway stony sandy loam (112). Both these soils are described as having a rapid permeability with a "slight' erosion hazard. An isolated area of McKenna gravelly silt (65) is mapped in the Ye)m Creek area. The McKenna soils have little or no erosion hazard. A copy of the SCS map is included as Figure 3. We observed no active erosion in the site area during our reconnaissance. Based on our observations, the site soils appear to have little or no susceptibility to erosion, particularly where vegetation is established. Subsurface Conditions The subsurface conditions in the site area were evaluated by reviewing the geologic maps and and monitoring the excavation of test pits at random locations across the site. In general, recessional outwash was encountered to the full depth explored in the ten test pit explorations that extended up to 14.0 feet. The outwash material consisted of sandy gravel with cobbles and occasional boulders. The sail classification method used is included as Figure 4: Copies of the test pit logs area are included Figure 5. Based on our site observations and experience, the soils at the site are generally consistent. A grain size test were performed on a soil sample collected at the likely location and depth of an infiltration system. The grain size tests indicate the soils are poorly graded gravelly sand (SP) with cobbles and boulders. A copy of the grain size test is included in Appendix A. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL Based on our site observations, explorations and laboratory test results, we conclude that the site is suitable for the proposed high density residential development. It is also our opinion that the native site soils are suitable for the infiltration of stormwater, provided additional explorations are completed in the proposed infiltration areas, and the infiltration rates provided herein are confirmed. The Type A soils encountered at the site will allow infiltration of stormwater from both the paved areas and the roof areas of the structures. Based on the soils encountered in the subsurface explorations at the site and our understanding of the proposed site development, conventional earthwork and foundation support is feasible for the project. Pertinent conclusions and preliminary geotechnical recommendations regarding the design and construction of the proposed residential development are presented below. Landslide Hazards No slopes over 15 percent occur at the site. No evidence of soil movement was observed at the site. Seismic Hazards According to the Seismic Zone Map of the United States contained in Figure 16 -2 of the 1997 UBC (Uniform Building Code) and IBC (International Building Code), the project site is located within Seismic Risk Zone 3. Based on the subsurface conditions observed at the site, we interpret the structural site conditions to corresponds with a seismic Soil Profile type Sm (Site Class "D") as defined by Table 16 -J (UBC) and Table 1615. 1.1 in the 2003 IBC documents, respectively. These conditions were assumed to Avila — Creek Road August 20, 2007 Page 4 be representative for the conditions beyond the depths explored. Structures located at the site that are constructed in accordance with the appropriate seismic criteria will have the same risk as other designed structures in the Puget Sound area. Erosion Hazards Erosion hazard areas are defined by the City of Yelm as those areas defined by the USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) soil survey maps as having a "slight to moderate" erosion hazard. The subject property is located in an area mapped by the SCS as Spanaway stoney and gravelly sandy loam If 10 and 112). It is our opinion that any potential erosion hazard of the site soils during site development is not a limiting factor for the proposed development. Temporary and permanent erosion control measures should be installed and maintained during construction or as soon as practical thereafter to limit the influx of additional water to exposed or disturbed areas. Erosion control measures may include, but should not be limited to, berms and swales with check dams to direct surface water runoff, ground cover /protection in exposed areas and silt fences where appropriate. Graded areas should be shaped to avoid concentrations of runoff onto cut or fill slopes, natural slopes or other erosion - sensitive areas. Temporary ground cover /protection such as jute matting, excelsior matting, woad chips or clear plastic sheeting may be used until the permanent erosion protection is established. EARTHWORK The following section of this report addresses our general conclusions and recommendations regarding site preparation, structural fill, and the re -sue of onsite soils. Site Preparation Areas to be graded should be cleared of deleterious matter including any existing structures, foundations, abandoned utility lines, debris and vegetation. The portions of the site still covered with vegetation should be stripped of any organic -laden soils. We anticipate stripping depths to be on the order of 2 to 6 inches, although localized areas of deeper organics may occur in areas of heavy organics or low lying areas. The stripped topsoil may be stockpiled and later used for erosion control and landscaping /revegetation. The areas of stockpiled material on the south portion of the site should be considered unsuitable. Materials that cannot be used for landscaping or erosion control should be removed from the project site. Where placement of fill material is required, the stripped /exposed subgrade areas should be compacted to a firm and unyielding surface prior to placement of any fill. We recommend that trees be removed by overturning in fill areas so that a majority of the roots are removed. Excavations for tree stump removal should be backfilled with structural fill compacted to the densities described in the Structural Fill section of this report. We recommend that a member of our staff evaluate the exposed subgrade conditions after removal of vegetation and topsoil stripping is completed and prior to placement of structural fill. The exposed subgrade soil should be proofrolled with heavy rubber -tired equipment during dry weather or probed with a 1/2- inch - diameter steel rod during wet weather conditions, Any soft, loose or otherwise unsuitable areas delineated during proofrolling or probing should be recompacted, if practical, or over - excavated and replaced with structural fill, based on the recommendations of our site representative. 1 Avila - Creek Road August 29, 2007 Page 5 Structural Fill All material placed as fill associated with mass grading or as utility trench backfill should be placed as structural fill. The structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts of appropriate thickness to allow adequate and uniform compaction of each lift. Fill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of MOD (maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM D- 1557). The appropriate lift thickness will depend on the fill characteristics and compaction equipment used. We recommend that the appropriate lift thickness be evaluated by our field representative during construction. We recommend that our representative be present during site grading activities to observe the work and perform field density tests. The suitability of material for use as structural fill will depend on the gradation and moisture content of the soil. As the amount of fines (material passing US No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult to achieve. During wet weather, we recommend use of well - graded sand and gravel with less than 5 percent (by weight) passing the US No. 200 sieve based on that fraction passing the 3/4 -inch sieve. If prolonged dry weather prevails during the earthwork and foundation installation phase of construction, higher fines content (up to 10 to 12 percent) will be acceptable. Material placed for structural fill should be free of debris, organic matter, trash and cobbles greater than 6- inches in diameter. The moisture content of the fill material should be adjusted as necessary for proper compaction. Suitability of On -Site Materials as Fill During dry weather construction, any nonorganic on -site soil may be considered for use as structural fill; provided it meets the criteria described above in the structural fill section and can be compacted as recommended. If the material is over - optimum moisture content when excavated, it will be necessary to aerate or dry the soil prior to placement as structural fill. We generally did not observe the site soils to be excessively moist at the time of our subsurface exploration program. However, laboratory test results indicated that many of our samples had moisture contents above optimum moisture. The soils at the site generally consist of a fine to coarse sand with gravel, cobbles and boulders. These soils are generally comparable to "common borrow' material and will be suitable for use as structural fill provided the moisture content is maintained within 2 percent of optimum moisture. However, the outwash does appear to have a significant amount of cobbles and boulders, which may require removal in the upper two feet of fill. Care should be taken when placing and compacting granular material over 3 inches in size near utility lines. Fill material within 2 feet of the foundation, slab or roadway subgrades should contain no material greater than 6 inches in size. This will result in localize pressure points and potential cracks in the concrete. All fill material in building and driveway areas should be placed as described in the "Structural Fill" section of this report and compacted to at least 95 percent of the MOD. If fill material is imported to the site for wet weather construction, we recommend that it be clean sand and gravel mixture, such as high quality pit run with less than 5 percent fines, or crushed rock. Cut and Fill Slopes. 1 Avila — Creek Road August 29, 2007 Page 6 All job site safety issues and precautions are the responsibility of the contractor providing services /work. The following cut/fill slope guidelines are provided for planning purposes only, Temporary cut slopes will likely be necessary during grading operations or utility installation. As a general guide, temporary slopes of 1.5H:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical) of flatter may be used for temporary cuts in the upper 3 to 4 feet of the soils that are weathered to a loose /medium dense condition. Where ground water seepage is encountered, flatter temporary slopes may be required. These guidelines assume that all surface loads are kept at a minimum distance of at least one half the depth of the cut away from the top of the slope and that significant seepage is not present on the slope face. Flatter cut slopes will be necessary where significant raveling or seepage occurs, We recommend a maximum slope of 2HA V for permanent cut and fill slopes in areas of medium dense sand and gravel. Where 2H:1 V slopes are not feasible in these soils, retaining structures should be considered. Where retaining structures are greater than 4 -feet in height (bottom of footing to top of structure) or have slopes of greater than 15 percent above them, they should be engineered. It should be recognized that slopes of this nature do ravel and require occasional maintenance. Where raveling or maintenance is unacceptable, we recommend that flatter slopes or retaining systems be considered. Foundation Support Based on the encountered subsurface soil conditions encountered across the site, we recommend that spread footings for the new residences be founded on medium dense native outwash soils or on structural fill that extends to suitable native soils. The soil at the base of the excavations should be disturbed as little as possible. All loose, soft or unsuitable material should be removed or recompacted, as appropriate. A representative from our firm should observe the foundation excavations to determine if suitable bearing surfaces have been prepared, particularly in the areas where the foundation will be situated in fill material. We recommend a minimum width of 2 feet for isolated footings and at least 16 inches for continuous wall footings for structures of two stories or less. Where taller structures are considered, site specific recommendations for the proposed loads can be developed. All footing elements should be embedded at least 18 inches below grade for frost protection. We recommend a minimum width of 2 feet for isolated footings and at least 16 inches for continuous wall footings. Footings founded as described above can be designed using an allowable soil bearing capacity of 2,500 psf (pounds per square foot) for combined dead and long -term live loads. The weight of the footing and any overlying backfill may be neglected. The allowable bearing value may be increased by one -third for transient loads such as those induced by seismic events or wind loads. Lateral loads may be resisted by friction on the base of footings and floor slabs and as passive pressure on the sides of footings.. We recommend that an allowable coefficient of friction of 0.35 be used to calculate friction between the concrete and the underlying soil. Passive pressure may be determined using an allowable equivalent fluid density of 300 pcf (pounds per cubic foot). Factors of safety have been applied to these values. We estimate that settlements of footings designed and constructed as recommended will be less than 1 inch, for the anticipated load conditions, with differential settlements between comparably loaded footings of 1/2 inch or less. Most of the settlements should occur essentially as loads are being applied. However, Avila - Creek Road Augusr29.2007 Page 7 disturbance of the foundation subgrade during construction could result in larger settlements than predicted. Floor Slab Support Slabs -on- grade, if constructed, should be supported on the medium dense native outwash soils or on structural fill prepared as described above. We recommend that floor slabs be directly underlain by a capillary break material with minimum 6 -inch thickness of coarse sand, pea gravel, or gravel containing less than 3 percent fines. The drainage material should be placed in one lift and compacted to an unyielding condition. A synthetic vapor barrier is recommended to control moisture migration through the slabs. This is of particular importance where the foundation elements are underlain by the silty till or lake sediments, or where moisture migration through the slab is an issue, such as where adhesives are used to anchor carpet or tile to the slab. A thin layer of sand may be placed over the vapor barrier and immediately below the slab to protect the liner during steel and /or concrete placement. A subgrade modulus of 400 kcf (kips per cubic foot) may be used for floor slab design. We estimate that settlement of the floor slabs designed and constructed as recommended, will be 1/2 inch or less over a span of 50 feet. Pavement and Driveway Subgrade We understand that asphalt pavements will likely be used for the driveways and parking areas. All structural fill should be compacted according to our recommendations given in the "Structural Fill" section. Specifically, the upper 2 feet of soils underlying pavement section should be compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM: D -1557, and all soils below 2 feet should be compacted to at least 90 percent. The subgrade areas should be proof - rolled with a loaded dump truck or heavy compactor to verify that a firm and unyielding surface has been achieved. Any areas where this proof - rolling operation reveals soft, organic, or pumping soils at or closely beneath the pavement subgrade should be overexcavated to a maximum depth of 8 inches and replaced with a suitable structural fill material. Stormwater Infiltration Rates Based on the soils encountered in our preliminary explorations and the results of the grain size tests, we conclude that the infiltration of storm water is feasible at the site. The thick underlying deposits of recessional outwash soils have adequate permeability and storage capacity to infiltrate storm water from the site, provided adequate design, construction and maintenance practices are used. Preliminary storm water infiltration rates for the site soils were determined in accordance with the Yelm/Thurston County Stormwater Manual guidelines, Table 1. Grain size distribution tests were performed on select soil samples collected from the test pits. The results of the grain size test are included in Appendix A. Based on the soils observed in the test pits and the laboratory test results, it is our opinion that a design infiltration rate of 60 inches per hour may be used for the infiltration system if located in the shallow soils, less and 12 feet below the existing site grades. An appropriate factor of safety should be applied to this value. Once the locations of the infiltration systems are determined, additional explorations will be required to verify the soils and the depths. Suspended solids could eventually clog the soil and reduce the infiltration rate for retention ponds or trenches. Because of the potential for clogging, we recommend that an appropriate factor of safety be utilized in the design. To reduce potential clogging of the infiltration systems, the Avila - Creek Road August29,2007 Page a infiltration ponds or galleries should not be connected to the stormwater runoff system until after construction is complete and the site areas are landscaped and paved. Temporary systems may be utilized through construction, or the pond /trench bottom left a minimum of 1 -foot high during construction and later excavated to the design grade. Periodic sweeping of the paved areas will help extend the life of the infiltration system. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for Mr. Mike Avila and the project consultants for use in design and construction of the various components of this project. The data and report can be utilized for bidding or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and recommendations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions, as they may vary both vertically and laterally. If there are changes in the locations or assumptions stated for this project, the conclusions and recommendations presented may not be fully applicable. If design changes are made, we should review the proposed changes to verify the applicability of our conclusions and recommendations. Additional explorations will be required in the stormwater infiltration areas. Variations in subsurface conditions are possible between the explorations and may also occur with time. Sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation should be provided by our firm during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those antici- pated, and to evaluate whether earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with contract plans and specifications. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. No other conditions, expressed or implied, should be understood. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. Please call if you have any questions regarding this submittal, or if we can provide additional services. Yours very truly, GeoResources, LLC I : bp. b r DOCD Avila Figure 31 ! O Attach ments, Figure 2 - Site Plan Figure 3 - NRCS SCS Map Figure 4 - Soil Classification System Figure 5 -Test Pit Logs Appendlx A -Grain Size Analysis °a F y 2 n v�, r i s s THAI . ' -.: Farr priers h+l Kenna .� a .� 4V A S w.,:1 N G a4 al Ill Ny.;' t' 1}-ir, ;s III A Approximate Site Location It Not to Scale GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 Site Vicinity Map Fife, Washington 98424 NE Creek Road Phone: 253- 896 -1011 Yelm, Washington Fax: 253 -896 -2633 File: Avila.CreekRA September 2007 Figure 9 20 to 39 PERCENT SLOPE AREA \PPROXIMATE LOCATION TP -1 ■ 40 PERCENT OR GREATER SLOPE AREA OF TEST PIT Scale: 1" = 100' FAR PAR %7 GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 Fife, Washington 98424 Ph: 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 FIGURE 2A- Site Plan Project : Creek Road Residential Development Location : Yelm, Washington Client : Mike Avila Date : October 2007 Job #: Avila.CreekRd.SP TMe�pactsrnt r � 3®p, �•. , wns • � 1 TP -7 ■ t TP-6 ■ TP -5 ■ iy ! u 1 � i ., �; 643 @34@@p@e . ` • i. �+ ', TP -9 ■ TP -10 ■ TP -3 ■ rr c4DR34 @ @0@4 ae3oie@@rau', . � �'r'�° aflRV@9408s@ ♦' � �, i TP -1 ■ i . i ' `4Gq '6@3h/00d00 0430: *4 "603 _ I .a � il, �SK,igry@yApS@1: tR'i - AABALY�98pgY1736S ,��Bbr4?1 :':425 2883094@4" X34 "82@0709 , 4430M786 M a�43@•eaa@R@4 �,' rl ' % rte.. MOM ! APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST PIT TP -1 NOR to seeps Qeoftsourc��, L�C� fts Layout, 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 Fite, Washington 98424 ME (Creak Road Phone: 253- 896 -1011 Y(Munl, /wrm'qNrngR(c))Pn) Fan: 253- 896 -2633 Approximate Site Location 1 GeoResources,LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 ' Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253- 896 -1011 Fax: 253- 896 -2633 Not to Scale NRCS SCS Soils Map NE Creek Road Yelm, Washington File: Avila.CreekR&SCS September 2007 Figure 3 SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP GROUP NAME SYMBOL GRAVEL CLEAN GW WELL - GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL GRAVEL GP POORLY - GRADED GRAVEL COARSE GRAINED More than 50% SOILS Of Coarse Fraction Retained on GRAVEL GM SILTY GRAVEL No.4 Sieve WITH FINES - GC CLAYEY GRAVEL SAND CLEAN SAND SW WELL - GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND More than 50% Retained on No. 200 Sieve SP POORLY- GRADED SAND More than 50% Of Coarse Fraction SAND SM SILTY SAND Passes WITH FINES No, 4 Sieve SC CLAYEY SAND SILT AND CLAY INORGANIC ML SILT FINE GRAINED CL CLAY SOILS Liquid limit Less than 50 ORGANIC OIL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT AND CLAY INORGANIC MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT More than 50% CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY Passes No 200 Sieve Liquid Limit 50 or more ORGANIC ON ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES. - SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS: 1. Field classification is based on visual examination of soil Dry- Absence of moisture, tlry to the touch in general accordance with ASTM D2488 -90. Moist Damp, but no visible water 2. Soil classification using laboratory tests is based on ASTM 02487 -90. Wet- Visible free water or saturated usually soil is 3. Description of soil density or consistency are based on obtained from below water table interpretation of blow taunt tlata, visual appearance of soils, and or test data. GeoResources, LLC Soil Classification System 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 3477 Harris Road SE Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253 -896 -1011 Kitsap County, Washington Fax: 253- 896 -2633 JOB# WilleyEstates.HarrisRtl.ul August 2007 Pigure4 Test Pit TP -t Location: South center of site, south of roadway (See Figure 2) Depth (ft) Soil Tvoe - Description 0.0-0.5 TS Sod over Topsoil w/ gravel 0.5- 1.0 SM Dk Brn si SAND w/ gravel, cobbles (loose, moist) 1.0-3.0 SP Brown cobbly SAND w/ gravel, (loose to med. dense, moist) 3.0-7.0 GP Brn spy GRAVEL w/ cobbles, boulders (med. dense to dense, moist) 7.0-12.0 SP Brn gravelly SAND w/ occ. cobbles (dense, moist) Terminated at 12.0 feet below ground surface Minor caving observed No groundwater seepage observed Test Pit TP -2 Location: Bottom of existing pond, north of commercial site (See Figure 2) Depth (t) Soil T Description 0.0-4.0 GP Brn sdy GRAVEL w/ cobbles, occ. boulders (dense, moist) 4.0-7.0 GP Brn spy GRAVEL w/ cobbles, boulders (FeO Staming)(dense, moist) 7.0-11.0 SP Brn SAND w/ gravel, occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 11.0 feet below the ground surface Minor caving observed No groundwater seepage observed Test Pit TP -3 Location: South Center, North of roadway by fence (See Figure 2) _ Depth (ft) Soil Tvpe Description 0.0-1.0 TS Sod over Topson w/ gravel 1.0-2.0 SM Dk Brn si SAND w/ gravel, cobbles (loose, moist) 2.0-8.0 GP Brown cobbly GRAVEL w/ sand, boulders (loose to dense, moist) 8.0 - 12.5 SP Brn gravelly SAND w/ occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 12/5 feet below the ground surface Moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed GeoResources, LLC Test Pit Logs 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 Fife, NW Corner Yelm Avenue SE & Creek Street Washington 98424 Phone: 253 -896 -1011 Yeim, Washington Fax: 253 - 896 -2633 JOB: DevelopmentatYelm .Yelm6CornersRetall.TP May 2007 Figure 5 Test Pit TP -4 Location: Ctr east pasture area (SEE Figure 2) 0.0 - 1.0 TS Sod over Topsoil w/ gravel V 1.0- 1.5 SM Dk Brn si SAND w/ gravel, cobbles (loose, moist) 1.5 - 7.0 GP Brown s GRAVEL W/ cobbles, boulders (loose to dense, moist) 7.0 - 11.5 SP iOrg Brn gravelly SAND w occ. cobbles (Min. FeO Stain)(dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 11.5 feet below the ground surface Minor caving observed No groundwater seepage observed, but FeO staining 8 to 10 ft. i Location: NE corner by wetland area (SEE Figure 2) Test Pit TP -5 0.0 -1.0 TS 1.0 -4.0 SM 4.0 - 14.0 SP 000 over 1 opsoil w/ gravel, occ. cobbles Drk Brn si SAND w/ gravel, cobbles, boulders (12 — 16 inches) (loose to m. dense, moist to wet) (appears to perch water t east) �rg Brn SAND w/ gravel, occ. cobbles (med, dense to dense, moist) Terminated at 14.0 feet below the ground surface Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed, but wet @ 1.5 to 2.5 ft. :;� _ocation: NW corner of east pasture (SEE Figure 2) 0.0 -0.8 TS 0.8 -2.0 GM 2.0 -5.0 GP 5.0 -11.5 SP 1 Logged by BPS Test Pit TP -6 �o0 over Topsoil w/ gravel, occ. cobbles Dk Brn si GRAVEL w/ cobbles, occ. boulders (loose to M. dense, moist) Brn say GRAVEL wl occ. cobbles/boufders (med. dense to dense, moist) Bin gravelly SAND w/ occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 11.5 feet below the ground surface Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253- 896 -1011 Fax 253 -896 -2633 Test Pit Logs Creek Street Development Yelm, Washington JOB: Avila.CreekSt.TP August 2007 Figure 5 Test Pit TP-7 Location: East of trailer house, NE corner of site (SEE Figure 2) Depth (ft) Soil Tvoa Description 0.0-1.0 TS Sod over Topsoil w/ gravel, occ. cobbles 1.0-2.0 S Drk Brn si SAND w/ gravel, cobbles, boulders (12 — 16 inches) 2.0-65 GP (loose to m. dense, moist) Org Brn soy GRAVEL w/ occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) 6.5 -10.5 SP Brn gravelly SAND w/ cobbles, occ. boulders (dense, moist) Terminated at 10.5 feet below the ground Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed Test Pit TP -S Location: NW corner of site, pasture (SEE Figure 2) 0.0 - 1.0 TS Sod over Topsoil w/ gravel, occ, cobbles 1.0- 1.5 SM Drk Brn si SAND w/ gravel, cobbles, boulders (12 inches) (m. dense, moist) 1.5-55 GP Brn soy GRAVEL w/ occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) 5.5 - 9.5 SP Brn gravelly SAND w/ cobbles, occ, boulders (dense, moist to damp) i eliminated at 9.5 feet below the ground surface Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed Test Pit TP -9 Location: Southwest pasture area, 100 feet from house (SEE Figure 2) 0.0 - 1.0 TS Sod over Topsoil w/ gravel, occ. cobbles 1.0 - 1.5 SM Drk Brn si SAND w/ gravel, cobbles, boulders (loose to M. dense, moist) 1.5-50 GP Brn sdy GRAVEL w/ occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) 5.0 - 9.0 SP Brn gravelly SAND w/ cobbles, occ. boulders (dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 9.5 feet below the ground surface Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253 - 896 -1011 Fax: 253- 896 -2633 Test Pit Logs NW Corner Yelm Avenue SE & Creek Street Yelm, Washington JOB: DevefopmentatYelm .YelmSCornersRetail.TP May 2007 Figure 5 Test Pat TP -10 Location: South pasture area, 50 feet fence (SEE Figure 2) 0.5 -1.5 SM 1.5 -55 GP 5.5 -11.0 SP roc over I opsoil w/ gravel, occ. cobbles Drk Brn si SAND w/ gravel, cobbles, boulders (loose to m. dense, moist) Brn sdy GRAVEL w/ occ, cobbles (dense, moist to damp) Brn gravelly SAND w/ cobbles, occ. boulders (dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 9.5 feet below the ground surface Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed GeoResources, LLC Test Pit Logs 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 NW Corner Yelm Avenue SE & Creek Street Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253- 896 -1011 Yelm, Washington Fax: 253- 896 -2633 JOB: DevelopmentatYelm .VelmSCOrnersRetail.TP May 2007 Figure 5 APPENDIX "A" 5007 Pacific Wlghmray c, S lice 2C Fife, WA. 98424 Weight Retained I Percentage Specification Difica (253)696 -1011 Fax (253) 396 -2633 Cumulative Retained Passed Grain Size Analysis 4° Project Number: Avila.CreekSt Date Sampled: ..8/17/2007 Project Name: Creek Street Residential Plat Sampled by: - BPB Client:. Mike Avila Date Tested 8122/2007 Sample ID: S -1 Tested by -:. bpb Description: - - lest . pit sample bag TP 3 932.5 Screen Weight Retained I Percentage Specification Summary Intlivitlual Cumulative Retained Passed Max. Min. 4° rem _ 0.0 100.0% 70.2% Coarse 10,9% Fine 3" rem -: 0.0 i..' 100,0% 11/2° rem '..0.0 ' °- 100.0% 3/4" 932.5 - y32.5 ., 70.2% 29,8% 3/8" 100.1 1032.6;' ]7.7% 22.3 % 41.11-f. 9rev¢I' - �- #4 45.3 777-79 81.1% 18.9% #10 26.2 1104,1'- 83.1% 16.9% 2.0% Coarse 11.4% Medium 4.1% Fine 020 66.3 711904 -- 88.1 % 11.9% 040 85.7 '- 12581:: 94.6% 5.4% 060 36.0 1120R.1 ' 1 97.3% 27% 6176 % - .Sand 0100 13.1 13052 �. 96.3% 1.7 g200 5.0 -- 1310.2¢. 98.6% 1.4% -1.4% Fees' an D.= 33.55 D,o2 24.324 Dis- 1.5671 D,o- 26,959 D,,r= 19053 Dm= 77257 Cs= 37.2 Cc = 18.56 USCS Classiticatian: Dust Ratio 0.251 Moisture % 2.9% Sand Equivalent Grain Size in millimeters Input Data: Wet +Tare 1551.1 Dry +Tare .1512.7 arm 1 -1/2" AW +Tare 1497.9 19 After Wash 1313.5 #4 - #200 % #10 Dry Weight 1328.3 Depth: #40 Moisture 2.9% Sieve izes 3" 75 1 -1/2" 37.5 3/4" 19 3l8" 9.5 #4 4.75 #10 2 #20 0.85 #40 0.425 #60 0.25 #100 0.15 #200 0.075 ' Gravel - Sand 4.75 0 ' 4.75 100 Sand - Silt ' 0.075 1 0 0.075 1 100 Parameters: it -J V ,. ,_ 1�, - �, l.ii ,� �y, � ,. F�YTe 4 1 .. .. - .. _. •y �. if SjlL�J1r4 _.$ -.if �- rSTt££•_ /'a, —?f�9 IT ', TV 13- io. August 26, 2007 WETLAND REVIEW AND DELINEATION 1 :0 ZIT . :i: , i _.r c_ r r NW %, NW Y., SECTION 29 (17N -2E) Prepared for: Mike Avilla Pacific Rim Real Estate 315 39h Ave SW, Suite 8 Puyallup WA 98373 Wetlands Forest Management GPS Services Consufting 204 Senn Rd Chehalis WA 98532 Office/Fax: 360- 262 -9226 Home: 360262 -3806 Mobile: 360- 520-0479 E -mail: gcjones @localaccess.c im 1 ' August 26, 2007 City of Yelm Attn: Grant Beck P O Box 479 Yelm WA 98597 RE: Wetland Review and Delineation 4'F1i Uii:i.T.73 s , On Saturday, August 2e, I reviewed a site as requested by Mike Avilla, Pacific Rim Real Estate. They are planning on developing the property. He had checked with Pierce County Planning and found the site mapped as having "hydric soils". The parcel number is 64303400400 in the NW %, NW Y., Section 29 (17N -2E) at 10520 Creek Rd SE in Yelm. ON SITE The property is mostly pasture with two residences and outbuilding on the west end of the property. Yelm Creek, a type "S" flows northwesterly through the east end of the parcel. Upon reviewing the area described and having completed training based on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual Technical Report Y -87 -1 (1987 Manual), as provided for in the training materials developed in conjunction with Section 307 (e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 for Wetland Delineator Certification Program, I found said parcel to have jurisdictional wetlands. DETERMINATION METHOD: "Routine ", Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (1997) No. 96- 94. SOILS The soils are mapped as poorty drained "hydric" #110 Mckenna gravelly ashy loam and somewhat excessively drained #110 Spanaway gravelly sandy loam. Mckenna is moderately deep to dense till formed in glacial drift in depressions and drainage ways. Spanaway formed in very strongly weathered ancient glacial drift on glacial hills, terraces and terrace escarpments. Soil pits #1 and 3 are in Mckenna and #2 and 4 are in Spanaway. Soil pits marked with blue painted 3' wooden stakes and blue flagging. HYDROLOGY: I found indicators of hydrology to be at or within 12" of the soil surface in the area designated as wetlands. See drawing. VEGETATION: Vegetation plots are marked with green painted 3' wooden stakes and green Flagging. See — --- -attachedpictures and data fortes ------ --- --- ---- -... -- ---- - -- - CONCLUSION: Per Yelm City Critical Areas 14.08.100 Wetland Review /Identification Procedures: WETLAND: The area designated as wetland meets the hydrology, soils and vegetation requirements of Jurisdictional Wetlands. The wetland boundary marked with red/ orange painted T wooden stakes and pink flagging. CATEGORIZATION: Per Washington State Department of Ecology's Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington #04-06-025, the wetland is a Class IV Wetlands. See attached rating fors. BUFFER: Per Yelm City Critical Areas 14.08.100 (F) 6a "Standard Buffer Widths ", Class IV, the Wetland Buffer Width is 50 feet with the possibility of reduction as allowed under 14.08.100 (F) 6d "Wetland Buffer Width Averaging ", with a minimum of 75% or 35 feet, whichever is greater. Please call with any � /(�estions or comments. ' Greg Jones, President Enclosures: Wetland Drawing Maps: Vicinity Map County Ortho/Parcel Map County Welland Map Contour Map Soils Map Wetland Data For Wetlands Rating Photos Qualifications cc: Mike Avilla, Pacific Rim Real Estate Wetland Delineation _Forestry Services GPS Services 204 Senn Rd Chehalis WA 98532 Office/Fax: 360- 262 -9226 Mobile: 520-0479 Home: 360- 2623806 E -mail: gciones@localaocess.com X i DATE DRAWNBY 0 200' TRAVERSE W/ - rwmazeAe xaers � REVISION SER/NLS� - Ra,Ewna�,o U] -104 try X111 I T- i80AVILLA.TRV I SCALE DATE DRAWNBY 2DO Fum 8-2e -2007 I ch. Junes JOB REVISION SHEET U] -104 try X111 Tmveme PC 1 AVILLA WETLAND DRAWING PARCEL #64303400400 NW114, NW114, SEC. 29 (17N -2E) PARCEL #64303400400 \ 11.06AC. 3 4l UPLAND AREA wmn,vo.snuse ncernnav 420,439 FTz RMZ 9.7AC 61,215 F, /.4 AC. 'ti� y Greg /arses 204 Sma RE Chehalis, WA 98532 360.261 -9126 a wurvo.saua warnrrav wmn,vo.snuse ncernnav m,wo e,wm'wvr Owv mnnncemz,vrzme. ».z,smrz.nc. 'ti� y Greg /arses 204 Sma RE Chehalis, WA 98532 360.261 -9126 SOS20 Creek St Se Yelm WA � / � 98597 -9610 US '7!0 Fitt i,: _.I ibe safest Notes: _ tiro =s of day to drive.. 'Only text visible within note field will _] il'n lure fir °hn° Driver's Ed for the Real World. rl. he•a J MgPVUES? UAllstate, MAPpUE S! ao3 m `Y a Pe.o V ®11 it -Ii, Cby ie r �1 ','• 4, 1C31d AV,, '. Q i Five Corners Y ladcrri Ln Sr (- c s; = m Id2h Am• Sr. I IaIh A:c. r]r irk ss H °s Q L3'_kcr L': b_ ` All nghts_reserve .-IJ5e Subject to_LicenslCopy_rl2ht This map is informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. MapQuest and its suppliers assume no responsibility for any loss or delay resulting from such use. http: //w .mapquest.com/maps/ print. adp ?mapdata= p5kgyoo6yZfXrAOgPL]aV W2MI21p... 8/28/2007 ht tp:/. /geomapl.geodata. org/ servlet /com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap ?Sen iceName= cadastralov &C.. 7/9/2007 p o Ilh A IC Ili - 1M1 C 3 aull 1 LEGEND ..pre a nplul jond Fe Dnes �.m. ^ n r. cnn nee f o�,ho„on an mrt�eW,me cv�rt�r ,lho n o.do.r �nvl_. rt(a� �ntaL orto, ps' i ,i P'asr CCads F_cld �.na5 wp, (m nm tlemaec m mrun trle,ta Fs me u aRM1n nvp 1.1ntlur toappntsnleloro all rolM1Cr',e%p, F.:3� cmrropfornlepmtupo, npl,dC— rone,orj e.p'en fo impnce I ' dosing Fm not emned m. impbee.�urmni¢s pf mnehanl :'a: +[ Ealias nnln&anon C.IIa Plon..- for andnono ;:fpropnHOn no,FU %ii' =[IIS ,apan¢ulorpuryas , o., ,rn. @r mCnu r M1e loae� ne1Wm3 hw al lc,a for 'Fn r am: uurc au�OVec, mal resWt fmm o onno noeenlpl.n t iLlla l Ullo� II IM1e ntt of m rM1nnaM1tlin �o me inunlon Court�� mnlena6 -bloo 1 0.311, 111 —J, .�iirldi �.f.:a I meson Comity GenDO1, C_rmr _3041 tmalage Coo, l SN 31d Flour I OA mpia.K A 98�fZ W31 I =dznd flwYee= FaotL ht tp:/. /geomapl.geodata. org/ servlet /com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap ?Sen iceName= cadastralov &C.. 7/9/2007 Gix ^a0ID1 dale G.*.MaMo LAM :IGOSYt edi Thurston County D.,clm TIdi Corr,, male, e, en Inborn m e.,are toal On, map rs and mrepr,l Ida il aryl¢ n a arnTCa e e nr oIane,nrk.1Counpgor 1Hor. t,theCru and all FLT,GEND aged pea oelookp mun. coWersdmlmnncd. ng II¢ a¢'ulad, coca on ho, ona, map Foraomthe Grunn /�� /Rlajar liaad^, %ea36m ?r e.e,eoaeeaa ro the r,ierr, sbl. par mat applicable law. Tnu on Counliesof mer, all F.9ads rbotdelesl lucks orern e, armerenam amies . a \ores mpned including nm not nmllcagglopasor ,•IaYeC EUCL�S I alum ftnrss rot a pan¢uler purpose, ma nors- inRingamam prai ne,vn news 9t:eune ,.,v0000,oee IaMe rot m the 1, ci:lror co t, zrldis al aalnapxs lnel rnsalr tram wnllnv nasnele — znrcn% he ax nCanhe k t c, rhual, n Cou we, n,aRmn Cormn eLe >omo7ao P.... a.... e 2007. Teui Cant, ceooau center ce..,c nc Lnono.xoz l �•ab, Olpmpla, WA 96502 -6111 %; .+Uand EllSar F,Z[al. c..aocnwoa U'Wi _S7;lnu4, a- Aadlnl� On klZluolki Gix ^a0ID1 dale G.*.MaMo LAM :IGOSYt edi http: / /geomap I . geodata .org /servIeUcom.esri.esriniap. F_srimap ?Sen iceName= cadastralov &C... 7/9/2007 as 29A D.,clm TIdi Corr,, male, e, en Inborn m e.,are toal On, map rs and mrepr,l il aryl¢ n a arnTCa e e nr oIane,nrk.1Counpgor 1Hor. t,theCru and all FLT,GEND aged pea oelookp mun. coWersdmlmnncd. ng II¢ a¢'ulad, coca on ho, ona, map Foraomthe Grunn /�� /Rlajar liaad^, %ea36m ?r rcpt llvoion for oepletcocesormnr %dinarxoramlrk....l dto, th... em m mjun c man} ine uss orlon map ro the r,ierr, sbl. par mat applicable law. Tnu on Counliesof mer, all F.9ads rbotdelesl lucks orern e, armerenam amies . a \ores mpned including nm not nmllcagglopasor ,•IaYeC EUCL�S I alum ftnrss rot a pan¢uler purpose, ma nors- inRingamam prai ne,vn news 9t:eune dek, cheer ncmam,.nm nol nepueena.,nan nrpman e6aan he Oull Ti IaMe rot m the 1, ci:lror co t, zrldis al aalnapxs lnel rnsalr tram wnllnv nasnele — znrcn% he ax nCanhe k t c, rhual, n Cou we, n,aRmn Cormn P.... a.... e 2007. Teui Cant, ceooau center Le al nun ?4, l 1orltage Cood 5W. bid Floor l �•ab, Olpmpla, WA 96502 -6111 %; .+Uand EllSar F,Z[al. http: / /geomap I . geodata .org /servIeUcom.esri.esriniap. F_srimap ?Sen iceName= cadastralov &C... 7/9/2007 `Pn •••� • ON nu f ... - lop Op • • • . 111 N\ IWO _ _ w // •,'Athi•V t i' J `4, :z C? • •' field °In • •' TSITE a X's.4z 1`^ < I Fiv 4 .• Corners - • /A AMS .a • : \. \ i -- Hammersmith \ Ado'/ '� Hl ✓ J \\ "S` hletic Meld, �I R.. �OOO fl �•� D e re XMap® =. mgflyY n•.m�w n.ne.. LevW: N: 1 .40 0 W A.�n�: G58. V • Soil Map - Thurston County, Washington (AVILIA) ` � f t \` �o ss mo zoo nso u. �l a ZGO aoo a. I 2 I1SQA Nalwal Resources Web Soil Survey 2.0 etj Consemabon Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 912 &200] Page 1 of 3 DATA FORD/ e ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION l COE ViVetlaNds Delineation Manuel) ProjecIlSile: AvillaNelm Date: 8125/2007 Investigator: JoraslHelm County: Thursfon Do normal circumstances exist at the site: YES Plot ID: # 1 Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)?: NO Community HID: VEGETATION Slodum: T -tree, Sp -- -Dominant Plant Species — — Stratum. - Indic. Field observations: Rumex crispus H FAC SURFACE _Water Marks Leuanihemum vulgare H NI _FAC - Neutral Test Agrostis gigantea H FA( Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Regional knowledge of plant communities X Physiological or reproductive adaptations Sh- shrub, WIt- Broady vine, Z1911A Wetland plant list(nat'l or regional) x Morphological adaptions Wetland Plant Data Base Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL,FACW, or FAC(excluding FAC-) 96% RationalelRemarlks: Heavily grazed field Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES HYDROLOGY Recorded data available? Welland Hydrology Indicators: (If yes, describe in remarks) Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators (2 reou'redl' Check all that apply & explain below: Other: Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial photographs: Rational /Remarks: Weiland Hydrology Present? YES SOILS Map Unit Name: #65 Mckenna Drainage Class: P_1Y (series and phase) Gravelly ashy loam Confirmed Mapped Type? Yes Taxonomy (subgroup): Aoandic EDiaaueots Profile Desription: X Inundated _Oxidized Root Channels <12` Field observations: X Saturated <12' —Water-Stained Leaves Depth of Surface Water. SURFACE _Water Marks _Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: SURFACE _Drift Lines _FAC - Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Sol: 16'+ _Sediment Deposits _Other(explain in remarks) A X Drainage Patterns None Check all that apply & explain below: Other: Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial photographs: Rational /Remarks: Weiland Hydrology Present? YES SOILS Map Unit Name: #65 Mckenna Drainage Class: P_1Y (series and phase) Gravelly ashy loam Confirmed Mapped Type? Yes Taxonomy (subgroup): Aoandic EDiaaueots Profile Desription: _Histosol Matrix Mottle Mottle X Gleyed or Low Chrwna Depth (in.) Horizon Color Color Abundance /Contrast Texture 0 -6' A 10YR 211 None Gravelly ashy loam 6 16' Bwt l BW2 10YR a(l None Hydric Soils Present? Gravelly ashy loam mystic son indicarors: _Histosol X Reduced Conditions _Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Histic Epipedon X Gleyed or Low Chrwna X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Sulhdic Odor _Concreations _Listed on National Hydric Sails List X Aquic Moisture Regine _High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Other (explain in remarks) RationalelRemarks: Hydric Soils Present? YES WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES Wetland Hydrology Present? YES Hydric Soils Present? YES Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?: YES RationalelRemarks: DATA FORM e ROUT ME WETLAND ®EYERWHA` N (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) ProjectiGni AvillalYelm Date: 612WO07 Investigator: Jones/Helm Matrix Color itiottle Color County: Thurston Do normal circumstances exist at the site: YES Plot 10: # 2 Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)?: NO Community ID. Field Observations: Is the area a potential problem area ?: NO Transact 10: _Water Marks Agrosts capillans I H FAC Crepis setosa H FACU Leuanthemum vulgare I H NI Avena falua H NOL Spergulan a Iubra H FAC - Check all indicators that apply 8 explain below: Regional knowledge of plant communities % Wetland plant list(nat'I or regional % Physiological or reproductive adaptations Morphological adaptions Technical Literature X Welland Plant Data Base Rationale/Remarks: Heavily grazed field Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? NO HYDROLOGY Matrix Color itiottle Color Recorded data available ? - Wetland Hydrology Indicators: 0 -16' (If yes, describe in remarks) Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators f2 required): _Aquic Moisture Regime _High _ Inundated _Oxidized Root Channels <12" Field Observations: _Saturated <12' —Water-Stained Leaves Depth of Surface Water: None _Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: 16'. _Drift Lines _FAC - Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soil. 16'+ _Sediment Deposits _Other(explain in remarks) Stream, Lake or gage data. SOILS Map Unit Name: #110 Spanaway Drainage Class: Somewhat excessively (series and phase) Gravelly sandy loam Confirmed Mapped Type? Yes Taxonomy(sunpup): Type Melanoxerands Profile Desription: Depth (in.) Horizon Matrix Color itiottle Color Motlle AbundancelCOntrasl Texture 0 -16' A 10YR 2l1 None _Aquic Moisture Regime _High Gravelly sandy loam Hydnc Soil Indicators: _ Histosol _Reduced Conditions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Hl he Eplpedon _Gleyed or Low Chrome _Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ SulOdic Odor _Concreations _Listed on Natural Hydnc Soils List _Aquic Moisture Regime _High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _Other (explain in remarks) RationalelRemarks: Hydric Soils Present? NO WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophilic Vegetation Present? NO Wetland Hydrology Present? NO Hydric Soils Present? NO Is this Sampling Point Within a Weiland ?: NO RationalelRemarks: DATA FORM m ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1997 COE Wetlands Delineation Hamm) Projecl/5ite: Avilla/Yelm Date: 8/25/2007 Investigator: Jones/Helm Indicator__.__ Agrostis cap 'an' County: Thurston Do normal circumstances exist at the site YES Plot ID: W 3 Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)?. NO Community ID: Is the area a potential problem areal: NO Transect ID: VEGETATION Stratum: T -tree, Sp- sapling, Sh- shrub, Wv -woody vine, H -harbi Dominant PlantSpecis- - -- Stratum— Indicator. Dominant. Plant. Species_______., Stratum __ Indicator__.__ Agrostis cap 'an' H FAC Plantago lanceolata H FAC _Water Marks Leuanthemum vulgar, H NI Cichonum capillans H NI 16 "+ A rostls giganlea H FAC Check ail indicators that apply S explain below: Regional knowledge of plant communities x Weiland plan list(nat'I or regional) X Physiological or reproductive adaptations Morphological adaptlons Technical Literature x Wetland Plant Data Base Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL,FACW, ar FAC(excluding FAC -) 51% RationalelRemarks: Heavily grazed Geld Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES HYDROLOGY Recorded data available? Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Of yes, describe in remarks) Primary Indicatori Secondary Indicators (2 reauiredl: X Drainage Patterns Check all that apply & explain below Other. Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial photographs. Rational /Romarks: Wetland Hudmlomr Present? YES SOILS Map Unit Name: N65 Mckenna Drainage Class: Purdy (series and phase) Gravelly ashy loam Confirmed Mapped Type? Yes Taxonomy (subgroup): Agandic Epiaquepts Profle Desription: Matrix X Inundated _Oxidized Root Channels <12" Field Observations: Depth(in.) Horizon X Saturated <12" —Water-Stained Leaves Depth of Surface Water: SURFACE _Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit SURFACE _Drift Lines _FAC - Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soil: 16 "+ Sediment Deposits _Other(explam in remarks) X Drainage Patterns Check all that apply & explain below Other. Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial photographs. Rational /Romarks: Wetland Hudmlomr Present? YES SOILS Map Unit Name: N65 Mckenna Drainage Class: Purdy (series and phase) Gravelly ashy loam Confirmed Mapped Type? Yes Taxonomy (subgroup): Agandic Epiaquepts Profle Desription: Hydric Sal Indicators; _ Histosol %Reduced Conditions Matrix Mottle I _ Sulfidic Oda _Concreations Depth(in.) Horizon Color Color Abundance /Contrast Texture 0-6' A 10YR 2l7 None Weiland Hydrology Present? YES Gravelly ashy loam 6 -16' Bwt/ Bv2 10YR 3/1 None Gravelly ashy loam Hydric Sal Indicators; _ Histosol %Reduced Conditions _Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Histic Epipedon X Greyed or Low Chroma X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Sulfidic Oda _Concreations _Listed on National Hydric Soils List X Aquic Moisture Regine _High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _Other (explain in remarks) Rationale/Remarks : Hydric Soils Present? YES WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES Weiland Hydrology Present? YES Hydric Soils Present? YES Is this Sampling Point Vo9thin a Wedarri YES RationalelRemarks: ' DATA FORM a ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COTE 9, aIlands Delineation Manual) ' ProjoUlSite: Avilla/Yelm Date: 0125/2007 Investigator: Janes Helm Matrix County: Pierce Do normal circumstances exist at the site YES Plot ID: 44 ' Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)?: NO Community ID: Color Is the area a potential problem area?: NO Transact ID: WETLAND DETERMINATION VEGETATION Stratum: T -free, Sp- sapling, Sh- shrub, Wv -woody vine, H -herb) ICYR2/2 - -- Dominant Plant Species -- Sbxtum— Indicator Dominant Plant Species. —_._.__Stratum_.._.___ -_. _Indicator.__. 6 -10" Agroshs capillans H FAC Crepis setosa H FACU Leuanthemurr vulgate H NI Agrostis gi antes H FAC Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Regional knowledge of plant communities X Wetland plant lisl(nat'I or regional) X Physiological or reproductive adaptations Morphological adaptions Technical Literature X Welland Plant Data Base Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL,FACW, or FAC(excluding FAC -) 59% RationalelRemarks'. Heavily grazed field Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES HYDROLOGY Recorded data available? Welland Hydrology Indicators: (Ifyes, describe in remarks) Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators (2 reauiredl: ' _ Inundated _Oxidized Root Channels 02' Field Observations: _Saturated <12" —Water- Stained Leaves Depth of Surface Water: None _Water Marks Soil Survey Data ' Depth to Free Water in Pit: 16 "+ Dnfl Lines -Local FAC - Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soil: 16 "+ _Sediment Deposits _Othenexplain in remarks) _Drainage Patterns Check all that apply 8 explain below: Other: Stream, Lake a gage data: Aerial photographs. Rational/Remarks: Welland Hydrology Present? NO SOILS Map Unit Name: #110 Spanaway Drainage Class' Somewhat excessively ' (series and phase) Gravelly sandy loam Confirmed Mapped Type? Yes Taxonomy (subgroup): Typic Melanoxerands Hydric Soil Indicators: Profile Desription: _ Histosol _Reduced Conditions _Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Matrix Mollie Mottle Sulfidic Oda _Concreations Depth (in) Horizon Color Color Abundance /Contrast Texture WETLAND DETERMINATION Obi A ICYR2/2 None Wetland Hydrology Present? Gravelly sandy loam 6 -10" A 10YR 3/2 None Gravelly Sandy ban 10-16' 10YR3/3 None Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol _Reduced Conditions _Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Histic Epipedon _Gleyed a Low Chrome _Listed an Local Hydric Soils List Sulfidic Oda _Concreations _Listed on National Hydric Soils List _Aquic Moisture Regine _High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soil: Other (explain in remarks) RationalelRemarks: Hydric Soils Present? NO WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophylic Vegetation Present? NO Wetland Hydrology Present? NO Hydric Soils Present? NO Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland ?: NO RationalelRemarks: WETLAND RATING FORM — WESTERN WASHINGTON /// /a - N Name of wetland (if known): dllklvm&w Location: SEC: 14 TWNSHP: LI RNGE: ?(attach map with outline of Weiland to rating form) ------ Person(s) Rating Wetland: 46rdJm•D- IESAffiliation:� -- Dateofsiteviiita, Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I_ II_ III_ IV-kff, Category I = Score x70 Score for Water Quality Functions Category II = Score 51-69 Score for Hydrologic Functions Category ID = Score 30-50 Score for Habitat Functions Cate¢ory N = Score < 30 TOTAL scare for Functions ( y Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetlaad I_ II_ Does not AFpiy ✓ FW&l Categ"Y (choose the 66highest" category from above) Check the opproprinle type and class of wetland being rated. W T e Wetland Class De ressional Hari a Wetland RDverine Lake -fri® e orest 810 wth Forest Flats La con Freshwater Tidal al he above Pdedand Rating Form — weamm Wadnagto 1 August 20 04 Don the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YFS to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That Need Special Protection, and YES NO That Are Not Included in the Ratin SPI. Has the wetland been doctanenred as a habitat jor any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the ni ate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland been documented as habitat jor any Stale listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. SPI Does the wetand contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? i SP4. Does the wetland have a local slgniance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed m answer how well the wetand functions. The Hydro geoun hic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. Ct for more detailed instmctions on classifying wetlands, wed"Raing Four— wesiem washmgtm 2 August 2004 Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Was 9�g�tt7on /,` Wetland Name: GREG �DKB,S Daft. e /A O — L e, water levels in the wetland usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? O go to 2 YES — the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes,, -is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES — Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO — Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) If your wetland can he classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use theforms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and 11 estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). 2. � pography within the wetland flat and precipitation is only source (>90 %) of water to it. NO g0 to 3 YES — The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for Delimsional wetlands. 3. Does the wetland meet both of the following criteria? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8 ha) are permanently inundated (ponded or flooded); 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 Lahr fringe (Laeustrine Fringe) 4. ne s the wetland 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? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummochs(depressions are usually <3ft diameter and less than I foot deep). NO.- go to 5 YES — The wetland class is Slope S. Is the wetland in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river? The flooding should occur at least once every two years, on the average, to answer "yea " The wetland can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is notJlooding. �� NO - go m 6 /'XES The wetland class is Riverine Weiland Rating Foan- westem Washington 3 August 2004 6. Is the wetland in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at sometime of the year. This means that any outlet, ifpreaent, is higher than the interior of the r eland NO — go to 7 YES — The wetland class is Depresseonal 7. Is the wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no stream or river running through it and providing water_The wetland seems to be maintained by high, grotmdwater in the area The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO — go to 8 YES — The wetland class is Depresseonal 8. Your wetland seems to be difficult to classify. For esmmple, 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. Sometimes we find characteristics of several different hydrogeomorpbic classes within one wetland boundary. Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within Yom • wetland. 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 being rated If the area of the second class is less than 100% classify the wetland using the first class. HGM Classes Within a Delineated Wetland Boundary Class to Use in Ratin Slo a +RivWme Riverine Slo +D ressional D ressional Slope + Lzke-tjR a Lake -frin Pepressional + Riverine along stream within boun ional D Tonal +Lake -Erin D sessional Salt Waeer Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater Treat as ESTUARINE under wetland wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Deprea OBW for the rating. Welland Ratiug Foan - xv = Washington 4 August 2004 R Piaerine and Freshwater Tidal Fringe Wetlands Points WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS - Indicators that wetland fimctions to improve water quality R R 1. Dow the wetland have the note etial to 1 ®prove water quality? (seep• 52) R R 1.1 Area of surface depressions within the riverine wetland that can trap sediments dining a flooding event: Depressions cover >3/4 area of wetland points = 8 Depressions cover> 1/2 area of wetland points = 4 Depressions present but cover < 1/2 area of wetland points = No depressions present points; 0 $ R 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland ` Forest or shrub > 2/3 the area of the wetland points = 8 Forest or shrub > 0 area of the wetland points = 6 Ungraaed, emergent plants > 2/3 area of wetland points = 6 -Cf Ungrazed emergent plants > 1/3 area of wetland points = 3 Forest, shrub, and ungrazed enteravat < 1/3 area of wetland points r�'0 R Add the points in the boxes above R R 2. Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (seep. 53) Answer YES if you lmow or believe there are pollutants in groundwater a surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes a groundwater downgradient from the wetland? Note which of the folio jpirig conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. — Grazing in the wetland a within 15011 — Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland — Tilled fields or orchards within 150 feet of wetland — A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, fesideatial areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear -cut logging sidential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft of wetland — The river a stream linked to the wetland has a contributing basin where human activities have raised levels of sediment, toxic compounds or nutrients in the river water above standards for water quality multiplier Othef r�S multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 Ted, _Water Quality Eupctlous Multiply the some from R 1 by R 2 �_ Add sere to table on d Comments Weiland Ratlog Form— western lVashingtm 7 August 2004 R Riverine and Freshwater Tidal Fringe Wetlands Feints HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that wetland functions to reduce floodine and stream erosion R 3. Den the wetland have the potenthij to reduce flooding and erosion? se e54_....__.._ .__.-- ____._— .___.___...______— R R 3.1 Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the average width of the wetland perpendicular to the direction of the flow and the width of the stream or river channel (distance between banks). Calculate the ratio: (width of wetland) /( width of stream). If the ratio is more than 20 points = g s^ If the ratio is between 10 — 20 points = 6 If the ratio is 5- <10 points = If the is 1- <5 C2) ratio prinL4 If the ratio is < 1 iota = 1 ]j R 31 Characteristics of vegetation that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris as ' forest or shrub ". Choose the poims appropriate for the best description. �� D— = Forest or $limb for >1 /3 area OR Emergent plants > 2/3 area points = 7 r Forest or shrub far> 1 /10 area OR Emergem plams > 113 area points q Vegetatim does not meet above criteria rota? R Add the points in the boxes above R R 4. Does the wedead have the opportunity to reduce flooding end erosion? (seep 57) Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, Or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or emsive flows. Note which of the following conditions apply. — There are human structures and activities downstream (roads, buildings, bridges, farms) that can be damaged by flooding, — There are natural resources downstream (e.g. salmon redds) that can be multiplier damaged by flooding — Other r (Answer NO if the major aource of water to the wetland is mmrolled by a reservoir _ or the wetland is tidal fringe lo the sides of a dike) YES multiplier is 2 O multiplier is 1 j$ TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from R'3 nbyR Add score to table Z-- Wet4wd Rating Foy— weafem Washings® s August 20" 1 These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Paints HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat H I. Does the wetland have the oP MI11 l to provide habitat for many species ?_ H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 71) - -- -- -- Check the types of vegetation classes present (os defined by Cowardm) if the class covers more than 10% of the area of the wetland or'/, acre. _Aquatic bed 4- Emergent plants _Scrub/sbrub (areas where shrubs have >30ah cover) _Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) _Forested areas have 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, aub- canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, �- moss/ground-covet) Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. lfyou have: 4 types or more points = 4 3 types points =. 2 2 types points= 1 e jp(g 0 _yaroturiods (seep. 73) Check the types of water regimen (hydroperiods) preset within the wetand The water regime has to cover more than 10%ofthe wetland or %acre to count. (see text for descriptions of hydropemods) 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 point 47 Saturated only /Permanently flowing team or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland _Lake - fringe wetland =2 points — Freshwater tldat wetland = 2 points H 1.3. Richness of Plant ctMiC (seep. 75) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 patches of the same species can be conbined m meet the size threshold You do not have to name the species. T(d Do not include Eurasian 1✓Jilfotl, reed canarygrass, purple laosestnThistle If you counted > 19 species List species below if you want to: 5 - 19 species <5 species ponts 0 Wedend Raring Fa®- � Wad,%a 13 Augrar 2ON H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between types of vegetation (described in H 1.1), or vegetarian types and unvegetated men (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. jr None — 0 points Low — 1 point Moderate T pom_[s> Ur\ / [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: If You have fws or more vegetation types or three vegetation types and open water the Mu Lng as always "hi ' H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks m the number ofpoims you put into the next column. _Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland ( >4in. diameter and 6 ft long). _Standing snags (diameter at the bottom > 4 inches) in the wetland _,Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (]m) over a stream for at least 33 ft (10m) _Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning ( >30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present __At least % acre of thin - stemmed persistent vegetation 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 each stratum of plants Ef 1. TOTAL Scare - potential for providing habitat Add the scores in the column above Wetland Rating Form -=stem Washington 14 August 2004 H 2. Don She Welland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (step 80) Choose the descr4nion that best represents condition of buffer of wetland. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the mviland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed. — 100 in (3308) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no- grazing) Points = S — 100 in (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50° /a circumference. Points = 4 — 50 in (17011) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 — 100 in (33011) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% circumference, . Points = 3 — 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above — No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 in (8011) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OY- Points = 2 1 — No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >500/6 circumference. Light to moderate gazing, or lawns are OY- Points = 2 — Heavy grazing in buffer. Points — Vegetated buffers are Qm wide (6.611) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0. — Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = f H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wethmd part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian in upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 300/c cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wedands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dates in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel reads, paved roads are considered breaks in the corridor). YES= 4polnts (goto H2.3) NO -go to H2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undis d and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 5011 wide, bas at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake- fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES = 2 polats (go to 112.3) N-OQ H 2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: �/ within 5 mi (81om) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within I mi of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES = & point NO – ® points v wedged Rating Foan — mne=Washivgtm is Aagusr20W H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other ono*ity habitats listed by WDFW (seep. 82) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (I 00m) of the wetland? (see text for a more detailed description of these priority habitats) _%8ipvarean_The ar adjacent toaquatic .systemswith.flowing_water.that- contains-- - - -- -- elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. _Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.8 ha (2 acres). _Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. —Old-growth 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 20 trees/ha (8 tress/aore)> 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. _Mslture forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100 %; crown cover may be less that 100 0%; 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. (Prairies: Relatively undisturbed areas (as indicated by dominance of native plants) where grasses and/or £orbs form the natural climax plant community. _Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliff's. _Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages — Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component of the stand is 25 %. _[(Than Nahuml Open Space: A priority species resides within or is adjacent to the open space and uses it for breeding and/or regular feeding; and/or the open space functions as a corridor connecting other priority habitats, especially those that would otherwise be isolated; and/or the open space is an isolated remnant of natural habitat larger than 4 ha (10 acres) and is surrounded by urban development. _Estnary/EsWary- like: Deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands, usually semi-enclosed by land but with open, partly obstructed or sporadic access to the open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater ,�- runoff from the land The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the open ocean by evaporation. Along some low - energy coastlines there is appreciable dilution of sea water. Estuarine habitat extends upstream and landward to where ocean - derived salts measure less than 0.5ppt. during the period of average annual low flow. Includes both estuaries and lagoons. _Mt rine/Estnarine Shorelines: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones of beaches, and may also include the backsbore and adjacent components of the terrestrial landscape (e.g., cliffs, snags, mature trees, dunes, meadows) that are important to shoreline associated fish and wildlife and that contribute to shoreline function (e.g., sand/mck/log recruitment, nutrient contribution, erosion control). If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points ,l1 Wetland Rating Fonn - western Wash e'er 16 August 2004 H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within '/: mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed {Light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lalce shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other developmeat. point = 5 -- -- The -wetland is Lake -fringe on 'a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other -- fringe wetlands within h mile points = 5 3 There are at least 3 other wetlands within 'h mile, BUT the connections between the �q are disturbed f3/ points The wetland is Lake - fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake - fringe wetland within '%. mile points = 3 There is at least 1 wetland within 'h mile. points = 2 There are no wetlands within h mile. points = 0 H 2. TOTAL, Score - opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores in the coluran above Total Score for )Habitat Functions - add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on Pie Wetland Rating Pam— western Washington 17 August 2004 Q7EG2R1ZA TA0N BASED ON SPECUL CHARACTERYN I ICS Please determine djthe wetland meets the atttrbates described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. -Wetbad Type. - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - -- - Category Category— Check offany criteria that apply to the wetland Circle the appropriate Category when the a rc riate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) 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 SC 1.1 Is the wetland within a National Wildlife fuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cut I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332 - 30-151? YES = Category I NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO - Category 11 Cat I — The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no dildng, ditching, filling, Cat II cultivation, grating, and has less than 10% cover of non -native plant species. If the non -native Spartinna spp ate the only species that cover more than 100/. of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (IQ. The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the eating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in IM determining the size threshold of I acre. — At least % of the landward edge of the wetland bas a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, of un-grazed or un -mowed grassland. —The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Wetland Rating Form —wenem Washing= Is August 2608 SC 2.0 Nit" Heritage Wetlands (seep 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Cat. 1 Progmm/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. -SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a -- -- Natural Heritage wetland? (this questan is used to screen oat mastsites - - -- -- - - before you need to contact WNHPIDNR) S/r/R information from Appmdiz D _ m accessed Rom WNHP/DNR web site YES -- contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 3.2 NO SC 2.2 Has DNA identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant res YES = Category I NO I - SC 3.0 Bogs (see p. 87) Does the wetland (or part of the wetland) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will stiff need to rate the wetland based on in funcdons. I. Does the wetland have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peals or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field, y to identify organic soils)? Yes - go to Q. 3 Jo - go to Q. 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peals or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that ate floating on 7�5%.)w1s=t Yes - go to Q. 3 bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the wetland have mom than 7 ver of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in jable 3)? Yes - Is a bog for purpose of rating 0J) go to Q. 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain show the extent P"mosses in the umderstory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 3. Is the wetland forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine Sr, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of the total shmb/herbaceous cover)? �—� 4. YES = Category 1 l.0 Is note for Cat 1 v bog purpose of rating Wetland Rating Fmm— western Washminm 19 August 7004 1 Weiland Rating Fruit - western Washington 20 August 2004 1 SC 4.0 Forested wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Ijyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its junctions. -- Old- growth forests:.(west.of Cascade crest) Stands of at least two me species; -- - - forming a multi- layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old - growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. — Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 - 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old -growth YES= Category I t -'o (., Cat I SC 5.0 wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) 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 firm marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks — The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface 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 measge't{ near the bottom) YES = Go to SC 5.1 NOL not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets all of the following three conditions? — The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has Less than 200/6 cover of inversive plant species (see list of invasive sirmies on p. 74). — At least '% of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un- grazed or un -mowed grassland Cat. I —The wetland is larger than 1 /10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat HI 1 Weiland Rating Fruit - western Washington 20 August 2004 1 SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seem. 93) Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? r YES - go to SC 6.1 ( N� O )not an interdunal wetland for rating If you answer yes yogis wM1 sdiineedd to rate the wetland based on its In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula- lands west of SR 103 • Grayland- Westport- lands west of SR 105 • Ocean Shores- Copalis- lands west of SR 115 aad SR 109 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one sae or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category II NO — go to SC 6.2 Cat 11 SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III Cat M Category of weda ©d based on Special Characteristics Choose the "highest" rating if wetland fails into several categories, and record on P. 1. If you answered NO for all types enter "Not AMficable" on p. l Wedand Rating I =— waelom NVashmgtm 21 August 26P4 LOOKING EASTERLY ® SOIL /VEG PLOT#1 LOOKING EASTERLYO SOIL /VEG PLOT x2 & UPLAND WETLAND BOUNDARY LOOKING EASTERLY ® SOIL /VEG PLOT a3 LOOKING EASTERLY ® SOIL/VEG PLOTx5 & UPLAND / WETLAND BOUNDARY LOOKING SOUTHERLY UPLAND RIGHT - WETLAND LEFT y. ' AX 4 t LTd rr s v 17 i I 3" � L r i ;iX+ Iv '• a YELM CREEK LOOKING SOUTHEASTERLY ® WETLAND 4 C .likes-^' h- -- LOOKING WESTERLY ® UPLAND y. ' AX 4 t LTd rr s v 17 i I 3" � L r i ;iX+ Iv '• a YELM CREEK LOOKING SOUTHEASTERLY ® WETLAND IcsY: i r I LOOKING SOUTHEASTERLY @ WETLAND Forest Pro, Inc. Greg Jones 204 Senn Rd Chehalis WA 98532 Office / Fax 360 - 262 -9226 Mobile: 520 -0479 Home: 360- 262 -3806 E -mail: 9-ciones@iocalaccess.com ♦ QOIO RCIRIOMB • Forest Practice Applications /Forest Stewardship Plans /SEPA Checklists, JARPA'S. • Forest harvesting: Timber Cruising and Appraisals, Harvesting unit identification and layout including wetlands. Harvest systems and roads. t • Road location, layout, and road maintenance assessments. Culvert sizing and profiles. Fish passage design. ♦ Logging Systems Analysis and Profiles. • GPS Traversing and Mapping with Real time field corrected Trimble GEO XT Global Positioning System. 1 ♦ Log Quality Assurance (maximizing return to log and return to stump values in the manufacturing and sorting of logs at the stump and on the landing). a♦ Data Management - Computer Skills — Excel, Word, Traverse PC (Mapping), Spreadsheets. ♦ Certified Wetland Delineator ♦ Forest management; silvicultural site preparation, regeneration, vegetation control, pre- , commercial thinning, commercial thinning, fertilization, forest road maintenance, soils, forest sampling, and appraisals. Wetlands for Lewis, Thurston, Cowlitz, Pierce Counties Schinnell Surveying The Timber Exchange The Campbell Group, LLC, Portland, OR Rayonier Timberlands, Hoquiam WA Weyerhaeuser Company, Longview. Raymond & Vail IP Pacific Timbedands, Inc Afognak Native Corporation, Afognak, Alaska Tacoma City Light Washington State Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Forest Resources, Inc. Olympic Resource Management Merrill & Ring The Herbrand Co. Pacific Rim Real Estate Group Shipp Construction, Inc. B & M Logging, Inc. Menasha Corp. Green Crow Butler Surveying Chehalis Valley Logging Mason Engineering ♦ Bachelor of Science, Forest Management, University of Washington, 1975. 1 ♦ Associate of Arts, Forest Technology, Centralia College, 1971. ♦ Certified Wetland Delineator (The US Army Corp Of Engineers "1987 Guidelines ", Technical Report Y- 87 -1), Certified "Advanced Wetlands Soils and Hydrology for Delineators" P. S. U. , Certified Wetland, Mitigation, Construction & Installation Charles J. Newli Instructor <.. , �. Dewey% Administrator V'� 15�111 Phil Scole3, CP55c, PW Instructor 11311 Prolmonal Development Center «r6 Wiltrniitq Iftf 06hinghlo AM' 711 all to whom thene petters nhnll come, Greeting: 1 (hr Regents of the 31nitiersity on rerommenhation of the 11niversitg I�arultg anb by virtue of the Authority uesteb in Chrm by taw have this bay nbmitteb (SXegarg �qerf Jones to the brgree of 1 MC EIQX of ` CiEICCE in IIXES ESIILTXtEs W haor granteb all the Rights, Priuilegrs anb . vnvrs thereto pertaittinq Given at Seattle, in the State of Mashington, this fourteenth Pay of Rune, One iyhousanh Mine *96reh anb Seuenty- fiue, in the (One �unhreb anh fifteenth tear of the Eniuemsitg. RrsiAe Ctha niuregily 3gesi8rni of the iggnod n(2iegeni5 Dean All- Lnmmunit�t CinUeeistrirt 12 C�entrttlitt, �ttshin� fun ffhis Tertifres ghat Grrpru 'WEil Tours has satisfartnril� rompleteb a Lourse of �'tubu presrribeb by the (fnllege anb is herehk atnarbea the LIegree of (Newriatt TIC Te hnirttl C rd5 Oiben at Ctlentralia, in the Mate of iM' ashington. Jane 11,1971_ P 1915 (FOREST PRO, INC. j2003 -2007 WETLAND JOBS JOB #'S NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 2003 3 -26 STURDEVANT WETLAND LEWIS 3 -27 KEITH LYONS WETLAND LEWIS 3 -32 RON TRAVERS WETLAND MITIGATION LEWIS 3 -34. TOBYBELCHER WETLAND LEWIS 3-42 HAWES WETLAND DELINEATION LEWIS 3 -57 ROSTER WETLAND LEWIS 3 -60 HAWES WETLAND MITIGATION LEWIS 3-64 BILLMAN WETLAND LEWIS 3.69 CHURCH OF GOD WETLAND LEWIS 3 -70 BRENT WENTZEL WETLAND LEWIS 3 -77 WALLACE WETLAND LEWIS 3-95 CARLSON WETLAND LEWIS 3 -79 CURFMAN WETLAND LEWIS 3 -85 HAGEN WETLAND LEWIS 3 -93 HAWES WETLAND LEWIS 3-96 PEDERSON WETLAND LEWIS 2004 497 B 8 D DEVELOPMENT WETLAND LEWIS 4 -71 BAYNE- ANDERSON WETLAND LEWIS 4109 BRENEMAN FWD 7 -73 ROBINSON) WETLAND LEWIS 4 -54 DAVIS WETLAND LEWIS 4 -108 FRYE WETLAND LEWIS 4 -113 HAWES WETLAND LEWIS 4 -50 HOLGATE WETLAND LEWIS 443 JOE LURF WETLAND LEWIS 4 -25 KATHY GRAHAM WETLAND LEWIS 4 -101 KELLY WETLAND LEWIS 44 LOBDELL WETLAND LEWIS 4 -79 PRIGGER(NO ACTION) WETLAND LEWIS 45 REED WETLAND LEWIS 485 REESE NO ACTION) WETLAND LEWIS 4 -32 RON MOSS WETLAND LEWIS 4-8 RON O'LEARY 123RD WETLAND THURSTON 413 RON O'LEARY 173RD WETLAND THURSTON 429 RON TRAVERS WTLAND MITIGATION LEWIS 4 -2 ZENKNER WETLAND LEWIS 2005 5 -9 MERYHEW LEWIS 5 -29 REESE(4 -85) LEWIS 5 -33 KRICK/CONWELL LEWIS 5 -25 RYAN LEWIS 5-36 TRAVERS LEWIS 5 -38 BETTS LEWIS 5-42 SCHWARTZ LEWIS 5-50 O'LEARV THURSTON 5 -51 0 -LEARY THURSTON 5 -59 0-LEARY THURSTON JOB #'S NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 5-65 CHURCH LEWIS 5 -67 RARE EARTH LEWIS 5 -74 ANDERSON KENNICOTT HILL LEWIS 5 -77 MORRISON LEWIS 5-82 COHO ESTATES COWLITZ 5 -85 SCOTT MILLER LEWIS 5 -86 DENTON, JEFF LEWIS 5 -90 HERBRAND PIERCE 5-94 IHARRIS LEWIS 5 -96 ROSS LEWIS 5 -97 JERRY LEWIS 5 -98 SELF LEWIS 5 -99 SELF LEWIS 5-100 WALLACE LEWIS 5-102 NEUERT LEWIS 5 -106 SCHAFER CHEHALIS VALLEY DR LEWIS 5 -116 CHAMBERS LEWIS 5 -117 WEIBOLD LEWIS 5 -118 B & D LEWIS 5 -122 SMITH LEWIS 5-123 WALLACE - LEWIS 5425 ALPHA TO OMEGA CONSTRUCTION LEWIS 5-126 PURIS LEWIS 5 -127 SCHWARTZ LEWIS 5130 FLUGEL LEWIS 5 -131 LOVAN LEWIS 5 -134 MARPLE LEWIS 5 -135 PETTIT LEWIS 5 -142 HAWES LEWIS 5 -143 RASKEL LEWIS 5144 BLEVINS COWLITZ 5145 MEADE LEWIS 5 -146 KRISTEN LEWIS 5 -147 SCOVILLE LEWIS 5 -149 WALPOLE LEWIS 5 -150 MADILL LEWIS 5 -151 EVANS LEWIS 5 -152 B 8 M LEWIS 5 -153 B 8 M LEWIS 5-154 DENTON, JEFF LEWIS 5156 MCCORMICK LEWIS 5157 RANDALL LEWIS 5 -160 BATCHELOR LEWIS 5171 POULOS LEWIS 5 -172 O'BRIEN LEWIS 5-173 HORNER LEWIS 5 -174 WILLIAMS LEWIS 5175 LONG LEWIS 5 -176 HAN JACKSON HWY LEWIS 5 -177 HORNER JACKSON HWY /508 AREA LEWIS 5 -179 SMITH TUCKER RD LEWIS 5 -182 STEELE HWY 207 CENTRALIA LEWIS JOB #'S NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 5 -183 WOOD OFF HWY 12 ETHEL LEWIS 5 -184 GREENWOOD MEMORIAL GARDENS CENTRALIA 5 -186 PACIFIC RIM REAL ESTATE PACIFIC 5 -187 PACIFIC RIM REAL-ESTATE PACIFIC 5 -195 LEDORZE BUNKER CREEK RD LEWIS 5 -197 HARRIS RUSH RD LEWIS 5 -199 MCNARY HWY 5081GUERRIER RD LEWIS 5 -202 BLEVINS COHO ESTATES COWLITZ 5 -205 SHAFER CHEHALIS VALLEY DR LEWIS 5-206 BABARE MOSSYROCK LEWIS 5208 DODIE NORTH FORK RD LEWIS 2006 5 O'CONNOR WETLANDS LEWIS 12 ADAMS WETLANDS LEWIS 13 DOWNEY WETLANDS LEWIS 14 BEANS WETLANDS LEWIS 19 STEVENS WETLANDS LEWIS 20 DANIELSON WETLANDS LEWIS 21 WALKER WETLANDS LEWIS 22 SHELTON WETLAND ASSESSMENT LEWIS 23 ALPHA TO OMEGA WETLAND CREATION LEWIS 26 STONE WETLANDS LEWIS 27 POLLOCK WETLANDS LEWIS 29 PETLOCK WETLANDS LEWIS 30 JENSEN WETLANDS LEWIS 37 EITEL WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 38 HERBRAND WETLAND DELINEATION PIERCE 39 RIEHS WETLAND DELINEATION LEWIS 44 SORENSON WETLAND DELINEATION LEWIS 51 RYAN WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 53 MAKILING WETLAND REVIEW COWLITZ 55 COOPER WETLAND DELINEATION LEWIS 62 PRESTON WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 65 BARNES WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 71 JONES WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 72 ALLEGRE WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 79 WALLACE WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 83 B & M COAL CREEK FILL LEWIS 84 BLEVINS WETLAND IDENT COWLITZ 90 PACIFIC RIM 6 -221 WETLAND BOUNDARIES PIERCE 93 DUEY WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 94 HILL SITE REVIEW LEWIS 95 ALLENDER WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 97 LONG, DAVID WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 103 B & D (6 -147) ARMSTONG WL DELINEATION LEWIS 104 PETTIT SALSBURY WL DELINEATION LEWIS 106 JENNINGS WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 107 LANTAU WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 111 THOMPSON - WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 113 BASZLER WETLAND DELINIATION LEWIS 115 BRIDGES WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 121 KNODEL WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS JOB #'S NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 122 HORNER WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 126 B & D 6 -147) ANDERSON MIT SITE LEWIS 130 SUBJECK WETLAND DELINIATION LEWIS 131 OBERG WETLAND REVIEW -LEWIS 135 MCNARY WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 137 SMITH WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 138 TSMITH WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 140 MELIUS WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 141 STINSON WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 142 LONG, TONY WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 143 LONG, JIM WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 144 KUGLE WETLAND DELINIATION LEWIS 145 PROPERTIES PLUS KYSER WETLAND LEWIS 147 B & D ARMSTRONG FILL LEWIS 151 RISNER WETLAND LEWIS 152 MCNAUGHT WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 153 GREEN WETLAND /FPA LEWIS 156 WASSON WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 164 MARKHAM WETLAND (DENT NAPAVINE 168 CONWELL WETLAND LEWIS 173 WALKER WETLAND LEWIS 174 FRANKS WETLAND LEWIS 177 MATHEWS WETLAND LEWIS 183 SHELTON WETLAND LEWIS 184 PAVONE WETLAND LEWIS 185 PROPERTIES PLUS WETLAND -BRULE LEWIS 188 BARR WETLAND LEWIS 191 WICHERT WETLAND LEWIS 193 RITCHEY WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 201 ANDERSON WETLAND LEWIS 202 HERBRAND WETLAND PIERCE 204 REBMAN WETLAND LEWIS 205 REITZE(6 -211) WETLAND LEWIS 208 FORD WETLAND LEWIS 210 POLLOCK WETLAND LEWIS 211 KEAHEY(6 -205) WETLAND LEWIS 212 PROPERTIES PLUS WETLAND LEWIS 213 STURDEVANT PEELLWETLAND LEWIS 215 BRUMFIELD WETLAND REVIEW FOR LC FILL LEWIS 217 ROSS SOMMERVILLE RD WL LEWIS 218 ALLMAN HENRIOT RD WL LEWIS .219 FRUZZETTI HENRIOT RD WL LEWIS 221 PACIFIC RIM (6 -90) WETLAND PIERCE CO PIERCE 223 STEPHEN WL- PIERCE CO PIERCE 227 PETTIT MITIGATION SITE LEWIS 230 DENISON WETLAND SALKUM LEWIS 231 SHELDON WETLAND BUNKER CREEK LEWIS 235 BOWER BOLDUC RD WL LEWIS 237 ARY - WINLOCK WETLAND LEWIS 238 WHEELER NORTH FORK WETLAND LEWIS 240 WILLIAMS SMOKEY VALLEY RD WETLAND LEWIS 242 WILLOWS WL REVIEW JACKSON HWY LEWIS JOB WS NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 245 KINDELL WL DOTY LEWIS 246 REMUND WL BOISTFORT LEWIS 248 HINSHAW WL MOSSYROCK LEWIS 250 PRUDENT NW MAYTOWN WL THURSTON 255 B 8 D GENERAL MIDDLE FORK WETLAND LEWIS 256 B 8 D GENERAL NAPAVINE WETLAND LEWIS 257 PRUDENT NW THURSTON WL THURSTON 258 BUREN WL LARMON RD LEWIS 259 ALEXANDER JACKSON HWY WETLAND LEWIS 261 VANSTEERTEGEN LUCAS CR WL LEWIS 262 KIMBREL LINCOLN CR WL LEWIS 264 BARNES PEELL MCDONALD WETLAND LEWIS 265 SAYLER WETLAND LEWIS 267 JOHNSTON BOONE RD WL LEWIS 272 RADKE WETLANDS LEWIS 279 SWANSON REVIEW WETLAND PIERCE 284 PRINCE WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 285 LARSON (FWD TO 7-6) CENTRALIA WL CENTRALIA 286 OREBRICK TILLEY RD WL THURSTON 2007 1 DREBICK PARCEL #2 WETLAND THURSTON 2 GRAY LINCOLN CR WETLAND LEWIS 3 GRAY MATTISON RD WETLAND LEWIS 8 HERBRAND BLAINE KITSAP 10 DREBICK TILLEY RD WETLAND 3 THURSTON 17 KA77ENBRAKER RICE RD WL LEWIS 18 FRUZZETTI HENRIOT RD WL LEWIS 20 SELF -THE BREWER CO. YARD BIRD WL LEWIS 27 WALKER JEFFRIES RD WL LEWIS 31 SHELDON BUNKER CR WL LEWIS 34 LARSON KALAMA WL DELINEATION COWLITZ 37 PACIFIC RIM PIERCE WL PIERCE 38 CHAPMAN ANDERSON HILL RD WL LEWIS 39 DOSTICK (FWD) WALKER - JEFFRIES RD WL LEWIS 43 HAWES(FWD) JACKSON HWY WL LEWIS 44 PRUDENT NW THURSTON WL THURSTON 47 BLEVINS COHO WL- COWLITZ COWLITZ 48 POULOS (FWD 7 -78) JACKSON HWY S WL LEWIS 49 KLEE ANDERSON HILL RD WL LEWIS 50 JC MINI RANCH LN WL LEWIS 54 BARNES (FWD 6 -264 ) PEELL MCDONALD WL LEWIS 61 BENNIGHT ADNA WL LEWIS 63 BLEVINS COHO WL COWLITZ 64 HENDERSON BOONE RD WL LEWIS 65 WEB JOIST BOREVEC RD WL LEWIS 67 RADTKE WOODARD RD NAPAVINE WL LEWIS 68 ROSS 184TH AVE WL THURSTON 70 HENDERSON BOONE RD WL LEWIS 74 REISCH HANAFORD WL LEWIS 75 LARSON, CRAIG THOMPSON CREEK WL THURSTON 77 GRONSETH WETLAND VON WORMER CENTRALIA 78 POULOS TUCKER RD MIT SITE LEWIS [1 1 x 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 JOB #'S NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 83 VIIK TURNER RD WL THURSTON 88 DICKINSON EVANS RD WL 8 BRIDGE LEWIS 97 WHITE KOONTZ RD WL LEWIS 98 MASON ENGINEERING RIBELIN RD WL LEWIS 99 STUDER BRADY WL GRAYS HARBOR 105 B & M (6 -83 ) COAL CR FILL CHEHALIS 106 PETTIT FILL/MIT LEWIS 108 CONROY WETLAND LEWIS 123 MASON ENGINEERING JACKSON HWY MIT SITE LEWIS 127 MDK CONSTRUCTION WETLAND LEWIS 128 GUDAZ WETLAND LEWIS 131 PROPERTIES NW WETLAND DELINEATION PIERCE 133 BLEVINS SOLO WETLAND COWLITZ 134 BERGER WETLAND LEWIS 136 INDUSTRIAL PARK WETLAND MITIGATION LEWIS 138 WTMSTALEY WL THURSTON 141 RIPP WINLOCK VADER RD WL LEWIS 153 COOPER OYLER RD WL LEWIS 154 MAHAN WL THURSTON 157 HAVORSEN WL MOSSYROCK LEWIS 158 OLIVER, JULIE N FORK WL LEWIS 159 BOSTICK JEFFRIES RD WL LEWIS 163 REBECCA WLREVIEW LEWIS 165 HOLLENBACK PEELL WL LEWIS 170 TRULSON WL LEWIS 172 NEILSON WL DELINEATION LEWIS 173 KLEE WL REVIEW LEWIS 177 STEEN WL LEWIS 180 HORNER/BLOSL WL DELINEATION CENTRALIA 181 BERTUCCI WL LEWIS 182 LARSON, CRAIG WL DELINEATION THURSTON 183 KLUMPER WL WINLOCK 184 AVILLA WL YELM 195 HORNER AVERY RD WL LEWIS 202 HAWES FWD 743 JACKSON HWY LEWIS 203 DREBICK TILLEY RD THURSTON 205 WARREN WETLAND DELINEATION LEWIS 207 CHEHALIS VALLEY REALTY WETLAND LEWIS 209 KIENHOLZ CRITICAL AREA REVIEW LEWIS 210 HALVORSEN OYLER RD WL LEWIS 211 ABSTON RECON/WETAND THURSTON 214 ROE - AIRPORT WL LEWIS 215 HALVORSEN JACKSON HWY WL LEWIS 217 KUGLE WETLAND LEWIS 223 ESPOSITO WETLAND LEWIS 225 GASTFIELD WETLAND LEWIS 226 PETRASSO WETLAND LEWIS 229 HERBRAND WL LEWIS 231 IGARMAN WL LEWIS