Tech App Draft EIS 12-1992
/
SOUTHWEST YELM
ANNEXA TION
~~l'~!~~iU"r~~.~~~\';M"r;:t~~/~;J~~,:~~~~~~-N:,:~\t~t\~;";f"~~'-t ~': '~""'t"'; ~':4' .\<:-., l.~f, ,...., .~: .j-"~';""+;, \I~"ll':'$--;!""I'~:J;;"'i.":~:~'f;t~;r.::'~.
f~fl'}~'h~~~~~~~1'.;t~~~f:&"i~~i')"~\'t~",J",{~':t~~'~~:"~~'r',~ "'k-_-~"".~~ ~'p ",,0,,:'."" . ,.....r" '~,~1.;'/ ,t.'.- ~~." ~i>~ :.~~"~J.~:,>i'd ~':~!,j~
TECHNICAL APPENDICES
FOR THE
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
CITY OF YELM
DECEMBER 1992
R.W. THORPE AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
INDEPENDENT ECOLOGICAL SERVICES
MUNDY AND ASSOCIATES
S. CHAMBERLAIN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Appendix A
Surface Water and Public Utilities
Prepared by
Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Kent, Washington
Ill. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
2. Water
B. Surface Water
1. Existing Conditions. The area within the 2,OOO-acre annexation
boundary is located generally directly south and west of the downtown
Yelm area. The topography of the land within the boundary annexation
area is generally rolling in nature with grades ranging between 0% to
over 40% in a few areas. However, the average grade could be more
accurately described as between 5 % and 15 % (percent grade defined as
the number of the expressed grade in 100 feet, therefore, 15 % grade is
equal to 15 feet vertically in 100 feet horizontally)
It is not uncommon in western Washington to find topography inside
urban areas which is rolling in nature. However, the westerly 1,000
acres of the annexation are somewhat unusual. Due to a slowly
receding glacier during the ice age, several potholes (enclosed drainage
areas or depressions) exist within this part of the annexation area.
Normally water quality within urban areas is a function of storm water
treatment prior to discharge into major draining channels. The amount
of paved surfaces or industrial pollution points which discharge directly
into streams also significantly affects water quality For the easterly
portion of the annexation area, these general water quality principles
apply However, approximately half of the !rea to be annexed does not
drain to an open water channel but it percolated directly into the ground
via potholes. The depressions collect and pond water Water is then
allowed to slowly percolate into the ground and is essentially filtered by
surface and/or wetland vegetation and then is further filtered through
the ground percolation process. There does not appear to be a
substantial amount of pollutant discharges into these pothole areas and
the water quality entering the ground water system is probably
excellent.
For the remaining easterly 1,000 acres of the proposed annexation
which is more urban in nature, water quality is a function of pollutant
discharges from developed areas. These can occur in the form of farm
animal waste discharge as well as oil and heavy metal run off from
paved surfaces. In either case, these pointed discharges appear to be
minimal and therefore water quality for the natural environment would
be considered to be very good.
M.025
-1-
DM/jp
2 Impacts to the Proposal A total of approximately 5,000 residential
units would or could ultimately be constructed within the annexation
area. Based on current storm drainage conveyance and
retention/detention requirements, as well as the State of Washington
Department of Ecology and State of Washington fisheries Department
biofiltration requirements, water quality from the developed areas can
be anticipated to be as good as the natural environment. Land use
controls, regulations and ordinances requiring the design and
construction of extensive biofiltration facilities prior to the discharge of
storm drainage from developed areas into open channels will assure that
the water quality similar to the natural environment is maintained In
addition, the preservation of significant wetlands on portions of the
annexed area as well as the incorporation of retention systems utilizing
the existing pothole areas for natural biofiltration and percolation will
also assure water quality similar to the natural environment for the
proposal.
3 Impacts of the alternatives Same as the proposal
4 Mitigation. Water quality mitigation will be required for any
development within the annexed area Mitigation will include the
design and construction of the following'
A. Subsurface and/or surface conveyance systems Open water
channel/ditches will be the preferred mitigation alternative
wherever pOSSIble
B Storm draInage detention will be required in order to limit the
post-development release rate for storm water to that of the pre-
developed sIte Storm detention facilities 10 the form of
surface, storage ponds, and/or subsurface storage vaults or
pipes, will be required
C BiofiltratJOn In the form of biofiltration swales and/or other
mechanical biofiltration facilities will be required to assure
water quality Water quality will be preserved and will be
similar in character to the natural environment.
D Storm water retention will be encouraged in order to percolate
storm water directly into the ground whenever soil conditions
will allow In addition to the biofiltration requirements will be
effectively filtered through several layers of surface soils pnor
to entering the ground water system
M 025
-2-
DM/jp
M.025
E. Frequently flooded areas and water absorption.
1 Existing conditions. Frequently flooded areas of the proposed
annexation include property located directly west of the Yelm Golf
Course. In addition, in portion of the southeast corner of the
annexation is also subject to periodic flooding. These areas provide
substantial water absorption and accommodate storm drainage run off
from other portions of the annexation area as well as other off-site
areas not to be annexed as part of this proposal. Generally, the bottom
of the potholes tend to be wet in nature and under current state law
some may be classified as wetlands. As such, they will be afforded
wetland protection as required by law Therefore, their ability to
accept storm water and absorb a substantial amount of surface runoff
into the site soils will be preserved. As a result, there will be no
significant difference between the developed and undeveloped condibon
in these areas.
2. Impacts of the proposal Development would generally increase the
total amount of runoff This occurs because the increase in surface
area generally associated with development produces higher storm
water runoff rates. Additional storm drainage volume results from
constructing roadways and/or rooftops, driveway, gravel areas, etc ,
normally associated with development. As outlined in previous
sections, the post-development runoff rate will be limited to that of the
pre-developed site. In addition, water quality will be assured by
utilizing several methods of water treatment including biofiltration.
However, an unmitigatable impact of any development is the overall
increase of net runoff from a site due to the increase in pervious
surface. Assuming that water quality and runoff rates, however, are
maintained to mimic the natural environment the additional storm
drainage water can in some instances actually be a benefit to certain
wetland areas and frequently flooded areas. By adding additional storm
drainage to these areas the natural condition will be enhanced.
3 Impacts of the alternatives Same as for the proposal
4 Mitigation.
A. Provide siltation control measures for storm drainage entering
frequently flooded areas to insure that siltation does not occur
This requirement could be satisfied through the use of
oil/water/siltation separators in all conveyance storm drainage
systems.
-3-
DM/jp
M 025
B Design and construction of biofiltration facihties prior to
discharge into discharge of storm drainage water into frequently
flooded areas Biofiltration facilities act as a natural digestive
system on heavy metals and silt.
F Storm water drainage systems.
1 Existing conditions. Very few storm water collection systems have
been constructed or maintained within the annexation area. The Yelm
Golf Coarse and a few of the farms in the area incorporate primarily
open ditches and culverts to collect and convey storm drainage away
from buildings and developed areas. Storm drainage collection systems
within streets located wlthm the annexation area are non-existent.
Water apparently sheet flows toward streams in these areas.
2 Impacts of the proposal Upon development, complete storm drainage
collection and conveyance facilities will be required. This will include
providing open water channels (ditches) and/or subsurface piping
systems to convey storm drainage away from building areas and into
storm water collection and storm water treatment facilities In addition,
storm drainage catch basins with oil/water separator sumps would be
provided within roadways and all paved areas. Construction of these
areas would assure that the storm drainage conveyance system is
operated and maintained to a level consistent with current water quality
requirements Impacts of the alternatives same as for the proposal
4 Mitigation.
A. Surface conveyance systems in the form of open ditches and/or
conveyance channels will be required wherever practical within
each development.
B Subsurface storm drainage collection systems incorporating the
design and construction of subsurface storm drainage pipe will
be an alternative to open ditches.
C The design and construction of storm dramage catch baSins with
oil/water separator sumps to collect oil, heavy metals, and silt
from runoff areas will be reqUIred in all paved areas.
D Surface or subsurface storm water retention/detentIon systems
will be reqUIred
6 Public Services
-4-
DM/jp
M.025
F. Storm Collection Systems
I Existing conditions. Naturally occurring storm water drainage
infiltration systems are provided by the existing pothole/depressions
located throughout the annexation area. Man-made detention systems
including open surface water ponds and/or underground pipes have not
been constructed within the existing developments (primarily the Yelm
Golf Course and farms) within the annexation area.
2.
Impacts of the proposal Developed areas will produce additional storm
water runoff due to the construction of impervious surfaces including
asphalt, rooftops, and gravel and lawn areas. The additional storm
water runoff will require the construction of storm, drainage detention . I
and/or retention systems. L )..; .-+c..(..e. pc.> ~ (..t<.~
bo!.. f<t~,,~~ c.:. t'r<1.'^'it:4c.L
Storm drainage detention will be provided e' er in the form of surface +-e .
ponds and/or subsurface vaults and/or pipesr These facilities will be c~, < c.~k
sized in order to limit the post~evelopment storm drainage flows to C<trr..l ""<V112-
that of the pre-developed site. These types of systems are commonly ~ <;' .z...Jl
used within western Washington in order to mitigate the impacts of j:,--c.. .'^~
what would otherwise be higher runoff rates than in the natural Ie? c..:;' , &
condition. By constructing these facilities., off-site storm drainag~ flows $ _,-..:,.-ld...
are reduced to that of the pre~eveloped Site. (Or1t! fJ-'K.k. ~'r ~-"...!..:J) !
Gr e; "'- ..-
The existing significant depression/pothole/retention areas located ~l,vh'x-
primarily on the western portion of the annexation area will be utilized L,<-~ t':::>
to percolate surface water into the subsurface aquifer However, some ( c
changes will be required within these pothole areas in order to i;~~'\(
accommodate the additional storm drainage runoff flows and volumes V?.:f .
produced by development. ~e""er"~t-
t!C. "c.. ~"" ~~ r:
lo,-~.,:,,') )
Kvlh r\~
0'~ F"'-L-'..
~ (',-<~
. ,{7._ ^,_ /
~~~Ih.
--t-o ( c; "'" b ,~
)+0:"'''-' .Jle{e....+~.... Cj$l~ (Do..> ..
, ,
Utilize the existing configuration of each depression/pothole and (f'r-l '1 ..-i,,,-
discharge more storm drainage volume into each pothole. This c~
would result in higher average water levels within the bottom of Cl . ,i. ~
each pothole Several of the existing potholes located on the (:' 1,' ~ (
westerly portion of the annexation area have standing water of P " ~ PC),y'
up to several feet deep during the wet portions of the year A ~/~
,. 10 c ~k~
((f;vt& hi. c...' _..\'\r"'c~'<(
0c.* W t-K.;--., ~
o L~ i- 1,&."e.. DM/jp c+ ~
d__~(....:-~ ,c(,J:. lO,-,~~<L
"'I. re c.. 5 .
Three types of specific designs are proposed within the drainage basin
for each depression/pothole. The three design alternatives for the
retention systems are outlined in the attached figures. Although it has
not been specifically determined which alternative would work best in
each pothole/depression/percolation area located within the annexation
area, one of the three alternatives would generally be used depending
on requirements of the city These alternatives are explained as
follows:
A.
-5-
few of the larger depressions appear to pond water year-round.
Many of the smaller potholes appear to be dry most of the
year
Each pothole has its own storm drainage infiltration
characteristics. Naturally occurring potholes receive storm
drainage water of varying amounts depending on the amount of
rainfall within a given year As rainfall provides an
environment for the growth of various vegetative species, these
species flourish in the bottom of the potholes. When the
vegetation dies each autumn and regrows each spring, naturally
occurring silt and/or organics are deposited on the bottom of
each pothole. This process, generally referred to the
eutrophication process, eventually makes the bottom of each
pothole impervious.
Once this occurs, the primary infiltration area of a pothole is
along its side walls. As silt creates an impervious pothole
bottom storm water would pond to a depth higher than the silt
and then percolate through the sides of the pothole, rather than
its bottom.
This alternative assumes that storm drainage is discharged
directly into each pothole. As a result, the water level within
each pothole would increase to either a smaller or larger degree
depending on the amount of water in the pothole. Dredging
and/or cleaning out the bottom of each pothole would be
required to assure that the required amount of infiltration is
provided on an on-going basis. In this retrospect, the pothole
would serve as both a detention area (holding the water in a
temporarily ponded state), as well as infiltration facility
percolating water into the ground water table.
B. A separate detention system could be provided near the top of
each pothole which would provide a restriction for storm
drainage water Into each pothole. These facilities would be
constructed in the form of a surface pond of subsurface storm
drainage vault or underground pipe. Primary advantage in this
type of facility would be to slow the rate of storm water
discharging into each pothole This type of facility could be
used within smaller potholes which could be more sensitive to
storm water volume than larger potholes.
C. Separate retention facilities which would not discharge into the
existing storm drainage systems could also be developed.
These facilities could be constructed in the form of open
M.02S
-6-
DM/jp
retention ponds or subsurface percolation system with no outlet.
Subsurface percolation systems are similar to sewer septic
systems except that they are much larger
An important requirement for any retention system is proper
maintenance. All retention systems should incorporate silt removing
facilities prior to discharge into the retention area
Biofiltration facilities mayor may not be required for the infiltration
systems. Typically. depending on the gradation of soils within a given
discharge area, subsurface filtering of storm water is satisfactory and in
many cases, separate biofiltration facilities are not required. Any
development withm the annexation area WIth substantIal developed area
would require the mitigation of storm water discharge volume and rate
This would necessitate the design and constructIon of storm water
detention facilities and/or detention facilities as noted above The
satisfactory operatIon of these facilities is dependant upon the ability of
the soils to percolate water Mitigation for the increase of storm water
is proposed as follows
A. Provide storm drainage detention in areas where a viable
downstream channel or open body of water exists to accept
additional storm drainage flow
B Provide Surface retention in areas without any viable means of
surface discharge
C Provide retention facilities in areas where retention does not
occur naturally but can be created due to good soil conditions.
D Provide desiltatJon facilities to ensure that both retention and
detention systems operate as designed.
3 Wastewater FacilIties. The City of Yelm is not currently served by
sewage treatment facilIties Areas within the city lImits as well as the
outlying areas are served by individual or community septic tanks and
septic percolation systems However, in 1991 the City of Yelm was
awarded funds from the state and federal government on a matching
basis to construct a treatment plant. This plant is in the process of
being designed by Parametrix, Inc The waste water facilities plan has
been approved by all local and state agencies.
This new proposed facility will be SIzed to serve approximately 2,600
people within the City of Yelm city limits by 1995, in the form of 435
connections. A total of 2,600 people will be served in the form of
M 025
-7-
DM/jp
approximately 792 connections by the year 2010 The city engineer,
Parametrix, has assumed 3 3 persons per connection which is
conservative A figure of 2 4 persons per household would be more
consistent with populatIOn projectIons used by Thurston County
This new system will be a sewage treatment effluent pump system
(S T.E.P ) which a small diameter force main system which
incorporates individual private treatment septic tanks at each point
discharge (residence or business) The septic tank provides primary
sewage treatment and removes solids from primary effluent. Effluent is
pumped from each septic tank under pressure into the small diameter
pressure line. This pressure line will convey sewage into the secondary
sewage treatment facility which is scheduled to be constructed at
approXImately the City of Centraha power canal & Willanson Street.
Proposed primary outfall from the sewage treatment facility will be into
the City of Centralia power canal (as authorized by a DOE NPDES,
2.0 CFS average daily flow or I 3 MGD) with a secondary discharge
directly into the Nisqually River located east of the primary discharge
point.
It is anticipated that thIS new sewage treatment system will be fully
operational in the next two years, and therefore, will theoretically be
available to serve a portIOn of the annexation area
The city, however, is anticipating using all of the available connections
to serve its current city customers. The design of the sewage treatment
plant will allow with expansion the connection of approximately 357
additional units to this system by the year 2010 It is antiCIpated that
the city would sell connection rights to the system on a first-come-first-
serve basis. The fees associated with connecting to the system would
be directly proportIOnal to the cost of providing sanitary sewer service
to each individual user per connection basis.
The funds which have been allocated for the construction of the sewage
treatment plant allow for an average daily flow of 0 14 million gallons
per day (MGD) when the plant becomes operational in 1994 This is
approximately equivalent to 435 connections. The plant ultImately, as
constructed, will have an expansion capability of up to 0 3 MGD for
approximately 972 connections. The 1994 projected service area will
be for 1,430 people (0 14 MGD) The 2010 future service area will be
for 2,600 people (0 30 MGD)
M 025
-8-
DM/jp
The city fully intends to construct the plant as provided under the
adopted 1991 waste water facilities plan. Based on the projected
population of the city m Yelm and including the annexation area of
2,000 acres (approximately 5,000 additional units) substantial expansion
of the proposed new sewage treatment with facility would be required
2. Impacts of proposal Because the ultimate buildout of the annexation
would require approximately a 5-fold increase of the maximum
currently anticipated sewage flows a significant expansion of the plant
will be required. However, an expansion of this type is feasible as
long as a long-range expansion plan is developed to increase sewage
treatment capacity on an incremented basis.
For purposes of sewage treatment deSIgn, the following criteria has
been used.
. Eighty gallons per capita per day is assumed for domestic
sewage flow
. Twenty-five gallons per capita per day is assumed for
commercial sewage flow
. A total of 105 gallons per capita per day is assumed for a
gravity sewage flow for the proposed annexatIon area.
The proposed total sewage that would be generated by ultimate buildout
of the annexation area summarizes as follows
5,000 units X 2 4 capita per dwelling unit X 105 gallons per
capita per day X I day = 1,260,000 total gallons per day is
equal to Ilt260 MGD i. '2(. (
..--
~ ,""\
Because the NPDES permit allows for an average daily ~
discharge mto the Centralia Power Canal of 1 3 MGe (20
CFS), once thiS allowance has been utIlized, a new NPDES
permit WIll be required. At ultimate buildout, a flow of I 260
MGD from the annexed area plus 03 MGD from the existing
deferred service area would produce an average daily flow of
1.56 MGD
Individual peaking factors for various neighborhoods would be
on the order of 2 5 Lower peaking factors in main trunk lines
designed and constructed which would leave from the
neighborhoods to the sewage treatment plant would be
approximately I 5 However, for purposes of calculation the
M 025
-9-
DM/jp
maximum sewage flow to the sewage treatment plant, the total
as noted above should be used.
Clearly, substantial expansion to the proposed sanitary sewa,
treatment plant would be required in order to serve the
annexation area. According the city, a step system will be
provided for the city system as currently proposed. Other areas
and particularly those areas within the annexation area with
only medium density residential development would most likely
be cost-effectively served by gravity sewer systems.
The city has purchased approximately 12 acres of property to
construct the current sewage treatment plant. It is anbclpated
that the city could acquire additional adjacent property if
necessary in order to expand the sewage treatment plant beyond
the existing 12-acre boundaries.
Parametrix has completed preliminary calculations which
indicate that the existing 12-acre site of the proposed sanitary
sewer treatment plant would be sufficient to accommodate the
ultimate additional buildout of the annexation area If
additional area IS needed, however, the city could purchase (or
condemn to purchase) adjacent property in order to expand the
sewage treatment plant.
Once the proposed system has been constructed, it is likely that
the CIty would provide additional sanitary sewage treatment on
a per development basis based on mitigation fees collected at
the time of development approval by the city Once a specific
development has been defined and a land use application has
been submitted to the city for review a full analysis of the
sewage treatment requirements would be made The city's
engineer, Parametrix, Inc , would then analyze the specific
expansion requirements which would be necessary within the
current City of Yelm sewage treatment plant system. Fees
would then be levied directly to the property owner and/or
developer in order to pay for the expansion capacity Fees
would then be paId by the developer prior to any connections
being made WIthin the development. Once the sanitary sewer
system has been expanded, individual housing units and/or
business would be allowed to connect to the sewer based upon
the additional capacity available at that time
M 025
-10-
DM/jp
3 Impacts of alternatives Same as above
4 Mitigation.
A. The city is in the process of having its consultant, Parametrix,
provide a sewage comprehensive plan for the city This
comprehensive plan would outline the general expansion
requirements of the existing sewage treatment facility on a per
development basis. Funding for this study should be
contributed on an area basis by each property owner within the
annexation.
B Additional sarutary sewage treatment plant expansion costs will
be passed on directly to each development on a direct cost
basis.
COn-site sarutary sewer systems will be reqUired to servIce each
development individually
D Trunklines will be constructed as necessary in order to serve
each individual development as it connects to the existing city
system.
M 025
-11-
DM/jp
IV BUILT ENVIRONMENT
6 Public Services.
G Solid Waste Collection/Recycling Systems.
1 Existing ConditIOns Solid waste is collected my LeMay Garbage
Service. According to the Thurston County Solid Waste Management
System, the solid waste collection franchise held by Harold LeMay
Enterprises, includes the entire city limits of Yelm and the proposed
2,OOO-acre annexatIon area. Material collected from the city limits is
deposited at the Thurston landfill located northeast of Lacey Thun
field in Pierce County, another sanitary landfill, is also open to
residents of the Yelm area
The Thurston County 1992 Solid Waste Management Plan currently
estImates county waste generation to be approximately 6-7 pounds per
person per day This plan estimates that for the 20-year period from
1992 to 2011, the county will require solid waste disposal capacity for
between 4 9 million and 5 4 million cubic yards to accommodate 2 4
million to 2 7 million tons of solid waste Currently, the county is
discussing a goal of diverting 60% of solid waste generated countyWIde
through waste reduction and recycling programs. These efforts may
reduce the corresponding amount of solid waste directed into the Thun
field and Hawks Praine Landfill from the City of Yelm and the
annexation area At this time, no waste is being generated by the
annexation area, which is largely undeveloped.
2 Impacts of the Proposal With an estimated 5,000 residential units and
a potential residential population of 12,500 persons, the amount of
residential wastif generated by the annexation is 75,000 to 87,500
pounds per day, or 77 cubic yards to 90 cubiC yards per day
3 Impacts of the Alternatives The proposal alternatives are anticipated to
have the same impacts as the proposal, as the reSIdential population is
anticipated to be approximately the same
4 Mitigating Measures
A Waste reduction efforts and recycling efforts will be provided
in the annexatIOn area in conjunction With the solid waste
pickup service
'W
3687 006
-1-
June 3, 1992
IV BUILT ENVIRONMENT
6 Public Services
C. Fire
I Existing ConditIons The proposed 2,OOO-acre annexation site is served
by the Pierce County Fire District No 2, City of Yelm. The
headquarter station, Main Station No 21, is located on Yelm Avenue in
downtown Yelm. The City of Yelm is placing before the voters in
November, approval to build a new main station on Mill Road and
l04th Avenue S E. If approved by the voters, the facility may be built
in 1993 The new Station No 21 would likely include four drive-
through bays to provide storage for 8 fire department vehicles. In
addition to the headquarter station, there are two substations within Fire
District No 2. Substation No 22 is located at 123rd Avenue and
Lindsay Road. Substation No 23 is located at Vail Loop and Hannus
Road.
At this time, the City of Yelm has an all volunteer fire department.
The personnel consists of one fire chief, two assistant chiefs, one
captain, five lieutenants, and approximately 25 volunteer fire fighters
In addition to the main station and the two substations, the City of
Yelm has a mutual aid agreement with Fire District No 4 in Rainier,
Fire District No 17 in the Bald Hills, and a county-wide mutual
agreement.
Vehicular equipment consists of four Class A pumpers, four tankers
supplying 1,500 gallons, 2,500 gallons, 1,800 gallons, and 13,000
gallons, respectIvely, one rescue vehicle, two brush rigs, one aid
vehicle and one utility fig The average response tIme to calls is SiX
minutes from the tIme call is received to the time of the arrival at the
scene During the three-year period from 1989 through 1991, the Yelm
Fire Department responded to an average of 688 calls per year and an
average of 233 fire calls, for a average total of 913 fire and aid calls
per year Of the total calls, approximately 80 percent of these calls are
emergency medical service calls.
In the project site itself, the City of Yelm has not received any aid or
fire calls during the past year with the exceptIon of a few brush fire
calls.
3687 004
-1-
June 3, 1992
2. Impacts to the Proposal A total of approximately 5,000 residential
units would or could be ultimately be constructed within the 2,OOO-acre
annexation area. The project would create immediate needs upon the
Fire Department. The all-volunteer fire department serves a population
of 8,445 according to Thurston Regional Planning Council estimates.
The additional 5,000 residential units could potentially increase their
served population by up to 12,500 assuming an average of 2.5 persons
per household.
At present, the number of personnel responding to fire calls from the
project area would be approximately 6 to 8 volunteer fire fighters
depending upon the structure and the time of day Types of vehicles
responding would depend on the emergency requirements At this
time, the Yelm Fire Department has no fire equipment capable of
suppression or rescue above a two-story construction.
Many factors contribute to additional cost factors that the fire
department must try to meet to maintain its current level of service
These factors include needs for additional equipment, suitable to the
type of construction WIthin the project area, an increase in the
responses for both fire and medical aid responses within both the
commercial and residential areas of the project site, man hours for
routine fire inspections, responses to vehicular accidents related to an
increase in traffic III the project area and other related fire department
service impacts. Normally, new construction offsets negative cost
factors for fire services through tax revenues such as property taxes.
Although revenues are collected in the form of property taxes by the
fire district, these revenues are not received for use by the fire
department for approximately two years after completion of the project.
In essence, the tax revenues (property taxes) collected do not offset the
immediate impact demand created in additional equipment and/or
manpower required for such a project.
3 Impacts of the Alternatives. Same as the proposal
3687 004
-2-
June 3, 1992
4 Mitigation. Fire service impact mitIgation will be required for the
development within the 2,000-acre annexation area Mitigation will
include the design and/or provision of the following'
A. A satellite statIon, including utilities, will be built on one of the
public land use nodes shown on the proposal
B. The property owners within the annexation area will contribute
toward the purchase of fire support vehicles and/or other capital
equipment as deemed necessary by the City
C Water facihties wIll be constructed on the annexatIon area to
provide adequate fire flow and to maintain adequate fire
pressure during a fire. A minimum pressure of 20 PSI during
fire flow is deSired with 30 PSI provided under domestic flow
conditions (See water supply conditions )
BC/jp
3687 004
3687 004
-3-
June 3, 1992
IV BUILT ENVIRONMENT
6 Public Services
E. Water Supply Systems.
1 Existing Conditions The city's water supply system consists of two
wells located near the city center, and a newer well located in the
eastern part of the city Wells I and 2, the downtown wells, are
located in the block bounded by Washington and MacKenzie Streets,
2nd and 3rd Avenues. Well No 3, the Casavante well, is located east
of Yelm between lOOth Way and 103rd Avenue Well No 1 is 63-feet
deep and will deliver 385 GPM Well No 2 is 55-feet deep and will
deliver 400 GPM The city's distribution system consists of pipe from
4-8 inches in diameter A lO-inch water main connects the southern
500,OOO-gallon tank to the downtown system. Newer lines at the
perimeter of the system are generally 6 to 8-inch PVC pipes. Existing
service lines closest to the annexation area include the 8-inch service
line in Berry Valley Road and a 6-inch main in Longmire Street.
Hydrant flow tests conducted in the city and reported in the 1989
comprehensive plan indicate that measured flows vary considerably
throughout the city, depending upon the proximity to the storage tanks
Calculated flow at 20 PSI ranged from 700 GPM to 1,752 GPM
There is no public water supply system in place to serve the entIre
2,OOO-acre annexation. Furthermore, the site is not within the city
water service area and the city service maps would need to be amended
to include the annexation.
The City of Yelm 1989 comprehensive water plan provides guidelines
for service area extension. The criteria include the requirement to
annex to the city limits, provide capacity to serve the property, and not
unduly burden the citizens of the city Additionally, the city requires
that all systems be deSigned and built to meet city design standards
The maximum instantaneous demand, MID, for the Yelm Water System
is based on the State Health Department "Sizing Guidelines for Public
Water Supplies" The City of Yelm Comprehensive Water Plan
indicates that in January 1989, there were 646 single-family or
equivalent residential unit connections The MID for the 1989 system,
which does not include well #3, is estimated at 535 GPM, according to
the State Health Department regulations. Peak daily demand for the
646 connections is 516,800 gallons Wells No I and 2 can supply a
total of 785 GPM producmg 1,130,400 gallons of water during a 24-
3687 005
-1-
June 3, 1992
hour period. The State Health Department requires a public water
system to be capable of providing 800 gallons per residential connection
per day Thus, the actual supply greatly exceeds the state mandated
source capacity
State regulations also require equalizing storage. This must be at least
equal to 150 times the difference between the MID and the source
production rate. For 1989 conditions, this source, 785 GPM, greatly
exceeds the MID, 535 GPM Therefore, no equalizing storage is
required under 1989 conditions.
To determine the required standby storage, the regulations state that the
largest well must be assumed out of service. Under current conditions,
this leaves a source supply of 385 GPM, for a total of 554,400 gallons
per day. For the current system, this results in 858 gallons per
connection per day Therefore, no standby storage is required for the
1989 system. With a storage capacity of 550,000 gallons, the system is
anticipated to provIde adequate storage for projected demands over the
next 20 years, with an estimated 1,130 connections, and a peak daily
demand of 904,000 gallons. This 1989 forecast did not account for the
projected growth of the 2,000-acre annexation, which is discussed
below
2 Impacts of the Proposal Complete buildout of the 5,000 residentIal
housing units, commercial and public buildings will exceed the current
storage and source capacities of the city's existing system. The
ultimate average demand of the fully developed annexatIon an~a IS
anticipated to be a total of 2,800 GPM for a total of 5,000 single-family
or equivalent residential connectIOns. Based on the State Health
Department minimum source supply of 800 gallons per reSIdentIal
connection per day, the peak daily demand for the 5,000 new
connections is 4 mIllion gallons. The maximum instantaneous demand
MID, for the 5,000 connections, is 3,583 GPM
Preliminary well source evaluations indicate that four wells within
the annexation area can readily produce a total of 200 GPM without
adversely affecting the subsurface aquifer Calculations prepared by
Robinson and Noble indicate that the rainfall recharge capacity of the
aquifer greatly exceeds the projected well demand. With the largest of
the forecasted wells out of service, the source supply of 1,500 GPM or
2,160,000 gallons per day is calculated. For the buildout condition, this
results in 432 gallons per connection per day This is less than the
required 800 gallons per day per connection. Therefore, 1,840,000
gallons of equalizing storage will be required.
3687 005
.,
June 3, 1992
Therefore the required equalizing storage of 238,000 gallons and the
required standby storage of 1,840,000 totals 2,078,000 gallons. As noted
above, this far exceeds the current city storage of 550,000 gallons.
Practically speaking, it will be necessary to build storage capacity to
provide both standby and equalizing storage to meet city and state
requirements. The size of the facility is currently projected to be 1.5
million gallons in size.
The annexation area's water system supply will also need to be
designed to accommodate actual fire flow requirements to adequately
provide fire flow and to satisfy ISO fire flow requirements, City of
Yelm and Washington State rules and regulations, depending upon the
final building configuration and fire rating.
In addition, irrigation water will be required for up to 45 golf course
holes. Up to 2500 GPM would be required without storage or as little as
400 GPM if storage is made available. The latter will be the preferred
design. Storage could be supplied by constructing several surface
reservoir ponds strategically spaced around the golf course holes. One
separate 500 GPM well could provide the necessary irrigation water for
this type of design. Otherwise, several additional wells would be
required to produce up to 2500 GPM.
It should be noted that the calculations for water demand (domestic,
fire and irrigation) assume that there will be no water recharge after
withdrawal even though there clearly will be. Therefore, the
calculations presented herein are a worst case scenario relative to
aquifer demand.
3. Impacts of the Alternatives. Impacts of both the compact and village
alternatives are largely the same as the proposal. Extended phasing
would provide additional time to mitigate potential impacts. No
action would not increase water demand.
4. Mitigating Measures. The proposed mitigation for complete
development of the annexation area is as follows.
A. Construct one water reservoir with a 1.5 million gallon
capacity within the annexation area to serve complete buildout
conditions.
B. Construct a loop water system throughout the entire
annexation site with connections to the existing 8-inch main and Berry
Valley Road and Longmire Road
C. Provide onsite fire hydrants and fire protection devices
as required by city regulations.
Appendix B
Wetlands Report
Prepared by
Independent Ecological Services
Olympia, Washington
Wetlands Delineation
Plant Classification
and
Wildlife Evaluation Report
of the
Thurston Highlands Property
Yelm, Thurston County, Washington
for
Kramer, Chin and Mayo
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98104
by
IES Associates
1514 Muirhead Avenue
Olympia, WA 98902
(206) 943-0127
June 22, 1992
1.0
2.0
3.0
Table of Contents
Introduction . . . . . . .. ......
1.1 Scope of Services. .. ......
1.2 Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.1 Background Data Analysis. . . .
1.2.2 Field Evaluation Procedures
1
1
2
2
2
Site Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1 Unit 1 - Thurston Highlands Property
2.2 Unit 2 - Venture Partners Properties
6
6
6
9
9
9
15
15
16
18
19
20
26
27
27
29
30
Evaluation Results . . . . . . . . .. .
3.1 Thurston Highlands Property. . . .
3.1.1 Vegetation. . . . . . .. .
3.1.2 Animals .. . . . . . . . .
3.1.2.1 Mammals. ....
3.1.2.2 Birds. . . . . .. .
3.1.2.3 Reptiles and Amphibians.
3.2 Venture Partners Property. . . . .
3.2.1 Vegetation. . . . . . .
3 . 2 . 2 Animal s .. .. ..... .
3.2.2.1 Mammals. . . . . . . . .
3.2.2.2 Birds . . . .
3.2.2.3 Reptiles and Amphibians .
3.2.2.4 Fish . . . . . .
4.0 Wetlands. . . . . . . . ... . . .. 31
4.1 Soils. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 32
4.1.1 A1derwood . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.1.2 Everett . . .. ......... 33
4.1.3 Indiano1a . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 34
4.1.4 McKenna . . . . . . . .. 34
4.1.5 Muki1teo. . .. ......... 35
4.1.6 Nisqua11y . .. ......... 36
4 . 1 . 7 Tenino. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.1.8 Spanaway . . . . . . . .. 37
4.1.9 Tisch . . . . . . . . . . .. 37
4.1.10 Ye1m . . . . . . . . . . . .. 38
4.2 Hydrology. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 39
4.3 Wetland Classification . . . . . . . 42
4.3.1 US Fish & Wildlife Service
Classification . . . . . . . . . . . .. 42
4.3.2 Ye1m Resource Lands and Critical Areas
Ordinance .. .. ... 43
4.4 On-Site Wetlands . .. ... 45
4.4.1 Wetland #1 . .. ... 45
4.4.2 Wetland #2 . .. ....... 46
4.4.3 Wetland #3 ............ 48
4.4.4 Wetland #4 . . . . . . . . .. 49
i
4.4.5 Wetland #5 . . . . . . . . . .
4.4.5 Wetland #6 . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4.7 Wetland #7 . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4.8 Wetland #8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4.9 Wetland #9 . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4.10 Wetland #10 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4.11 Wetland #11 . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4.11 Wetland #12 . . .
4.4.13 Wetland #13 . . . . . . . . .
4.4.14 Wetland #14 . . . . . . .
4.4.15 Wetland #15 . . . . . . .
4.4.16 Wetland #16 . . . . . . . . .
4.4.17 Wetland #17 . . . . . . .
4.4.18 Wetland #18 . . . . . . . . .
4.4.19 Wetland #19 . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4.20 Wetland #20 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.5 Off-Site Wetlands . . . . . . . . .
4.6 Wetland Summary . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.0 Impact Scenarios . . . . . .
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix A - Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Figure 1 - Location Map . . . . . . . . . . .
Figure 2 - Site Map . . . . . . .
Figure 3 - USFWS NWI Map . . . . . . . . . . .
Figure 4 - WA Dept of Fisheries Map . . .
Figure 5 - Vegetation Communities Map . . . .
Figure 6 - Soils Map . . . . . .. ....
Figure 7 - Soil Core Location Map . . . .. .
Figure 8 - Wetlands Map . . . . .. ...
Appendix B - Tables . . . . . . . . . . .
Table 1 - Definitions of Indicator Status
Table 2 - Hydric Soil Indicators . . . . . . .
Table 3 - Hydrologic Regimes and Wetland
Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . .
Table 4 - Partial List of Known or Expected
Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Table 5 - Partial List of Mammals . . . . .
Table 6 - Partial List of Birds . . . . . .
Table 7 - Partial List of Expected Reptiles and
Anlphibians .... . . . . . . . . . . . .
Table 8 - Summary of Wetland Classifications
Appendix C - Field Forms
..............
ii
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
59
60
61
64
64
66
67
69
71
73
76
86
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
104
105
107
108
109
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
1.0 Introduction
IES Associates conducted a site evaluation of the Welcome
Construction Company property identified as Thurston Highlands
and the Venture Partners properties located west of Yelm. The
properties start north of Highway 507, run north and northeast
to Durant Street SE, with an extension going to Berry Valley
Rd. SE (Figure 1). The purpose of the evaluation was to (1)
determine the presence or absence of wetlands; (2) define,
delineate, classify and evaluate all wetlands found; (3)
generate plant community profiles, identifying the dominant,
subdominant and seasonal plants present on the site; and (4)
identify wildlife use, including the presence of critical
wildlife habitats for sensitive species as identified by the
Washington State Department of Wildlife and US Fish and
Wildlife Service.
1.1 Scope of Services
Work preformed by IES Associates consisted of three
elements. These elements were (1) to locate, identify,
delineate and classify all wetlands on the property; (2) to
identify, classify, record and map all plant and animal use on
the site; and (3) to develop a conceptual impacts analysis of
different levels of development on different wildlife and
plant communities, wildlife species and wetlands on the
property.
-1-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
1.2 Procedures
1.2.1 Background Data Analysis
An initial site evaluation was conducted utilizing
aerial photographs, orthotopographic maps, oblique color
photographs, a preliminary wetlands delineation report
prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc., Coot Company wetland map,
US Geological Survey 7.5 Quadrangle topographic maps, 5 foot
contour topographic maps, US Fish and Wildlife Service NWI
wetland maps, Thurston County wetland maps, Soil Conservation
Service Soil Survey of Thurston County, Washington Department
of Fisheries Catalog of Washington Streams and the City of
Yelm "Draft Sensitive Areas Ordinance."
These documents were used to generate a working field map
that was used to locate vegetative communities, approximate
wetland boundaries, determine soil core location areas,
provide other information to assist in the determination of
wetland values and functions and to identify significant
animal habitats.
1.2.2 Field Evaluation Procedures
The Thurston Highlands' portion of the property was
surveyed with Kramer, Chin and Mayo and Bud Welcome to
identi fy its physical characteristics, i. e., depressions, high
areas and drainages and to get an understanding of the over-
all project site through a review of the location of roads,
powerline corridor and property boundaries. The site was
-2-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
evaluated based on the relationship between Earth Consultants
maps and the soils maps.
The Venture Partners' portion of the property was
surveyed with Mr. Cants of the Cants Dairy Farm. The property
boundaries, stream, culvert locations, and grazing practices
were explained during this site visit.
Depressions and wooded areas with evidence of wetlands or
wet tolerant trees and apparent drainage ways were walked and
photographed. Plants were identified and recorded with their
wetland classification (Table 1, Appendix B). A vegetative
community profile map, identifying each community as to
density, age and location in relationship to drainage ways,
slopes and roads, was generated.
Areas where wetlands or streams were identified on either
the US Fish and Wildlife National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps
(Figure 3, Appendix A) the Thurston County wetlands maps or
the Cataloo of Washinoton Streams were examined. If wetlands
were present, the outside boundaries of the wetlands were
delineated and marked with 3 X 3 foot florescent orange bulls-
eye ground flags or orange flags. These were located at the
approximate boundaries for aerial surveying and aerial
photography or ground truthing, which will be used to define
the location and boundaries of the wetlands in relationship to
contours, roads and the over-all site.
Soil cores were taken in transitional areas between
predominantly upland and predominantly hydric vegetation.
-3-
Wetlanas De11neat1on, Plant Class1r1cat1on ana W11Q11re
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
These cores were used to define the effect of intermittent
high waters on the soil (Table 2, Appendix B). Cores were dug
to 24 inches to evaluate surface water or the presence of
ground water at 14 to 18 inches during March 1992, to
determine if posi ti ve hydrology existed and to determine
whether certain wetlands were connected hydrologically for a
long enough or frequent enough period to create hydric
conditions (Table 3, Appendix B).
Wetland boundaries were delineated and flagged with
sequentially numbered flags. Each separate wetland was
numbered for identification and discussion. The wetland
number was included on the wetland flags to assist regulatory
authorities in comparing the on-site wetland conditions with
the report and with the impacts analysis and development
recommendations.
A detailed plant survey was conducted to identify plants
wi thin the wetlands and other sensi ti ve areas, including
slopes. Different vegetative communities were mapped to be
used in the over-all site evaluation and for inclusion into
the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). A list of plants
using both botanical and common names their frequency and
distribution are incorporated as tables to be included in the
EIS ( Table 4, Appendix B) . Plant community maps were
completed for the entire site (Figure 5, Appendix A).
Wildlife surveys were conducted during the vegetative
survey and while locating and delineating the wetlands. Bird
and mammal sign, including trails, whitewash, nests and
-4-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
indicators of feeding, such as chip piles, barking of trees,
clipping of shrubs, woodpecker borings, the destruction of
rotten logs and digging of mole or mole borrows, were noted
and recorded. Skulls or other skeletal remains were noted,
identified when possible and recorded. Vole runs, mole mounds
and other indicators of subterranean or surface gnawing
mammals was also recorded. If there was an exaggerated
evidence of their presence, the area was marked and mapped for
future review and utilization during the drafting of the
animal section of the EIS. All bird and mammal observations
made during site visits were noted. Recurrences of species on
different days were noted. Hunting areas that appeared to be
utilized routinely or daily by different species were
identified and marked. Fish data was obtained from the
Washington Department of Fisheries Cataloa of Washinaton
Streams and Salmon Utilization. Volume 1 (Figure 4, Appendix
A) .
Animal and plant data were drafted into this report in a
manner to allow extraction for inclusion into the EIS. All
figures, maps and tables are included as Appendices to allow
the EIS writers flexibility without demanding complete
rewrites of the narrative portions of this report.
-5-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
2.0 Site Description
The evaluation site consists of two evaluation units:
( 1 ) the Thurston Highlands property, and ( 2 ) the Venture
Partners properties (Cants Dairy Farm).
2.1 Unit 1 - Thurston Highlands Property
The Thurston Highlands property consists of approximately
1,236 acres of land located west of Yelm, northwest of Highway
507 and southeast of Fort Lewis (Figure 2, Appendix A). Road
access is through two private properties off of George Road
SEe The evaluation area consists of the west half of Section
26, Section 27, the southwest quarter of Section 23, and a 40-
acre tract in the center of Section 23, Township 17N, R1E.
2.2 Unit 2 - Venture Partners Properties
The Venture Partners properties consists of the Mt. View
Dairy Farm area located west and south of Durant Street SE in
Yelm. The farm is a heavily used dairy farm area with the
upper reaches of Thompson Creek running through a portion of
the property. The eastern half of the site includes the
residence, barns, heavily grazed farm areas, a depression with
ponds that have been badly degraded by cattle use and the
Thompson Creek drainage, which has been ditched and bermed
along both sides through a majority of the property. The
western half is a mixed series of open meadows, Douglas fir
and red alder woods that extend to the eastern property
boundary of the Thurston Highlands property in this area and
-6-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
to the eastern edge of the 40-acre portion of the Thurston
Highlands property. The high areas adj acent to Thompson Creek
have a mixed Gary oak/alder stand with areas along the west
side of the creek blending into a Douglas fir/big leaf maple/
alder mix. At the top of the slope to the west, the
vegetation gives way to a large Douglas fir meadow that
extends through the center of the property to the logged-over
eastern border of the Thurston Highlands. The meadow extends
south into a wet depression in the southwest corner of the
property. The overall property is located in the southwest
corner of section 24 and along the east edge of section 23.
The area is basically a high plain with numerous
depressions and mounds throughout the site, with the greatest
variations in elevation being in the south half of Sections 26
and 27 where the difference between wet potholes at the bottom
of the depressions and the road elevation at the top of the
depression slope may vary as much as 110 feet.
The north and west boundaries in Section 27 and the west
boundary of the southwest quarter of Section 23 abut Fort
Lewis. A powerline corridor extends across Section 27 from
the southwest corner of the property to a point near the
northeast corner of Section 27. The powerline corridor
extends north across Fort Lewis.
A network of logging roads on the site has been
maintained through brushing. This allows ready access to most
areas on the site. Major drainage ways have been culverted
-7-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
under these roads to allow normal movement of water throughout
the system.
All of the property has been logged with different
sections of the property logged at different times. Sections
26 and 27 were the most recently logged. The southwest
quarter of Section 23 was logged at an earlier date. All of
the property has been reforested with Douglas fir plantings.
The size of the Douglas fir connotates the approximate cutting
date and creates the major difference in vegetative canopy
composition on the property.
An access easement extends from the southeast corner of
that portion of the property in Section 26, east to a railroad
right-of-way and SR 507. This area and the northeast 40-acre
parcel have been managed differently than the large blocks of
lands in Sections 23, 26 and 27, thus creating a variation in
physical conditions, vegetation and wildlife habitats.
-8-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Hi9hlands Property
June 22, 19_92
3.0 Evaluation Results
3.1 Thurston Highlands Property
A majority of this portion of the project site consists
of recently logged areas with portions having been slash-
burned while larger portions are littered with downed timber,
limbs and waste material from the Douglas fir, undersized
alder and other trees which were knocked down during the
process of removing the Douglas fir trees.
There are a series of depressions on the site which
collect surface water. Water stands in portions of these
depressions for long enough periods of time to create
wetlands. The wetlands on the site are variable, including
one large forested wetland, shrub/scrub and emergent marsh
wetlands and open water potholes. There are 18 delineated
jurisdictional wetlands on the site. There is a reforested
Douglas fir area, approximately 120 acres in size, in Section
23 and an unlogged deciduous/coniferous forested area,
approximately 40 acres in size, along the east boundary of the
site.
3.1.1 Vegetation
All of the site, with the exception of two small areas
along the east property line, have been logged. A major
portion of the site has been logged within the past five
years. All of the area was revegetated with seedling Doug13s
fir per normal reforestation practices. The differences in
-9-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
the ages of the initial logging and replanting have generated
variations in the height and age class of Douglas Fir over
different portions of the property.
Two small stands of deciduous/con~ferous trees were left
standing in the eastern portion of the site. Dominant trees
in the southern most of these two areas are Douglas fir with
two large black cottonwood and a small cluster of red alder
along a drainage way that extends to the east property line.
The area to the north, which is the largest of the two stands,
is a mixed forested community with the species composition and
distribution regulated by the amount and duration of standing
water or hydric soil conditions. The western end is vegetated
with a mix of red alder, western red cedar and an occasional
black cottonwood. The center of the area is dominated by
mixed Oregon ash and alder with scattered red cedar. There
are three islands of Douglas fir in this area, one mixed with
red cedar along the north edge of the unharvested area, a
second along the south edge of the unharvested area and the
third being a larger U-shaped area that extends from the east
property line, westerly (Figure 5, Appendix A).
Understory vegetation in this large, unharvested area
also varies with the soil conditions and duration and depth of
standing water. The high canopy shrub mix in the drier areas
consist of red elderberry, osoberry, red-flowering currant and
ninebark with scattered salmonberry. In the center core, the
high shrubs change to a predominantly salmonberry stand with
scattered Douglas spirea with osoberry on hummocks and logs.
-10-
Wetlands lineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluat_ '<
Thurston H....ghlands Property
June 22, 1992
Red elderberry grows on stumps, both at the edge and in
portions of the deeper water area.
Ground cover changes between these two areas from a
false-lily of the valley mat in the drier areas under the
mixed shrubs, to a buttercup area in the moderately wet areas
and to water parsley and skunk cabbage in the deeper areas.
False solomon-seal grow in clusters in the midst of the false-
lily of the valley and on the hummocks with the osoberry in
the wetter portion of the site. Scattered open areas
throughout the deepwater portion has dense mix~d stands of
water hemlock and skunk cabbage. These areas do not have
dense stands of salmonberry, which allows sufficient light to
reach the ground floor to provide the habitat necessary for
their survival.
The three Douglas fir and Douglas fir and cedar islands
have variable under stories. The northern Douglas fir and
cedar stand is typical of the remainder of the borderline wet
area with the red elderberry, osoberry, red-flowering currant
and red huckleberry with Sitka and Scouler's willow growing
along the open edges adjacent to the recently logged area.
The ground cover was predominantly false-lily of the valley,
solomon seal, false-solomon seal and piggyback in areas where
the sun could reach the ground. The southern Douglas fir area
was dominated by a high canopy of osoberry, red elderberry and
salmon berry with scattered patches of red-flowering currant,
and thimbleberry plus a low canopy of mixed salal and mahonia
with a ground cover of false-lily of the valley, false solomon
seal, piggyback and bleeding heart.
-11-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
The large U-shaped wetland in the eastern portion of this
unharvested stand has a mixed Douglas fir and red alder
dominated over story, which included big-leaf maple, cascara,
western red cedar and black cottonwood. The black cottonwood
were concentrated around the center slough that extends from
the eastern property line, westerly into the site and along
the northern edge where the Oregon ash and slough sedge marsh
swamp continues to the east property line. The high canopy
under story consists of osoberry, red elderberry, ocean spray,
red-flowering currant, prickly currant and vine maple. The
low cover varies with a salal and mahonia mix in the drier
areas giving way to a ground cover in the wetter or fringe
areas. Ground cover varied, being limited in some areas by
the density of the salal and mahonia. Where present, it
consisted of sword fern, false-lily of the valley, false-
solomon seal and piggyback with mixed grasses in certain
areas. Where light penetrated, there were open pockets
allowing grass growth. Grasses were dominated by orchard
grass, quack grass, velvet grass, eat's ear, English plantain
and sour dock. The drainage swale in the center grows mats of
green algae, which dries forming a dense algae mat that
precludes vegetative cover over most of this area. That which
does occur, is a mix of slough sedge, skunk cabbage and water
parsley.
The logged upland area and remainder of the site have
varying sized Douglas fir, ranging from 3 to 30 feet. The
oldest growth stands on the southwest quarter of Section 23
and in the southwest corner of the project site (Section 27).
Secondary trees growing with the Douglas fir are dominated by
-12-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
black cottonwood, with the average tree size being 1/4 to 1/2
inch in diameter and 10 to 12 feet tall. Red alder are also
scattered over the recently logged portion of the site, with
larger trees reaching from 1 to 2 inch diameter and 15 to 20
feet tall along the edges of the logging roads. There are two
areas on the site where the dominant shrub is Scot's broom.
Shrubs vary on the remainder of the site with red
elderberry being the most common in some areas and osoberry
the most common in other areas. Throughout the recently
harvested area, the dominant ground cover was trailing
blackberry. Grasses growing throughout the recently logged
areas were dominated by orchard grass, with a normal pasture
mix of non-native species being scattered throughout the
remainder of the site.
The understory in the older growth Douglas fir areas in
the northeast and the southwest corners have mixed hima1ayan
blackberry, sala1, mahonia, bracken fern and sword fern. Due
to the density of the low-limb cover, the brush and ground
cover in these areas are sparse and scattered.
The greatest variation of vegetation on the site occurs
in the depressions around wet pockets; however, even these are
limited in species diversity. The large central wetland area
has a shrub border of Douglas spirea, four willow species,
niner~rk, osoberry and red elderberry. The center core, or
deep; ~ part of the wetland, varies with portions being
domi' -sd by cattail and hardstem bulrush while the remainder
is dClninated by dense stands of Douglas spirea. There are
-13-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
open pockets of water in the pond; however, because of logging
wood debris, emergent vegetation is limited. What does exist,
consists of slough sedge, water parsley, buttercup and smart
weed with scattered reed canarygrass. Salmonberry and Douglas
spirea are the dominant shrubs extending from the east end of
this large wetland in the drainage-way, to the east property
line. The shrubs are growing under a young black cottonwood
stand with some trees as much as 6 inches in diameter.
There are eight depressions on the site that are
principally circular, intermittently-flooded water holes
surrounded by a willow mix with an inner border of Douglas
spirea and/or salmonberry. Douglas spirea is most prevalent
in areas that were not as well shaded prior to logging with
the salmonberry being present in those depressions where there
is evidence that Douglas fir provided good shade cover.
Border willows are predominantly with Scouler's willow and
Sitka willow in varying elevations surrounding the water with
Pacific willow and heart-leaf willow in the deeper water
areas. Where there was a steep incline into the depression,
the willows were usually dominated by two species, the Sitka
willow at the edge and Pacific willow in the deeper water
areas. The edges surrounding these depressions have varying
grass stands. Those areas that are close to logging roads
have more grasses than those which were surrounded by Douglas
fir prior to logging. Again, the dominant grass was orchard
grass with quack grass, sweet vernal grass and some velvet '
grass growing in patches along disturbed areas next to the
roads or log handling areas.
-14-
we~1anas De11nea~1on, P1an~ C1ass1r1ca~1on ana W11011re
Evalua'tion
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
A partial list of plants is included as Table 5,
Appendix B.
3.1.2 Animals
Wildlife use of the site has been significantly altered
by the logging operation. The surrounding unlogged areas,
particularly those properties on Fort Lewis, continue to
provide the necessary habitat to support big game species
which utilizes this area for movement, migration and feeding.
The regrowth of young plants and the invasion of a variety of
forest and new young shrubs has provided additional food for
browsing species, which probably were not as prevalent prior
to logging as they are under existing conditions. The entire
area is criss-crossed with animal trails. The stumps, dead
logs and snags have been worked by a variety of birds and what
appears to be mammal use. Skulls, bone fragments, and
deposi ted deer horns, which have been gnawed, indicate a
variety of predators and small mammals.
3.1.2.1 Mammals
Mammal identification was limited almost entirely to
sign, including trails, rubbings, browsing or clipping, stump
destruction, chip piles and droppings.
Black tail deer are the most predominant large mammals.
There was also evidence of some black bear use. There is
known elk in the general vicinity; however, there was no sign
on the site indicating that elk were using the property
-15-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
proper. Due to the density of the forest surrounding the area
and the past history of the site having limited amounts of
grasses, this was to be expected.
Small mammals noted on the site included cottontail and
brush rabbit, at least 2 species of voles, meadow mice, whi te-
tail deer mice, 2 species of moles, long-tail weasel and 1 or
2 species of shrews. Predators using the area included
coyote, raccoon, striped skunk and red fox. Opossum also use
the site. Mountain beaver were found on the wooded slope
banks in the southeast corner next to the larger draw and the
wetland along the west property line. Chickaree were still
present in the unharvested portions along the east property
line, with extended use in the properties to the east and
evidence of the presence in the forested areas on Fort Lewis
surrounding the north and west side.
A partial list of mammals is included as Table 6,
Appendix B.
3.1.2.2 Birds
Bird utilization has also been modified by the logging
activities that have occurred on the site during the past 10
to 15 years. The lost forest canopy has changed the emphasis
of bird use from deep forested, upland species, to a mix of
open grass/shrub species. Bluebird boxes have been placed
around the site in an effort to increase mountain bluebird
activity, which was historically present on the high plains in
this area.
-16-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Dominant bird use on the site were small meadow type
species including grasshopper sparrows, swallows, white and
golden-crowned sparrows and juncos. Red-shafted flicker,
pileated woodpecker and hairy and downy woodpeckers are using
the forested areas along the east side and the 40 acre tract
in Section 23. These species overlap and use the forested
area surrounding the site on the Fort Lewis property and in
the open forest pastures to the east.
Red-tailed hawk, marsh hawk and sharp-shinned hawk were
observed hunting the site. There is evidence of great-horned
owl use in the large, unlogged, forested wetland. The use
appeared to be in the northeastern corner in the large black
cottonwood and cedar area.
Waterfowl, including mallard, pintail, teal and gadwall,
were observed using the open water pockets and forested ponds
throughout the site. Wood ducks were observed in the brushy,
forested wetlands in the southwest corner of the site, in the
wooded wetland areas east of the site and in the open pasture
wetland habitats. An off-site open pond and the pasture area
to the east also supported widgeon, scaup, red-breasted and
hooded mergansers and Canada geese. This is an enhanced
wetland area that has been turned into a deeper water pond
with grass emergent marsh buffers.
Great blue heron were observed hunting the areas
surrounding the large emergent marsh wetland in the southwest
corner where there was evidence of a number of frogs. They
-17-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
were also hunting a small drainage ditch in the 40 acre parcel
in the center of Section 23.
A partial list of known or expected birds is included as
Table 6, Appendix B.
3.1.2.3 Reptiles and Amphibians
Common garter snake and western terrestrial garter snake
were observed in varying locations throughout the site. The
wet pond areas, particularly in the southern half of Section
26, in the wetland in the southwest corner of the site and in
the 40 acre parcel in the center of Section 23, had high
concentrations of Pacific tree frogs and red-legged frogs.
Bull frogs were identified in the large, wooded wetland along
the south property line, which extends off the site to the
south into a heavily forested wetland with a man-made modified
pond. Because of the time of the year and the duration and
detail of the wildlife studies, no efforts were made to
identify salamanders or other aquatic species that might be
present in the larger forested wetlands along the south
property line, in the southwest corner or in the large
unlogged forested area in the center of Section 26. It is
anticipated, because of the log downfall, that there should be
a good variety and relati vely high numbers of bog type
salamanders, which are common to western Washington.
A partial list of reptiles and amphibians is contained in
Table 7, Appendix B.
-18-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
3.2 Venture Partners Property
The Venture Partners portion of the project site is the
property lying east of the Thurston Highlands property and has
been re-evaluated independently of the Thurston Highlands
because of the variation use, which effected both vegetation
and soils.
The area starts as a flat pasture-land along the east
side abutting the golf course and partially developed
residential areas along Berry Valley Road and Durant Street
southeast. The property slopes gradually from the east to the
draw that supports Thompson Creek. From Thompson Creek the
area slopes up to the west creating a linear hogback from the
south property line to near the north property line. To the
west, this hogback drops to a second depression that is
diagonal from running northeast to southwest in the northwest
corner of the property, while remaining relati vely high
throughout the center of the property. To the southwest
corner of the property, the depression drops into an isolated
draw that supports intermittent standing water. The area
bordering both sides of the creek have linear depressions that
collect surface water which runs from south to north and into
the creek before it's discharged off-site.
The area west of the barn and east of Thompson creek is
heavily impacted by cattle use. In this area the soils has
been heavily pocked in the depression where water stands in
-19-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
the winter. The pond in the south end of this meadow is a
heavy silt and fecal contamination load. To the north as the
depression becomes shallower, the water is intermittent
flowing from south to north, through an impacted depression.
West of the creek there is a high meadow in the central area
that is irrigated with a water/manure mix, which increases the
fecal coliform/nitrogen content in the soil. The two larger
meadows on the northeast in the extreme north portions of the
property are also fertilized with the water/manure slurry mix.
Water quality in the stream is poor due to blockages
created by undersized culverts in Berry Valley Road and by
crossings in the vegetation where cattle are allowed to cross
and wade through the stream and stand in the stream at any
part of the day. The areas around the barns and fenced
feedlot areas and congregation areas for the yearling calves
and adult cows being milked, the residence and barns where
the formal landscaping.
Portions of the area are forested with a Douglas fir mix
that is an extension of the Thurston Highlands property to the
west, while the remainder of the forested area is a mix of
alder and Garry oak, which is typical of the ridge that runs
southeasterly off the site towards the Yelm highway.
3.2.1 Vegetation
The wooded portion of the depression extends to the west
and is vegetated with a dense Douglas fir forested area. The
dominate canopy cover in the lower area is red alder with a
-20-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
high shrub canopy being a mix of filbert, twinberry, with
service berry, ocean spray, and scattered pockets of hardhack
and areas of Himalayan blackberry around openings or along
cattle trails.
The ground cover varies with the density of the canopy
and the density of the shrub vegetation. In the higher areas
where the sun reaches the ground, there is a mix of grass,
piggyback, with some creeping blackberry. In the denser
canopied areas the piggyback gives way to buttercup and mixed
grasses. These areas still have filbert as the dominant shrub
vegetation. The depression rises both to the east and west,
giving way to a Douglas fir canopy with some alder, big-leaf
maple and cascara. The understory is predominantly ocean
spray, filbert with some red huckleberry and a ground cover of
salal, mixed stands of Indian plum and snowberry.
Nettle is growing in the open areas where the sun reaches
the ground. Underneath the dense Douglas fir canopy, there is
wild ginger. There is a high pasture in this area that has
been managed and maintained; has a mix of grasses dominated
by quackgrass, western wheat grass, sweet vernal grass,
orchard grass tall fescue. South of this meadow, the area
drops into a wet meadow that extends southerly to near the
south property line. There are scattered western red cedar in
this area, a portion of which are dead, indicating that the
area is wetter than it was under historic conditions. South
of this depression the area slopes back up to another Douglas
fir stand, typical of the Douglas fir on the remainder of the
si te. There is a deciduous shrub area in the southwest
-21-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
corner of this Douglas fir stand. The shrubs are dominated by
filbert, Himalayan blackberry with mixed salal, sword fern and
other species which extend off the property to the south.
The western edge of the property slopes up to a higher
ridge that runs the length of the property between the western
component and Thompson Creek. The central portion is a dense
Douglas fir stand with a filbert/ocean spray dominated
understory that is so dense that is precludes ground cover in
much of the area. Ground cover that is present includes
piggyback and snowberry. Himalayan blackberry dominates the
edge between the forested area and open meadows throughout
this site. Under the denser canopy, false-lily-of-the-valley
and ginger are mixed with occasional buttercup and piggyback.
The northern end of this portion has a number of trails made
by people either on foot or on trail bikes. Big-leaf maple
and western red cedar are mixed in along the north and east
edges of the forested component.
The meadow in the south central portion of this ridge is
a mix of introduced meadow grass/ pasture mix with sweet
vernal grass, quackgrass, orchard grass, timothy, Kentucky
bluegrass, annual ryegrass, tall fescue, white and alsike
clover. Thistle, plantain, tansy, dandelion, and eat's ear
are scattered throughout the pasture area. This portion of
pasture is irrigated with a slurry made of water and barnyard
waste that leaves a sediment of partially digested grass and
straw from the cleaning of the barns as a residue for mixed-
length periods of time after the spraying. To the south the
meadow gives way to a Douglas fir stand that gives way along
-22-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
the east side to mixed alder/Gary oak stand which extends down
to the edge of Thompson Creek.
In the north and north central portions of the site,
Thompson Creek is a narrow, linear ditch (vertical sided) that
has been dredged with the spoil deposited as a berm along
portions of both sides. The dominant vegetation on the
dredged spoils throughout the length is western crabapple with
ninebark. Oregon ash grow at the waters edge with the
crabapple, but is less dominant. In areas where the native
crabapple has been disturbed, ei ther for fencing or road
crossing, the Oregon ash and alder have become established.
To the south the stream opens up into depressed, paralleling
drainage ways along the west side creating a intermittently,
flooded meadow wetland that varies from 20 - 50 ft. wide until
it reaches an area close to the south property line. At this
point there is a large buttercup emergent marsh overflow area
along the west side of the creek. Near the center of the
property there is a spur channel that collects drainage and
interacts with the larger wetland to the south. The area
along both sides of the creek is wet, having a dense stand of
nootka rose along the east side of the creek mixed with
salmonberry and twinberry. As the area raises in elevation to
the east, the vegetation changes to a mixed grass meadow
dominated by eat's ear which is taking over this small pasture
area because of heavy grazing. The pasture gives way to a
dense Garry oak stand with a thick Oregon grape/osoberry
ground cover with scattered grasses and snowberry in the ope~
fringe areas. This area abuts the golf course along the east
-23-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
The flat to the east of the creek varies in vegetation
wi th the elevation. The area that is low stands surface water
for extended periods of time and is dominated by scattered
Oregon ash trees, which replace the oak. Alder are mixed with
the Oregon ash, with the ash being more dominant in the wetter
areas.
In the central portion of the site, just west of the
barns there is a depression that has standing water with
Oregon ash up to the edge. As the water drops during the
summer, the edge becomes vegetated with a dominant smart weed-
hemlock-water parsley mix with the smart weed gradually taking
over as the area dries out during the summer. This area
extends as a linear swale to the north where it interacts with
the mainstream channel. It is evident that waters from this
area collect and run to the north and enter into Thompson
Creek during the winter months. The ground vegetation in this
area is trampled into obscurity by the cattle. There is algae
mixed in the open water portion of the pond at the south end
of this depression. This gives way to a buttercup/smart
weed/water parsley mix in the wetter areas that give way to
smart weed dominated intermittently flooded swale.
The depression in the center of the property raises in
elevation to the east into a feed yard area directly behind
the barns and a heavily grazed pasture north and west of the
barns.
There is a high pasture area directly north and west
of the barns and residence that is dominated by a non-native/
-24-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
native grass mix, which was planted into the area in the past
as cattle graze and hay. The mix is the same as in the meadow
to the south being dominated by tall fescue, sweet vernal
grass, and orchard grass. This area is also irrigated with
water/manure slurry mix.
At the north end of the property, where the Creek crosses
north of the wooded area, there is a wet depression with
softrush, slough sedge, with an island of hard hack, twinberry
and Himalayan blackberry, with an occasional individual Oregon
ash and alder. The meadow area surrounding this is dominated
by buttercup and wet grasses.
The creek crosses under Berry Valley Road SE. in an
undersized culvert. The restriction of the culvert back","
floods this lower area during heavy rains when run-off exceeds
the capacity of the channel and the culvert. The back-
flooding has increased the width and wetness of the wetland in
this portion of the site. The northeasterly finger of this
area has a grass pasture area, again dominated by the same
introduced non-native/native mix as is designated in other
areas. A portion of this pasture has a higher density of
thistle.
The heavily pastured areas have been invaded by a mix of
grasses and forbs that are typical of heavily impacted lands.
In the drier portions of the pastured areas dominant
vegetation is pineapple weed. As the area becomes wetter, the
disturbed ground cover changes to a mix of smart weed, willow
weed, and toad rush. The soils in the wetter portions
-25-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
adjacent to depressions and the creek are pocked with cattle
marks showing the effects of grazing during the wet season
when the soil is saturated down to the harder sub-soil.
Dog fennel replaces the willow weed and pineapple weed
in higher elevations where the ground is drier and the area is
over-grazed. Black mustard is present throughout the drier
portions of the site, particularly along fence lines and under
open tree canopies.
The stream channel itself is vegetated throughout most of
its length because of its slow stagnant condition. The edges
in the areas where the water moves the fastest have water
plantain and burr reed along the edges. Reaches where the
water slows, have floating mats of duck weed, water weed,
water parsley, water hemlock, and duck potato. Alodea is
appearing in some of the stagnant water areas. Slough sedge,
small fruited bulrush, and softrush grow in the fringe area in
the overflow areas with buttercup and redtop.
At the south end of the property in the depression under
the heavy trees, there is pockets with skunk cabbage mixed
with water hemlock and water parsley.
3.2.2 Animals
Fish and wildlife in this portion of the site vary with
the vegetation and wetness more than on the Thurston Highlands
portion of the site. The mix of oak with Douglas fir provide
habitat for a variety of small birds and mammals that utilize
-26-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
hardwoods. Deer use the woods and stream bottom area, even
with the heavy cattle use. Deer horns, tracks and a skull
were evidence of some use. Tracks, spore and other
indicators, similar to those used on Thurston Highlands
portion of the site were used in this area.
3.2.2.1 Mammals
Deer continue to be the dominant, and possibly the only,
large mammal to use this portion of the site. The extensive
grazing and young animal raising without any evidence of
predation or carrion eating is indication that the limited
black bear population does not use this area.
Small mammal included eastern cottontail rabbit, brush
rabbit, long and possibly short-tailed weasels, meadow mice,
white-tailed mice, moles, voles and shrews. Predators using
the area included coyote, raccoon, striped skunk and possibly
red fox. Chickaree were present in the larger stands of
Douglas fir but only in limited numbers. No grey squirrel,
either eastern or western were observed. According to the
residents in this area, the squirrels are not in the area.
A partial list of mammals in included as Table 5,
Appendix B.
3.2.2.2 Birds
Bird utilization has been modified by the extensive
pasturing, the change in vegetation to a mixed native/
-27-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
non-native mix, and the irrigation with the manure slurry.
The tall grasses in the two northern pastures attracts a
variety of grass nesting species such as Savannah sparrow and
western meadowlark. The grass pastures in conjunction with
the oak woods provides habitat for western bluebirds and
Lazuli bunting.
The oak tree/alder habitat attracts hardwood users such
as warblers, bushtits, and vireos. Wilson's, orange-crowned
and Audubon's warblers were seen or heard in the less
disturbed portions of these woods. The Douglas fir stands had
robin, swainson's thrush, towhee, chickadee, bushtit and pine
siskins.
Taller trees at the edges of meadows were used as hunting
perches foe red-tailed hawk. Marsh hawk were hunting the
larger un-grazed pasture areas.
The forested mix coupled with open meadows and cattle
feeding areas create an insect community that attracts insect
eating crevice, hole and deciduous woods nesting species.
Flycatchers, kingbirds, tree swallow, violet green swallow,
ti tmice and others were observed in the mixed woods and flying
feeding forays over the pasture areas. Cowbirds, brewers
blackbirds and starlings concentrated in and around the feed
lot areas.
Ruffed grouse, valley quail and ring-necked pheasants
were seen or heard in the forested areas and protected areas
at the edge of the pastures.
-28-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
During the winter, waterfowl use the creek and pond area
in the east pasture below the barns. During this time the
water is high and less contaminated, attracting dabbling
species such as mallard, pintail and teal. There was no
evidence of wood ducks or other crevice or hole nesting
waterfowl.
Great blue heron hunt the creek because of the abundance
of aquatic life. They have also been observed with snakes and
mice. Green heron may use the northern portion of the creek,
however, they usually desire clearer running water than occurs
on the site..
A partial list of birds is included on Table 6,
Appendix B.
3.2.2.3 Reptiles and Amphibians
Snakes were more prevalent in the forested/pasture edge
areas than on Thurston Highlands. Both garter snakes use the
wet pasture areas feeding off mice, insects, and frogs. The
stream, wet areas and the open water pond had dense
populations of bullfrogs, good populations of red-legged frogs
and a mixed distribution of Pacific tree frogs. Unidentified
salamanders-skinks were observed in the standing or slow
moving waters in the creek.
A partial list of species is included in Table 7,
Appendix B.
-29-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
3.2.2.4 Fish
The only fish identified on the site or indicated on the
property, through discussions with local residence, are the
fish in Thompson Creek. Washington Department of Fisheries
lists coho salmon as probable but not certain in the stream (~
Catalog of Washinqton Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume
1). Small unidentified fingerlings were observed north of the
property but not in the reach through the project site.
-30-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
4.0 Wetlands
Wetlands on the site were defined usi the triple
parameter procedure as outlined in the Federal Manual for the
Identification and Delineation of Jurisdictional Wetlands
(1989). The procedures require identification of the presence
of all three hydric parameters, i. e., hydric vegetation,
hydric soils and water at the surface, or within 18 inches of
surface, for seven continuous days du ing any portion of the
growing season (Tables 1, 2 and 3, Appendix B).
The evaluation procedures, identified in Section 2.0 of
the Manual, were utilized to identify and delineate the
wetlands. Areas with positive hydrology, Le., standing water
or saturation at the surface, and hydric vegetation were
delineated and classified as wetlands with no further
evaluation procedures conducted. Soil evaluations, including
color, texture, approximate moisture content, presence or
absence of mottling, friability and other hydric conditions
which separate hydric from non-hydric soils, were conducted
through the placement of 24 inch soil cores in areas where the
soils were marginally wet or there were transitional
vegetative communities that included a variety of facultative
upland or upland plants. The A horizon was measured for
depth, texture and color and recorded on routine evaluation
field forms. The B horizon was also identified, unless there
was surface water wi thin 14 inches of the surface. If
moisture was present, the B horizon was analyzed, but not
recorded.
-31-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
4.1 Soils
Based on the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Soil Survey
of Thurston County Washinqton (1990), there are 10 soil types
on the site. The principal soil series mapped by the SCS as
being present on the subject site include three mapping units
in the Alderwood series (2, 3, and 4 on the SCS map) occurring
on three to 50 percent slopes, four mapping units in the
Everett series (32, 33, 34, and 35 on the SCS map) occurring
on zero to 50 percent slopes, two mapping units in the
Indianola series (47 and 48 on the SCS map) occurring on three
to 30 percent slopes, McKenna gravelly silt loam (65 on the
SCS map) occurring on zero to five percent slopes, both
undrained and drained Mukil teo muck (69 and 70 on the SCS
map), Nisqually loamy sand ( 74 on the SCS map), two mapping
uni ts in Spanaway gravelly sandy loam, (110 and 111 on the SCS
map),two mapping units in the Tenino series (116 and 117 on
the SCS map) occurring on three to 30 percent slopes and two
mapping units in the Yelm series (126 and 127 on the SCS map)
occurring on zero to 15 percent slopes (Figure 6, Appendix A).
4.1.1 Alderwood
Alderwood series consists of moderately deep, moderately
well drained gravelly sandy loam soils on glacial till plains.
The soils were formed in ablation till overlying basal till.
The mapping units located on the subject site are described as
typically having a surface layer that is a very dark brown
gravelly sandy loam about six inches thick. The upper nine
inches of the subsoil is described as being a dark brown
-32-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
gravelly sandy loam. The lower 15 inches of subsoil is
described as being a dark brown gravelly sandy loam. A weakly
cemented, strongly compacted hardpan is at a depth of about 30
inches. The depth to this hardpan ranges from 20 to 40
inches. Permeability is moderately rapid above the hardpan
and is very slow in the area of the hardpan. The available
water holding capacity within this soil is low. A perched
seasonal high water table is present at a depth of 18 to 36
inches from November to March. Water flows along the hardpan
and may seep at the bottom of slopes. Surface runoff is slow
and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. This soil is not
included on the hydric soil list for Thurston County.
4.1.2 Everett
The Everett series consists of very deep, somewhat
excessively drained, very gravelly sandy loam soils on
terraces, outwash plains and terrace escarpments. These soils
were formed in glacial outwash. The mapping units located on
the subject site are described as typically having a surface
layer th2t is dark reddish brown very gravelly sandy loam
about three inches thick. The subsoil is described as being
dark brown and dark yellowish brown extremely gravelly sandy
loam and extremely gravelly loamy sand about 17 inches thick.
The substratum, to a depth of 60 inches or more, is olive
brown extremely gravelly loamy sand and dark grayish brown
extremely gravelly sand. Permeabili ty is rapid and the
available water holding capacity wi thin this soil is low.
Rates of surface runoff range from slow to rapid and hazard of
erosion ranges from slight to severe depending upon slope.
-33-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
This soil is not included on the hydric soil list for Thurston
County.
4.1.3 Indianola
The Indianola series consists of very deep, somewhat
excessively drained loamy sand soils. These soils were formed
in sandy glacial drift. The mapping units located on the
subject site are described as typically having a surface layer
that is dark reddish brown loamy sand about 6 inches thick.
The upper 7 inches of the subsoil is dark reddish brown loamy
sand. The lower 12 inches of subsoil is dark brown loamy
sand. The upper 10 inches of the substratum is dark yellowish
brown sand and the lower part, to a depth of 60 inches or
more, is olive brown sand. Permeability is rapid and the
available water holding capacity is moderate. Surface runoff
is medium and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. The
soil is not included on the hydric soil list for Thurston
County.
4.1.4 McKenna
The McKenna series consists of moderately deep, poorly
drained gravelly silt loam soils in depressions and drainage
ways. These soils were formed in glacial drift. The mapping
unit located on the subject site is described as typically
having a surface layer that is black gravelly silt loam about
nine inches thick. The upper 4 inches of subsoil is very dark
grayish gravelly silt loam, the next 8 inches is dark brown
very gravelly silt loam and the lower 15 inches is dark brown
-34-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
and dark yellowish brown, mottled very gravelly loam. The
substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is grayish brown,
dense glacial till. Depth to the glacial till ranges from 20
to 40 inches. permeabili ty is moderate above the dense
glacial till and very slow through the till. The available
water holding capacity wi thin this soil is moderate. A
perched seasonal high water table is present near or above the
surface from November to April. Surface runoff is ponded or
very slow and the hazard of water erosion is slight. This
soil is included on the hydric soil list for Thurston County.
Areas of Bellingham and Norma soils have been included in the
mapping of this soil series. Both of these soils are on the
hydric soil list for Thurston County.
4.1.5 Mukil1:eo
The Mukilteo series is described as consisting of very
deep, very poorly drained muck soils in upland depressions.
These soils formed in organic materials derived from sedges.
In drained Mukil tea soils, drainage has been altered by
subsurface drains and open ditches. The mapping units located
on the subject site are described as typically having a
surface layer that is dark yellowish brown and dark reddish
brown muck about 6 inches thick. Below this layer, to a depth
of 60 inches or more, is dark reddish brown mucky peat.
Permeabili ty is moderate and the available water holding
capacity within this soil is high. A seasonal high water
table is present at or above the surface from October to
April. Surface runoff is ponded and water erosion is not a
-35-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
hazard. Both the drained and undrained Mukil teo muck are
included on the hydric soil list for Thurston County.
4.1.6 Nisqually
The Nisqually series consists of very deep somewhat
excessively drained soils on terraces; soils formed in sandy
glacial outwash. The soils area a sandy mixed pachic
Xerumbrepts, and a typical cross-section in the top 0 - 5" is
a loam fine sand, very friable, non-sticky, with many medium
and fine roots. From 5 - 18" the soil is loamy fine sand. It
is very friable non-sticky and non-plastic. It is medium and
fine roots are common. From 18 - 31" the soil is loamy fine
sand. It is very friable, non-sticky and non-plastic.
Nisqually soils are not classified as hydric soils by the Soil
Conservation Service.
4.1.7 Tenino
The Tenino series is described as consisting of
moderately deep, moderately well drained gravelly loam soils
on terminal moraines. These soils were formed in glacial till
over glacial outwash. The mapping units located on the
subject site are described as typically having a surface layer
that is dark reddish brown gravelly loam about 11 inches
thick. The upper 10 inches of the subsoil is gravelly loam,
the next 15 inches is dark yellowish brown gravelly loam and
the lower 4 inches is a weakly cemented, strongly compacted,
yellowish brown hardpan. The depth to this hardpan ranges
from 20 to 40 inches. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches
-36-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
or more is dark yellowish brown extremely gravelly sandy loam.
Permeability is moderate above the hardpan, very slow in tt3
area of the hardpan and very rapid below the hardpan. The
available water holding capacity wi thin this soil is moderate.
Surface runoff is slow and the hazard of water erosion is
slight. This soil is not included on the hydric soil list for
Thurston County.
4.1.8 Spanaway
Spanaway series consists of very deep somewhat
excessively drained soils on terraces. These soils form a
glacial outwash and volcanic ash. Soils are a sandy-skeletal,
mixed, mesic Andic Xerumbrepts. In a typical profile the top
15 inches is a gravelly sandy loam. It is loose, very
friable, non-sticky and non-plastic and strongly acid. From
15 to 20 inches, the soil is a very gravelly sandy loam with
fine sub-angular blocky structure that is very friable, non-
sticky and non-plastic. It has course roots, 55% pebbles and
is medium acid. From 20 - 60" the soil is extremely gravelly
sand with a few fine roots: 80% pebbles and 10% cobbles. The
soil is not classified as a hydric soil by the Soil
Conservation Service.
4.1.9 Tisch
Tisch silt loam is a very poorly drained soil in upland
depressions and drainage ways. Typically, the upper part of
the surface layer is very dark brown silt loam about 6 inches
thick and the lower part is very dark grayish brown silt about
-37-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
5 inches thick. The substratum, to a depth of 60 inches or
more, is stratified black, very dark brown, dark grayish brown
and dark brown silt and muck.
Included in this unit are small areas of Dupont, Everson,
McKenna and Norma soils in depressions and Giles and Yelm
soils on terraces. Permeability is moderately slow.
Available water capacity is high. Effective rooting depth is
limited by a seasonal high water table that is at or near the
surface from December to April. The main limitation affecting
the utilization of the soil is extreme muddiness caused by
seasonal wetlands.
4.1.10 Yelm
The Yelm series is described as consisting of deep,
moderately well drained fine sandy loam soils on terraces.
These soils were formed in volcanic ash and glacial outwash.
The mapping units located on the subject site are described as
typically having a surface layer that is dark brown fine sandy
loam about 8 inches thick. The upper 9 inches of the subsoil
is dark yellowish brown fine sandy loam and the lower 29
inches is dark grayish brown and olive brown, mottled fine
sandy loam. The substratum, to a depth of 60 inches or more,
is light olive brown loamy sand. Permeability is moderately
rapid and the available water holding capacity within this
soil is high. A seasonal high water table fluctuates between
depths of 18 to 36 inches from December to March. Surface
runoff is slow and the hazard of water erosion is slight.
-38-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
This soil is not included on the hydric soil list for Thurston
County.
4.2 Hydrology
The dominant hydrological activity on the site includes
(1) the collection and containment of surface water runoff
from ~he area, with entrapment in the isolated depression and
(2) ~he collection of on-site and off-site surface water into
depressions that include linear drainages that flow off-site
to the east, west and north, depending on the individual
wetland, (3) Thompson Creek and Thompson Creek drainage and
(4) the agricultural irrigation on the pasture portions of the
Venture Partners property in the northeast corner of the
evaluation site.
Dominant collection points of the Thurston Highlands
property are in the southern half of Sections 27 and 26, with
the greatest concentrations of collected water being in the
northwest one-quarter of Section 26 or the southeast portion
of the proposed development site.
Waters in these areas collect into a series of
depressions which were identified as Wetlands #1 and #2 by IES
Associates and Wetland "L" by Earth Consultants, Inc. The
water runs northeasterly through a culvert under a logging
road to a depression along the east property line, where it
ends in a blind sump that does not extend off the property.
-39-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
The second is the collection of surface water and
apparent seep water in the larger forested, unlogged forested
area identified as Wetland #15 by IES Associates Wetland "M"
by Earth Consultants. The water in this area runs easterly
off the site to connect with a series of surface water runoff
areas and the pastured area to the east. Portions of these
off-site collection points are included within the proposed
annexation area. The drainage in these areas runs north and
east off the site.
Additional drainages are in the southeast corner of the
proposed development site and in the easement between the
identified Weyerhauser property and SR 507. Wetlands in this
area form into a stream that runs to the south and east, to
collect in a borrow ditch along the railroad right-of-way and
along SR 507.
Because of the amounts and depths of water in the larger
wetland depressions, portions of the project site have year
around standing water. However, the majority of the site,
including the smaller, deep depressions and some of the larger
flat plains wetlands, dry up in early to late spring,
depending on the amount of winter rain and the wetness of
March and April.
Waters feeding Thompson Creek start in a series of
springs, seeps and surface run-off areas south of the Venture
Partners portion of the project site. The waters flow the
length of this portion of the property through the heavily
used agricultural area. Throughout most of the southern
-40-
we~1anas De11nea~10n, P1an~ C1ass1r1ca~10n ana W11a11re
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
portion of this portion of the site, the channel has been
dredged with a berm placed along the east side of the channel,
restricting flooding from the creek onto the east portion of
the property, but allowing water to flood into a narrow
corridor along the west portion of the creek.
Surface water and flooding backwater from the north end
of the creek collect in depression in the pasture immediately
east of the creek channel to form a near permanent pond and an
intermi ttently flooded drainage way leading from the pond
north to Thompson Creek.
Thompson Creek partially blocked with vegetation and by
unsized culverts under Berry Valley Road, reducing the flow to
where it appears as near standing water throughout most of the
reach through the property. During winter, flood waters
extent to the toe of the steeper slope to the west and cover
a major portion of the low pasture area to the east.
Irrigation water from deep wells is mixed with the manure
from the barns and dairy feeding areas to form a slurry which
is pumped onto the western meadow near the center of the
property and the two meadows in the north and northeast
portions of the site. The use of irrigation influences the
vegetative character of the site and introduces high fecal
coliform bacteria, nitrogen, phosphate, BOD, COD and viruses
and other bacteria that are typically associated with animal
waste into the ground and the shallow ground water table.
-41-
Wetlands Delineation, plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, ~992
4.3 Wetland Classification
Wetlands were classified on the site using two
procedures: (l) US Fish & Wildlife Service Wetland
Classification System, Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the
United States, Cowardin and (2) the proposed Yelm Resource
Lands and Critical Areas Ordinance.
4.3.1 us Fish & Wildlife Service Classification
Under the US Fish and Wildlife Service, there were four
classes of wetlands identified: ( 1 ) Palustrine Emergent
Marsh, (2) Palustrine Scrub/Shrub, (3) Palustrine Forested and
(4) Riverine Lower Perennial Emergent (non-persistent). There
are variations in the hydrologic regime, persistent to non-
persistent emergent marsh species and the soil type within
each of the Palustrine classes.
The persistent wetland type on the site is seasonally
flooded Palustrine Shrub/Scrub. The US Fish and& Wildlife
Service failed to identify any of the areas on the Thurston
Highlands property as Palustrine Open Water units, indicating
that the wetlands all dry up during the summer months. Those
portions which do not dry up are so heavily vegetated with
either shrubs or trees that there are no open water
components.
Based on our on-site evaluation, we have changed some of
the wetlands to Palustrine Open Water and have modified the
-42-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
hydrologic classification of the US Fish and Wildlife Service
on others.
4.3.2 Yelm Resource Lands and Critical Areas Ordinance
The Yelm Resource Land and Cri tical Areas Ordinance
utilizes the four category classification system created by
the Washington Department of Ecology in their Model Wetlands
Protection Ordinance, page 11, a. "Washington State Four-T ier
Wetlands Rating System, Categories I, II, III, and IV,"
September 1990.
1) Category I Criteria.
A. Documented habitat for endangered or
threatened fish or animal species or for
potentially extirpated plant species recognized by
state or federal agencies; or
B. High quality native wetland communities,
including documented category I or II quality
Natural Heritage wetland sites and sites which
qualify as a category I or II quality natural
Heritage wetland; or
C. High quality, regionally
communities with irreplaceable
functions, including sphagnum bogs
estuarine, wetlands, or mature forested
rare wetland
ecological
and fens,
swaps; or
D. Wetlands of exceptional local
significance. the criteria for such a designation
shall be developed and adopted by the local
jurisdiction under appropriate public review and
administrati ve appeal procedures. The criteria may
include, but not be limited to, rarity, groundwater
recharge areas, significant habi tats, unique
educational sites or other specific functional
-43-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
values within a watershed or other regional
boundary.
2) Category II Criteria.
A. Regulated wetlands that do not contain
features outlined in category I; and
B. documented habitats for sensitive plant,
fish or animal species recognized by federal or
state agencies; or
C. Rare wetland communi ties listed in
subsection l)C which are not high quality; or
D. Wetland types with significant functions
which may not be adequately replicated through
creation or restoration.
E. Regulated wetlands wi th significant
habitat value based on diversity and size.
F. Regulated wetlands
salmonid fish-bearing waters,
where flow is intermittent; or
contiguous with
including streams
G. Regulated wetlands with significant use
by fish and wildlife.
3) Category III Criteria.
A. Regulated wetlands that do not contain
features outlined in category I, II or IV.
-44-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
4) Category IV Criteria.
A. Regulated wetlands which do not meet the
criteria of a category I or II wetland; and
B. Isolated wetlands that are less than or
equal, to one acre in size; and have only one
wetland class; and have only one dominant plant
species (monotypic vegetation); or
C. Isolated wetlands that are less than or
equal to two acres in size, and have only one
wetland class and a predominance of exotic species.
Areas identified as wetlands were delineated using
sequentially numbered 2 color flagging with each wetland
assigned a number. Florescent orange bull-eyes, 3 X 3 feet,
were also placed at the perimeters of each wetland to allow
for aerial photography needed for general development and
evaluation needs.
4.4 On-Site Wetlands
4.4.1 Wetland #1
This wetland is the southern most wetland on the
property. It lies along the south property line in the
southeast corner of the project site (SW corner, Section 26).
It is a linear, forested wetland dominated by red alder,
Oregon ash and black cottonwood with a mixed dense salmonberry
shrub understory and a dense Pacific, Sitka and heart-leaf
willow border along the north edge. It extends off-site to
-45-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
the south into a larger forested wetland swamp with semi-
permanent water that is seasonally flooded into late summer.
The soils on the site are mixed saturated and unsaturated
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam with Everett gravelly sandy loam
along the northern edge next to the logging road.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife system, this wetland would
be classified as Palustrine Forested, Deciduous, Broad-leaf
Wetland (PFOW). Slough sedge and small-fruited bulrush is the
dominant emergent marsh species, growing under the dense
forested canopy.
Under the Yelm system, the area would be classified as a
Category II Wetland because of its size, diversity, forest and
plant species and hydrology.
This wetland is connected through a culvert to the north
to Wetland #2.
4.4.2 Wetland #2
Wetland #2 is the second largest wetland on the property.
It consists of a large depression that collects surface water
from the south, through the culvert from Wetland #1. It
drains northeasterly through a wetland drainage into a blind
slough, where the water collects in a small depression and is
then percolated into the ground or evaporated into the air.
The wetland is formed in a steep-sided depression where the
water is trapped, except for high water out-flows to the east.
-46-
we~~anas De~~nea~~on, p~an~ c~ass~r~ca~~on ana w~~a~~re
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Since the water does not leave the site or connect to any
larger wetlands, it can be assumed that the entire site is a
perched entrapment area.
Vegetation varies, but is dominated in part by Douglas
spirea and in other parts by cattail. The Douglas spirea
forms a dense mat across portions of the bottom, leaving
little open water, whereas the cattail areas have permanent
open water pockets that are used by mallards and other water
fowl species and hunted by heron and hawks. The area has been
logged down to the edge, leaving a narrow fringe of trees.
The dominant trees recovering in the area are black
cottonwood, Pacific willow and scattered red alder. Douglas
fir have been planted up to the edge of the wetland, and if
left alone, would become the dominant forest species in time.
Soils in this area are Mukilteo muck, fringed by Everett
gravelly sandy loam. Under the US Fish and Wildlife system,
this wetland would be classified as a mixed Palustrine
Scrub/Shrub, Emergent, Semi-Permanent/Seasonal Flooded Wetland
(PSS/EMY) .
Under the Yelm system, the wetland is classified as a
Category II Wetland because of its size, diversity of species
and the presence of at least two classes of wetlands under the
US Fish and Wildlife classification system.
-47-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
4.4.3 Wetland #3
This wetland lies north and west of Wetland #2 in the
same long linear depression. The two wetlands are separated
by a high saddle, approximately 200 feet wide at the narrowest
point and 400 feet wide at the widest. From a distance, the
wetlands appear to be connected. Wetland #3 is also formed in
a depression wi th relatively steep slopes, particularly to the
west. There is an open water component in the southeast
portion of the wetland that remains open throughout the year,
with the remainder of the site being a dense Douglas spirea
stand with mixed willow growing on high points within the body
of the wetland.
Mukilteo muck is the dominant soil in the area where the
water has stood and there has been an accumulation of organic
debris over the years. Everett gravelly sandy loam borders
this area.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife system, it is classified
as a Palustrine, Emergent, Semipermanent/Seasonal Wetland
(PEMY). However, it is our opinion that the wetland can be
classified into two groups: (1) Scrub/Shrub in the north half
and (2) Palustrine and Open Water, Semi permanently to
Permanent Flooded Wetland (POWY).
Under the Yelm system, the area would be classified as
Category III Wetland because of its size, isolation from other
wetlands and only two habitat types.
-48-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
4.4.4 Wetland #4
Wetland #4 is the third of four wetlands located in the
same north-south running depression that ends with the large
Wetland #2 in the south. It is separated from Wetland #3 by
another land bridge. The land bridge in this area is
approximately 400 feet long and has an increase in elevation
of approximately five feet. There is an over-water
hydrological connection between Wetlands #3 and #4; however,
the soils, hydrology and vegetation do not support a
classification of this connection as a "jurisdictional
wetland."
Wetland #4 is a small circular depression with steep
sloped sides on three sides and a low saddle connection to the
south. The vegetation around the edge is Douglas spirea with
Pacific and Sitka willow. Willow, black cottonwood and alder
are beginning to grow around the fringe as the area recovers
from the effects of logging. Douglas fir have been planted to
the edge of the wetland and will become the dominant forest
species in time, if left alone. The edges are heavily
impacted by log debris.
Soils in the center core are Mukilteo muck surrounded by
Everett gravelly sandy loam.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife classification system, the
area was classified as a Palustrine, Emergent Marsh Wetland.
However, we feel that the area should be classified as
Palustrine, Open Water, Permanently Flooded Wetland (POWW).
-49-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Under the Yelm system, the area would be classified as
Category III Wetland because of its size and limited diversity
of habitat and its lack of a permanent physical connection to
a larger wetland.
4.4.5 Wetland #5
This wetland is the northern most wetland located within
the long linear depression in the southeast corner of the
project site. It is located in the extreme east central
portion of Section 27. It is abutted by an extremely steep
slope on the west, marginally steep slopes on the north and
east, with a hummock separating the depression from Wetland
#4.
Soils around the fringe of the area are Everett gravelly
sandy loam. Because of the water depth and steepness of the
slope, no soil cores were taken in the center of this site.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service classified the area as
Palustrine, Emergent Marsh. The area has little to no
emergent marsh vegetation. It is dominated by a fringe area
of Sitka and Pacific willow with no vegetation in the center.
The dominant feature is semi-permanent open water. We have
classified the area as a Palustrine, Open Water,
Semipermanent! Seasonal Flooded Wetland (POWY).
Under the Yelm system, the area would be classified as a
Category III Wetland because of its size and the presence of
vegetation and open water.
-50-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
There are three small isolated depressions in the south
edge of the wetland (south central portion of Section 27).
They are surrounded on all four sides by steep slopes. The
area has been logged to the south property boundary.
4.4.5 We~land #6
Wetland #6 is the northern most wetland and is the
smallest of the three wetlands in the depression. It is
surrounded by steep slopes and separated from Wetland #7 by a
saddle that has a logging road and log landing. The wetland
is a small (less than one-tenth of an acre) depression with a
willow and Douglas spirea around the edge. Because of the
steepness of the slope and the duration of standing water,
there is no ground cover or emergent marsh vegetation
identified in this area. The dominant feature was open water.
Soils in the area, down to the edge of the standing
water, were unsaturated Everett gravelly sandy loam. Because
of the depth of the water, soil sampling was not completed
wi thin the wetter portions of the area; however, it was
assumed that the soils would be a saturated Everett gravelly
sandy loam.
The wetland contains large amounts of logging debris,
which is effecting water quality later in the spring from
decaying wood. There is evidence of algae growth in the
shallower portioned fringe areas, indicating the water does go
anaerobic.
-51-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Under the US Fish & Wildlife Service classification
system, the area was classified as a Palustrine, Scrub/Shrub,
Seasonal Flooded Wetland (PSSY). Based on the lack of
vegetation, it is our opinion the area should be classified as
a Palustrine, Open Water, Seasonal Flooded Wetland (POWY).
Under the Yelm classification system, the area would be
classified as a Category IV Wetland because of its lack of
diversity, size, isolation and single dominant plant group,
i.e., willow.
4.4.7 Wetland #7
This wetland is the largest of the three wetlands in the
depression, being approximately 0.25 acre in size. These area
is also heavily impacted with logging debris. It has
extremely steep slopes covered with a heavy concentration of
downed alder logs and Douglas fir limbs along the west side.
The dominant vegetation within the wetlands is Douglas spirea
wi th a narrow willow fringe. Trees recovering around the edge
are dominated by black cottonwood and the transplanted Douglas
fir. Red alder are scattered, but are not as persistent as in
other areas.
Soil in the site was an Everett gravelly sandy loam. The
area is isolated from all other wetlands and, by all
appearances of the soil conditions and the elevation between
Wetlands #6 and #7, it probably always has been. This is also
reflected in Douglas fir stumpage between the two wetlands.
-52-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Under the US Fish and Wildlife Service classification
system, this area is classified as a Palustrine, Scrub/Shrub,
Semipermanent/Seasonal Wetland (PSSY). For the most part we
concur, although there are some areas within the site that
could be classified as Palustrine, Open Water.
Under the Yelm system, the area would be classified as a
Category IV Wetland because of its size, lack of diversity,
amount of logging debris and sediment degradation.
4.4.8 Wetland #8
Wetland #8 is the southern most wetland of the three
wetlands. It has a severe slope on the west that extends to
the edge of the wetland. There is a linear flat depression on
the south end that extends off-site into an unharvested
forested area. It is evident that water comes from this
portion of the unlogged off-site area during heavy rains and
sheet flows across the flat ~nto Wetland #8.
The dominant vegetation is Douglas spirea with some
salmonberry around the edge reflecting the forested canopy
that surrounded the area prior to the logging. Based on log
stumpage, it is apparent there was a non-forested connection
to the south, up through a small draw, into the off-site
Douglas fir stand.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife Service system, it was
classified as a Palustrine, Scrub/Shrub, Semipermanent/
Seasonal Wetland (PSSY). The dominant recovering tree around
-53-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
JunQ 22_ 1002
the periphery is black cottonwood and alder mixed with the
planted Douglas fir. The slopes to the east have a good mixed
shrub community on the upland, including one of the larger
stands of filbert on the site.
Under the Yelm system, the area would be classified as a
Category IV Wetland because of its size, lack of diversity,
and isolation.
4.4.9 Wetland #9
Wetland No. 9 is a small isolated depression lying on the
south property line at the top of the plateau to the west of
the Wetlands #6 and #8. It consists of a half-moon shaped
depression vegetated with a dense stand of young black
cottonwood with a solid slough sledge understory. There are
two small isolated depressions adjacent to this depression
that are marginally wet black cottonwood areas; however, they
did not have water at 18 inches during the month of March 1992
and were considered to not have all three parameters necessary
to constitute a jurisdictional wetland.
The soils in the area are Everett gravelly sandy loam
with a dark soil accumulation in the bottom reflecting the
impact of the intermittent standing water and organic
accumulation on the surface of the Everett soil.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife Service system, the area
would be classified as Palustrine, Forested, Intermittently
Flooded wetland (PFOY). This area was not identified as a
-54-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
wetland in the US Fish and Wildlife Service or Thurston County
wetland maps.
Under the Yelm system, the area would be classified as a
Category IV Wetland because of size and isolation.
4.4.10 Wetland #10
Wetland #10 is a large Scrub/Shrub Wetland that extends
southwesterly off the property into a forested, scrub/shrub
swamp. It is located in the southwest corner of the project
si te (southwest corner of Section 29). The dominant tree
surrounding the edge of the wetland is red alder with an
occasional black cottonwood. The area turns into an Oregon
ash, alder and black cottonwood swamp on the property to the
southwest. Dominant vegetation is Douglas spirea, which
creates a dense impenetrable cover across the entire bottom of
the wetland. The area slopes gradually in all four directions
into 10 to 20 year old Douglas fir that has been logged in the
past. The understory along the edge is mixed, depending on
the cover and wetness, with salmonberry dominating the wetter
areas and salal and mahonia dominating the higher areas.
Soils on the site surrounding the wetland are Everett
gravelly sandy loam with deep peat, Mukilteo muck pockets in
the center that extends off the property to the southwest.
The area is a water collection retention/detention area that,
with its off-site connection, collects substantial amounts of
surface water run-off, which is trapped in the depression
-55-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
creating the hydrological condi tions and the wetland
characteristics of the area.
Under US Fish and Wildlife Service system, the area would
be classified as a Palustrine, Scrub/Shrub, Semipermanent/
Seasonal Flooded Wetland (PSSY). The fringe area, with the
wooded wetlands, is not sufficient in size or dominant enough
to be classified as a Forested Wetland. There are no open
water pockets within the area that remain wet throughout the
year. As the wetland extends off-site to the south, it
changes to a Palustrine, Forest Wetland (PFOY).
Under the Yelm system, the area would be classified as a
Category II Wetland because of its size, continuity to an off-
site forested wetland, its hydrological regime and functional
val ues .
4.4.11 Wetland #11
Wetland #11 is a small isolated depression north and east
of Wetland #10 that appears to have been partially created by
road excavation. There are three areas in this general
vicinity that have wetland characteristics; however, 2 were so
small and intermittent that they were not considered, while
the third (the largest wetland) was identified and classified
because of its forested wetland characteristics.
The wetland consists of a dense willow swamp bordered on
the east side by a logging road and on the west side by a
steep slope covered with 10 to 15 year old Douglas fir trees.
-56-
Wet1ands De1ineation, P1ant C1assification and Wi1d1ife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Water is trapped in the area and stands for long enough
periods of time to provide the habitat for slough sedge, which
is the dominant ground cover under the Pacific willow. The
willow are 20 to 25 feet tall and exceed the necessary
classification for Forest Wetland under the US Fish and
Wildlife Service system. The soils were Everett gravelly
sandy loam.
The area was classified by the US Fish and Wildlife
Service as a Palustrine, Emergent Marsh, Semipermanent/
Seasonal Flooded Wetland (PEMY).
The functional value of the area is that it collects and
traps surface water, where it percolates into the groundwater
table. The area that we have classified as a wetland is a
Palustrine Forested, Intermittently/Seasonal Flooded Wetland
( PFOY ) .
Under the Yelm system, the area would be classified as a
Category IV Wetland because of the single species, size and
isolation.
4.4.11 Wetland #12
Wetlands #12 and #13 are located in the south central
portion of Section 29. Wetland #12 is in a gradually sloped
depression with the steepest slopes being on the south and
west sides with a gradual drainage collection slope to the
north. It has a narrow border of willow and Douglas spirea
around the periphery with a small Douglas spirea component
-57-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
along the north end. The majority of the site is open water
that is semi-permanently flooded with permanent year round
water during rainy years. The center of the pond depth is
variable. Some of the deeper water components remain wet to
having standing water every year.
The soils surrounding the area are Alderwood gravelly
sandy loam with dark surface soils in the north drainage feed,
in area below the high-water line. Due to the water depth, no
additional soil cores were taken waterward of the high-water
mark.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife Service system, it was
classified as Palustrine, Emergent Marsh, Semipermanent/
Seasonal Flooded Wetland (PEMY). We have classified the area,
based on the lack of vegetation, water depth and evidence of
the duration of standing water, as a Palustrine, Open Water,
Intermittent to Permanent Flooded Wetland (POWY/W).
Under the Yelm system, the wetland would be classified as
a Category III Wetland because of its size and lack of
persistent vegetation, except in the periphery.
The wetland functions as a water collection and detention
area with the water either percolating slowly into the
groundwater table or evaporating into the air. It is isolated
from any other wetlands and provides no flood desyncronization
or other values.
-58-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
4.4.13 Wetland #13
Wetland #13 is perched on a high flat plain in a small
depression with very little elevational difference between the
wetland boundary and the surrounding uplands. The area has
been logged up to the edge of the wetland with some logging
roads cutting through portions of the wetland. The action of
vehicles, i.e., log trucks and heavy equipment, has created
deeper holes along the south side of the wetland closest to
the logging road. The wetland is predominantly a Douglas
spirea swamp with black cottonwoods and red alder around the
periphery. The area has been planted with seedling Douglas
fir up to the edge. Young Si tka willow are growing throughout
the disturbed areas, particularly in the graded-out roadways.
Soils in the area are Alderwood gravelly sandy loam with
no mottles, even in saturated portions of the area. The south
side of the area is a dark red 5Y 5/4 soil, typical of Tenino
soils that are present on the site, but were not mapped in
this area by the Soil Conservation Service.
The wetland serves as a water collection basin with no
connection to any other wetland. Water is trapped in the
depression where it either percolates into the ground slowly
or evaporates into the air.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife Service system, the
wetland would be classified as Palustrine, Scrub/Shrub,
Semipermanent/ Seasonally Flooded Wetland (PSSY).
-59-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Under the Yelm system, the area would be classified as a
Category III Wetland because of its size, function and the
predominance of a single plant species and a single wetland
class.
4.4.14 Wetland #14
Wetland #14 is a small isolated depression along the
northwest edge of Section 26. The area is bounded on the
north, south and west by steep slopes with a gradual drainage
slope to the east. The area to the east has a mixed
facultative wet plant species dominated by alder, regrowth
black cottonwood and planted Douglas fir with an understory of
red elderberry and a ground cover including creeping
blackberry and mixed grasses. The wetland has a dense Douglas
spirea shrub area that dominates all but the fringe of the
wetland. The fringe has a mix of two willow species, red
alder and black cottonwood. Douglas fir seedlings have been
planted down to the edge of the wetland and in the drainage
way between the north end of the wetland and the logging road.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife Service classification
}x~<
system, Wetland #14 would be classified as a Palustrine,
Scrub/Shrub, Semipermanent/Seasonal Flooded Wetland (PSSY).
Under the proposed Yelm ordinance, the wetland would be
classified as a Category IV Wetland.
-60-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
4.4.15 Wetland #15
Wetland #15 is a large unharvested mixed forested area
along the east side of the property (center of Section 26)
that extends easterly off the property to the north and east.
The wetland is initiated along the west side with seeps and
the collection of surface water from the north. These form in
a flat in the northwest corner of the overall wetland area.
A road has been graded through this area, which has lowered
the natural ground level creating an emergent marsh/standing
water area along the north side of the wetland. A small area
to the north of this graded area is a mixed Scrub/Shrub
Wetland dominated by Douglas spirea, young red alder and black
cottonwood with emergent plants in logging road ruts that
extend throughout this area. The center core of the wetland
has a mix of black cottonwood, red alder and Oregon ash with
an understory that is dominated by salmonberry and scattered
Douglas spirea. The open spaces in the center, where light
can penetrate to the ground, have mixed stands of water
parsley and skunk cabbage. The area along the fringe of the
forested area on the west side has a dense stand of slough
sedge that extends to the east property boundary under a mixed
alder and Oregon ash stand.
Towards the east end, the wetland splits into two
components, one being the willow/sedge drainage along the
south side and the second being the slough sedge area along
the east side. The center portion at this point is a Douglas
fir and alder upland that extends to near the east property
border. From the east property border, there is a finger of
-61-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
wetlands that is mostly unvegetated with a algae drift line
that extends west through the center of the Douglas fir area.
The overstory in this area is alder and scattered western red
cedar with vine maple up to the edge of the wetland.
The soils in this area were classified as Everett
gravelly sandy loam around the edge with a large area of
Mukilteo muck in the center. Soil colors along the north side
were not consistent with Everett, being redder in the upland
portions of the property with a variable depth dark soil layer
in the outer fringes of the wetland area. The peat dark soils
extend through the center up to the west end of the wetlands
into a small spring that forms its western-most end. The
center Douglas fir area was a dark brown Everett soil with
moderate drainage.
The functional values of the wetland is as a headwater
drainage way which collects and holds surface water run-off,
metering it into the off-site wetlands to the south and north
where portions of the water eventually reach the Thompson
Creek drainage way.
Biologically, the area supports a variety of upland and
wet edge species, but does not have the open water to provide
habitat for true wetland or water-dependent wildlife species.
The shrub edges along the drainage ways and the graded
depressions where emergent marsh plants survive and where
there is evidence of surface water for longer periods of time,
provide nesting habitat for marsh edge species such as yellow
throat winter wren and Buick's wren. The intermittent flooded
-62-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
conditions in the wetland have killed some small alder in
areas creating dead snags that are providing habitat for a
variety of woodpeckers, including pileated woodpeckers and
western flicker.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife Service classification,
all but a small portion of the northwest corner of the area
would be classified as Palustrine, Forested, Semipermanent/
Seasonal Flooded Wetland (PFOY). A small area, approximately
0.3 of an acre in size in its northwest corner, would be
classified as a palustrine Scrub/Shrub Wetland.
Under the Yelm system, the area would be classified as a
Category II Wetland because of its size, biological value,
hydrology and types of diversity. It does not qualify as a
Category I because it is not unique, has no sensitive plants
or animals and does not support managed wildlife, particularly
fish.
-63-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
4.4.16 Wetland #16
Wetland #16 is a small isolated wetland on the east
property line that extends off the property to the east in the
southeast corner of the site. This wetland is a small
intermittently wetted, but never flooded, Douglas spirea and
willow stand that gives way to the east to a cedar, black
cottonwood and alder stand with scattered Douglas fir.
Portions of the wetland area to the east have been logged and
graded, exposing dark soils to a depth of 14 inches with an
underlying hardpan.
Water runs into the wetland depression from the west and
north off steep slopes, where it is captured in the deeper
portions of the small depression, thus creating the necessary
hydric conditions to support the willow and Douglas spirea
community.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife Service system, this
wetland would be classified as a Palustrine, Scrub/Shrub,
Intermittently Flooded Wetland (PSSY).
Under the Yelm system, it would be classified as a
Category III Wetland because of its connection to a larger
off-site wetland.
4.4.17 Wetland #17
Wetland #17 is a long linear wetland located in the north
central portion of Section 26 in the north edge of the
-64-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
.June 22, 1992
Weyerhauser property and along the east side of the 40 acre
Thurston Highlands additional property. The wetland splits
the property line on a small drainage ditch that extends from
a Scrub/Shrub Wetland at the north edge of the Weyerhauser
logged area, into a managed pasture area that extends to the
center of the 40 acre parcel. At the north edge of the
meadow, there is a man-made farm pond. The farm pond is
separated from the remainder of the pasture and wetlands by a
farm road that runs east to west into the high meadow along
the west side of this 40 acre parcel. The wet meadow is a
mixed grass, slough sledge, softrush and small-fruited bulrush
area with buttercup at the upper fringes. The northwestern
portion of the wetland area has a small mixed alder and black
cottonwood stand that extends to the farm road to the north.
This wetland functions is a biofil tration area for waters
collected from the south and east slopes of the forested area
to the south, with the water moving gradually through the
grassy meadow area. Under existing circumstances, the pasture
area is being grazed, which contributes fecal coliform virus
and other contaminates to the water system within the wetland.
Under US Fish and Wildlife Service system, the southern
end of the wetland would be classified as a Palustrine Scrub/
Shrub, Intermittently/Seasonal Flooded Wetland (PSSY). The
major portion of the wetland to the north would be classified
as a Palustrine, Emergent, Seasonal Flooded Wetland (PEMY).
The small pond at the north end of the wetland would be
classified as a Palustrine, Open Water, Unconsolidated Bottom
Wetland (POWH).
-65-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Under the Yelm system, the wetlands would be classified
as a Category III Wetland because of its size, isolation from
other wetlands, and presence of more than one class of
wetlands.
4.4.18 wetland #18
Wetland # 18 is a meadow-western red cedar depression in
the southwest corner of the Venture Partners property that
abuts Douglas fir forested areas on the north, south and west
and a high sloped meadow on the east. Waters collect from
the four slopes into this isolated depression where it
percolates into the ground water table or is evaporated during
the summer. Vegetation in the depression is predominately
hard hack shrub with softrush, slough sedge and buttercup in
open areas. Red cedar and alder grow in the bottom and around
the fringe. Dead or dying cedar are an indication that the
amount and/or duration of standing water has increased in
recent years. Since no surrounding slopes that have been
logged recently, we can only assume that the logging on the
property to the west increased the rate of runoff for a long
enough period to initiate this reaction.
Because it is dead ended the depressions isolates all
sediments or other materials in the surface water from
interacting with others waters or wetlands. Currently the
area is exposed to grazing cattle which contribute fecal
coliform to the surface and ground waters. Due to the
infil tration process these are probably removed when the
..66-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
ground water is more than 3 meters below the surface of the
soil.
Under the Us Fish and Wildlife classification system the
wetland would be classified as a Palustrine Scrub/Shrub,
Intermittently/Seasonal Flooded Wetland (PSSY).
Under the Yelm system, the wetland would be classified as
a Category III wetland because of its size, isolation from
other wetlands and the presence of more than one dominant
vegetative species.
4.4.19 Wetland #19
Wetland #19 consists of the emergent marsh/open pond
areas west of the barn and east of Thompson Creek. It
encompasses the area influenced by surface water runoff,
stream back water flooding and winter ground water influence
but not those areas directly dependent on the creek for
function and survival. Vegetation in this wetland is
predominately disturbed area invader species under a loose
canopy of Oregon ash and occasional scattered willow and
alder. As the water recede in the summer the dominant ground
cover in the wetland is a willow weed/water smartweed mix with
pineapple weed at the upper fringes. The open water area has
islands with ash, willow and hard hack. The water has a
flooding bed of algae with some duckweed. Duckweed in the
fringe areas indicates that the waters retain more oxygen in
the winter when there is an influx of surface water which
increases the pond depth to a level which limits cattle use.
-67-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June. 22, 1992
During the summer the water level drops, the temperature
increases and cattle use the shallow water for drinking and
cooling.
The open water portion supports a high population of bull
frogs and red-legged frogs.
Water collects in this area during the winter when the
stream floods and the surface runoff accumulates. As the
water drops this area becomes isolated, trapping sediments and
nutrients in the pond area. As water moves to the north it is
fil tered in the smart weed community. Technically the area
acts as a biofi1tration chamber settling sediments and
collecting nutrients as the water slows. However, the active
cattle use of the area increases the sediments in the water,
defeating the functions of the vegetation. In addition they
deposit large volumes of waste with the coliform bacteria,
nutrients and other bacteria that are common to animal waste
in the water. When the water is on the surface these factors
become integrated into the water and flow directly into
Thompson Creek.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife Service classification
system the wetland would be classified as a Palustrine non-
persistent Semipermanent/Seasonally Flooded Emergent Wetland
(PEMY) .
Under the Yelm system, it would be classified as a
Category III Wetland because of its size. It is and will
continue to be degraded by the agricultural activity of the
-68-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
dairy farm which decreases its functional and biological value
to less than a Category IV wetland, however, the system does
not allow us to downgrade wetlands based on artificial
conditions.
4.4.20 Wetland #20
Wetland #20 is Thompson Creek and the associated
wetlands. It is dominated by a narrow riverine channel that
has been channelized through a major portion of the reach
through the project property. It has a narrow border of
western crabapple-alder along both banks with a mixed
understory varying from ninebark to ninebark mixed with
twinberry in the south end to hard hack mixed with Himalayan
blackberry in the north. There are two paralleling emergent
marsh grass overflow channels that border the creek which are
directly influenced by the creeks waters. These areas are
vegetated with buttercup and mixed grasses bordered by a alder
stand with blackberry and nettle as the dominant understory.
The stream channel has a mixed emergent marsh community that
varies depending on the velocity of the water and the canopy
cover. Fringe vegetation includes the shrub community and a
water plantain/water parsley mix. In slower waters with a
dense canopy the vegetation is limited to duckweed. In slower
waters with no canopy the emergent community includes burr
reed, small fruited bulrush, water parsley, water weed, alodea
and duckweed.
The stream acts as a water corridor, fish and amphibian
habitat, and a limited biofiltration chamber. Due to the slow
-69-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
movement there is significant sediment drop in the creek which
has generated a deep unconsolidated mud bottom. During the
growing season the plant utilize a limited amount of the
nutrient load and create a positive oxygen demand. In the
winter the increased water spreads and is slowed by vegetation
and restrictive culverts. This combination acts as a flood
desynchronization chamber, metering the water to the Nisqually
river downstream.
Water quality in the stream is degraded throughout the
year with the level on contamination and lowered overall water
quali ty being worst during the summer when the dilatation
rates are lowest.
Under the US Fish and Wildlife wetland classification
system the stream would be classified as a Riverine, Lower
Perennial, Unconsolidated Bottom/Emergent Wetland
(nonpersistent).
Under the Yelm system, it would be classi f ied as a
Category II wetland because of the functional values, size,
class of wetland, and biological value to fish and wildlife
and its interaction with the Nisqually River. This
classification recognizes the potential for restoration of the
overall stream values with the alteration of uses away from
heavy agricultural.
-70-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
4.5 Off-Site Wetlands
There are five off-site wetlands that are directly
connected or associated with the on-site wetlands. One
includ~s the easement from the Thurston Highlands property to
Yelm Highway. The easement from the southeast corner of the
property, between the east corner of the property and Yelm
Highway (SR 507), contains wetlands along the south edge of
Section 26 just outside the property boundary. They extend
southerly and easterly along the wetland corridor and onto the
properties to the south. The wetland loops to the north and
extends into the pastured areas. The combined wetlands to the
north of the right-of-way, south of the right-of-way and
through the right-of-way, form a U-shaped drainage corridor
with the maximum water collection area at the toe of the slope
within the right-of-way.
Portions of the upland right-of-way area has been cleared
of ground cover and most small trees. The wetland area where
the road proposes to cross is in its natural state. The
dominant overstory vegetation is a mix of larger red alder,
western red cedar with Douglas fir, alder and big leaf maple
on the upland slope to the east. The ground cover in the
wetland is a mix of water parsley, skunk cabbage, tall
buttercup, geum and burr reed. In June 1992 there was still
running and standing water in this area. The slope a:d the
eastern extent of the right-of-way are Everett gravelly sandy
loam soils with the major portion of the corner where the
easement abuts the property being dominated by Tisch silt
loam.
-71-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Based on the US Fish and Wildlife Service classification
system, the wetlands would have been classified as a
Palustrine, Scrub/Shrub, Intermittent/Seasonal Flooded Wetland
(PSSY). Under the Yelm system, the wetland would be
classified as a Category II Wetland because of its size and
interconnection to larger wetlands to the north, east and
south, the presence and predominance of Tisch soils and the
vegetative mix which consists of a scrub/shrub community with
a scattered forested wetland overstory and an emergent marsh
ground cover.
The remaining four off-site wetlands are:
1. A wetland in the southwest corner that is associated
with Wetland #10 and discussion of the off-site conditions
were discussed under Wetland #10. Water runs into the site
and surrounding areas where it is collected into the
depression. The water crosses the maintenance work road in
its southwest corner through a drainage draw that extends for
a minimum of 200 feet off-site to the southwest. The overall
size of the off-site wetland was not calculated, but it has
been identified on aerial photographs as linear drainage swale
and as an elongated extension of Wetland #10. The combined
wetlands are connected through a south drainage into a
continuing series of depressions in the northeast corner of
Section 33.
2. The second off-site wetland is a wetland that
extends easterly and northeasterly from Wetland #15 where it
connects to a series of man-made modified drainages in the
-72-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
northeast quarter of Section 26. The forested wetland
continues to the east with a predominantly alder, black
cottonwood and Oregon ash mixed wetland community, giving way
to a Douglas fir, cedar and alder slope to the east.
3. The third wetland is the eastern 1/2 of Wetland #17
located in the northern 40 acre portion of the property in the
center of Section 23. A small portion of the off-site wetland
is included in the scrub/shrub non-meadow area along the south
end of the wetland, with the major portion being incorporated
in the pastured meadow area. The northern end of the wetland
includes half of the pond identified in the discussion of
Wetland #16.
4. The fourth and last off-site wetland, is a
continuation of the Oregon ash, alder and red cedar wetland
(Wetland #1) along the south property line. There are man
modified open water areas and emergent marsh depressions.
This area is the start of the drainage that extends through
Wetlands #1 and #2.
4.6 Wetland Summary
There are 17 on-site wetlands and one off-site wetland
that will impact or be impacted by the development of the
Thurston Highlands property with an additional wetlands area,
including Thompson Creek, which will be impacted by the
development of the Venture Property portion of the annexation
to the north and east of the Thurston Highlands site. There
are four additional areas on the site that have hydric
-73-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
indicators and may be classified as wetlands, but because of
their size, i.e., less than 10,000 square feet, none of these
wetlands were classified by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
or Thurston County as wetlands.
Fi ve of the 17 on-site wetlands were classified as
Category IV wetlands under the Yelm Wetlands Classification
System. All of these were either Palustrine, Scrub/Shrub or
Open Water, Intermittent areas that dry up early in the
spring. Seven of the wetlands are Category III Wetlands under
the Yelm system. They are classified as Category III because
of their size; isolation, or lack of interaction with other
wetland areas; predominance of one wetland indicator species,
usually Douglas spirea and the depth and duration of standing
or surface water during late spring to early summer months.
The remaining five wetlands, three which are located in the
southeast corner of the project, are Category II Wetlands
under the Yelm system. Three of the four provide high
functional values, extensive wildlife habitat values and are
interconnected through surface drainage with off-site
wetlands. Activities associated with these three wetlands
could have off-site impacts.
Under the Model Ordinance Classification, there would be
no Category I Wetlands on the site, since none provide habitat
for endangered or threatened plant or animal species. The
site has no high quality native wetland communities, which are
identified as Category I or Category II quality Natural
Heritage wetland sites, do not have regionally rare wetland
-74-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
communities, nor are the wetlands of exceptional local
significance.
A summary of the wetlands to include size, classification
(using both US Fish & Wildlife Service methodology as
identified by the Fish & Wildlife Service and by IES
Associations and the classification using the Yelm system) are
included as Table 8, Appendix B.
-75-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
5.0 Impact Scenarios
There are two areas in the Thurston Highlands portion of
the development site where significant impacts could occur to
wetlands, surface water drainage, or undisturbed climax
vegetation. These are the southeast corner of the site and in
the 40 acre inset in the center of Section 23. The major
drainage from off-site through the project site starts in an
off-site wetland and properties to the south and runs through
Wetlands #1 and #2, where the water is isolated in a lying
depression.
The drainage way is currently culverted between Wetlands
#1 and #2 on the southern-most logging road and north and east
of Wetland #2 under the northern entrance logging road.
Restricting the drainage through the blockage of the eastern
drainage corridor would increase the depth and duration of
flooding of Wetland #2 and in all probability, create a
intermittent water connection between Wetlands #2, #3 and #4.
This would provide an area, approximately 1,000 to 1200 feet,
by the width of the drainage way plus the width of the buffer,
which could be utilized for development or a golf course. It
would eliminate the potential to create fairways between
Wetlands #2 and #3 and #3 and #4. Presently, the separation
between these three wetlands is approximately 200 to 250 feet
each. With a 100 foot set-back from Wetland #2 and a 50 foot
set-back surrounding Wetlands #3 and #4, there would be an
approximate 50 foot wide corridor between Wetlands #2 and #3
that could be utilized for recreation, road connections or
some aspect that does not include permanent fill or an
-76-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
increase in the potential for surface water run-off or surface
water contamination.
In the area between Wetlands #3 and #4, the 50 foot set-
backs would be approximately 100 feet wide. The slope from
the north into the depression that contains Wetlands #2, #3,
#4 and #5 is gradual and could be utilized either as golf
course corridor or for residences. The west side is abrupt to
near vertical and has no potential utilization because of the
proximi ty of the wetlands in the toe of the slope, the
steepness of the slope and the instability of the slope.
To the west, on the flat areas of Wetlands #12 and #13,
the wetlands are large enough and have a center core that is
wet enough and supports surface water for long enough periods
of time that they could not and should not be filled. Wetland
#13 is relatively flat up to the area surrounding the open
water area. Golf course or residential development could
occur wi thin 50 feet of this wetland, with only limited
effects.
The use of the area for a golf course will increase the
ni trogen and phosphorus input into the pond and probably
increase the potential for algae formation. The small
southeasterly finger of Wetland #13 is formed in an old road
and could be filled with no impact to the main body of the
wetland. This would provide an additional 200 to 250 feet of
property adjacent to the road or between Wetlands #12 and #13
for some form of development activity.
-77-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Wetland #12 has relatively steep slopes along the west
and south sides, with gradual slopes in on the north side.
The north slope collects surface water from a fairly
substantial area feeding into the wetland where it is trapped
for either very slow percolation or evaporation during the
summer months. The wetland goes completely dry each summer.
Development of the crowns of the steeper slopes should have no
affect on the wetland. Development on the north slope could
impact water quality coming into the wetland. The effect on
water quality would be dependent on the type of development.
Both Wetlands #13 and #14 could be enhanced, both as
permanent water features for residences or as a water feature
at the edge of a golf course. The wetland area is two large
(nearly 200 x 200 feet) to be incorporated into a golf course.
Wetlands #6, #7 and #8 are in a steep depression. The
slope is steepest to the north and west, with a gradual slope
into the unlogged area on the adjacent property to the south.
The north slope is more gradual, but still relatively steep.
The area between Wetlands #6 and #7 has an abandoned logging
road with a log landing area on the flat between the two,
which could be used as an access road or crossing road through
this portion of the property. It could also be a part of a
fairway; however, the steepness of the west side maybe
impractical for purposes of maintaining a golf course. All
three wetlands have extensive wood waste and should be cleaned
-78-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
for safety purposes, as well as aesthetic purposes. The
slopes on the west side of all three ponds have an extensive
amount of downfall that should be removed for safety purposes.
Wetland #6 and #8 could be filled if the drainage from
the rest of the site was affectively channeled into Wetland
#7. Wetland #7 could then be enhanced and maintained as a
feature, either for residences overlooking the depression or
as the edge of a golf course.
Because of the slope, I believe it would be impractical
to attempt to fill all three of the wetlands in this vicinity.
Wetland #9 is a very small depression along the property
boundary. Because of the wooded nature and the fact that it
is collecting surface water from an off-site slope, it should
probably be left or modified with the understanding that the
surface water from the adj acent properties, which is Fort
Lewis, would have to be addressed with the development. This
is an area that has a young stand of black cottonwood over an
old stand of slough sedge, indicating that the area is in the
process of changing from a shaded open-water depression in a
Douglas fir stand, to an exposed deciduous forested wetland.
It will retain its wetland character as long as the surface
water run-off from off-site continues.
Wetland #10 is a large Douglas spirea depression that
collects surface water and extends off the property to the
west. This is a Class II Wetland because of its size, water
collection functions and habitat diversity. A lOa foot buffer
-79-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
should be established around this area utilizing the existing
Douglas fir growth as a barrier. Some Himalayan blackberry
clearing could occur in some areas, but would probably
stimulate discussion in opposition and may not be necessary
for the limited benefits.
Wetland #11 is a small willow depression. This area is
less than one-tenth of an acre and could be filled with no
impact to water quality, as long as it is understood that the
drainage that was collecting into this area would have to be
rerouted and established at some other point on the property.
There are two other depressions in this area that are
technically wetlands, but because of their size, are exempted
under the proposed Yelm Ordinance, Thurston County Ordinance
and the recommendations of the Washington Department of
Ecology Model Ordinance.
Wetland #14 is another small isolated depression full of
Douglas spirea. This area is over 0.2 acre in size, but has
limited functional and biological value. This would be an
area we suggest could be filled with no impact to water
quality or wildlife habitat.
Wetland #16 is the largest wetland on the property and
the only wetland that is technically a forested wetland. The
area has a steep slope along the north side that would
probably preclude development without significant grading.
Residences could be established on the crown backing on the
forested area with the backyards being in the cut-over slope.
The north facing slope would require a 100 foot buffer from
-80-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
the edge of the forest portion of the wetland. There is a
small depression in the northwest corner of this wetland that
is not forested. It would be our recommendation that this
area be filled or modified and placed back as a buffer to
allow development of the northwest end of this large wetland
where the slope is less severe. The west end of the wetland
is gradually sloped and collects surface water. The area has
a fairly large area of uplands that could be incorporated into
the wetland as part of a mitigation to off-set the filling of
the wetland on the northwest corner. The south side has a
Douglas fir upland area that could be either opened up and
utilized. One hundred feet of the forested area will be
included in the wetland buffer. The south side also has a
relatively steep slope for a short distance that is heavily
impacted by wood waste. The east end of this wetland has a U-
shaped upland; however, because of buffers along both sides,
much of the area will probably be excluded from development.
It could; however, become an important area for mitigation to
off-set development of wetlands, particularly finger sloughs,
small isolated wetlands (Wetlands #6 and #8), the isolated
Wetland #9, portions of the finger of Wetland #l3, Wetland #11
and Wetland #14. The combined areas of these wetlands is
under two acres, which would qualify them for a Nationwide 26,
One to Two Acre Permit.
Wetland #17 splits the property line. A major portion of
this area is a meadow that is marginally wet. It could be
incorporated into a summer fairway with little to no impact to
the existing vegetation during the winter months. Mowing of
the area should not constitute development. During the winter
-81-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
months, the area would be too wet to be utilized as a part of
the golf course. The drainage through the system, the shallow
groundwater table and the size of the over-all wetland would
prevent it from being filled and utilized on a permanent basis
as a part of the development.
The road crossing coming into the property will require
filling and culverting of the drainage and wetland that lies
at the toe of the steep slope in the southeast corner of the
property. Mitigation and compensation will be required for
this use. This again, could be incorporated into the larger
forested wetland in the central portion of Section 26.
The consolidation of all of the isolated pockets of
wetlands throughout the site into the larger forested wetland
area, which extends off the property to the northeast, would
create a viable, self-sustaining, highly productive, forested,
scrub/shrub, open water wetland system that would be an
enhancement to that portion of the development, as well as
providing a quality wildlife habitat.
The proposed development scenario for the Venture
Partners portion of the property would impact two wetland
areas: (1) the shrub/scrub wetland in the southwest corner of
the site; and (2) a portion of the degraded emergent marsh
pond area east of Thompson Creek in the vicinity of the
existing barns and residence.
Losses associated with the development of the small
wetland in the southwest corner would be the loss of a water
-82-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
collection depression that dries out early in the spring.
Loss of this area would not impact wetland or water dependent
wildlife species since the area is not utilized by these
species except possibly in the winter. Due to the shrub cover
and lack of surface water, this use would be extremely
limi ted. Surface water collected in this area could be
relocated into grass-lined swales or constructed detention/
retention systems providing the same level of functional water
quality treatment value as exists under current conditions.
The loss of the wet depression and intermittent pond
along the east side of Thompson Creek would eliminate highly
degraded emergent marsh area that has the potential of
providing some biofil tration, flood desynchronization, and
nutrient out-take. Removal of the cattle from the area with
the filling of these wetlands could be considered to be a
posi tive impact to the overall water quality to Thompson
Creek, adjacent wetlands to Thompson Creek downstream from
this area, and at times, in the flume from Thompson Creek into
the Nisqually River. Removal of the cattle would also
decrease contamination of groundwater which has been charged
with impacting shallow-water wells in the immediate vicinity.
It would remove causes of violation notices from the
Department of Agriculture, Public Health Department and
Washington Department of Ecology, for groundwater, surface
water and Thompson Creek contamination.
The loss or filling of this portion of the wetland would
eliminate some flood desynchronization values, however, with
some innovated habitat manipulation in the proposed stream
-83-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
corridor, these values could be reinstated. Wi th proper
design, peripheral flood detention ponds with back-flow as
waters recede, would increase the biofil tration, sediment
deposits that would occur with the development of the land and
that does occur on the properties to the south that are not
proposed to be modified. These types of structures could
increase water quality in the stream as well as metered water
back through the stream, thereby regulating the water level
drop within the stream after each rain effect in the spring.
Overall, the removal of cattle, the reduction of
slurry/manure mix onto the grass meadows, with the proposed
wetland corridor, would increase water quality values
throughout this portion of the property. There will be a net
loss in wetlands unless the area is mitigated on another
portion of the overall property.
The conceptual impacts are based on a one month analysis
of the site, review of other documents in the immediate area,
discussions with the Washington Department of Wildlife,
conservation officers and waterfowl biologists and our
knowledge and understanding of values of different types of
wetlands to different wildlife species, and the three
development scenarios provided by R. W. Thorpe and Associates
for the southwest Yelm annexation.
-84-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
This constitutes the IES Associates wetlands delineation,
plant classification and wildlife evaluation report on the
Yelm annexation properties, Yelm, Thurston County, Washington,
for the Yelm annexation drafted environmental impact
statement.
R. L. Van Wormer
Senior Biologist
IES Associates
-85-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Bibliography
l. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golat and E.T. LaRoe.
1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of
the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service publication
FWS/OBS-79/31.
2. An Interagency Cooperative Publication: U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, and U.S.D.A., Soil Conservation Service.
Federal Manual for Identifyinq and Delineating Jurisdictional
Wetlands, January 1989, Washington D.C.
3. Franklin, J.F. and C.T. Dyrness. 1969. Vegetation of
Oreqon and Washinqton. U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station,
Portland, Oregon.
4. Greeson, P.E., J.R. Clark and J.E. Clark, eds. 1978.
Wetland Functions and Values: The State of Our Understanding.
Proceedings of the National Symposium on Wetlands, American
Water Resources Association. Technical Publication Series TPS
79-2.
5. Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the
Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle.
6. Soil Survey Staff. 1988. Keys to Soil Taxonomy. Cornell
University.
7. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1986. Wetland Plants of the State of
Washinaton. 1986 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service publication.
WELUT-86/W12.47.
8. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species
That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Reqion 9). U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service Publication. WELUT-88 (26.9).
9. Robbins, C.S., B. Brunn and H.S. Zim.
North America. Golden Press, New York.
1966.
Birds of
10. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual. Tech. Rep. Y-87-l.
-86-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
ll. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
Service. 1983. Soil Survey : Pierce County, Washinqton.
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
l2. U.S.D.A, SCS, 1991, Hydr~c Soils of the United States.
13. U.S.D.A., SCS, Soil Taxonomy: A Basic System of Soil
Classification for Makinq and Interpretinq Soil Survey,
Agriculture Handbook No. 436.
l4. Washington Natural Heritage Program. 1987. Endanqered,
Threatened and Sensitive Vascular Plants of Washinqton.
Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia.
l5. Washington Natural Heritage Program. 1989.
Heritaqe Plan. Washington State Department of
Resources, Olympia.
Natural
Natural
l6. Washington Department of Wildlife, Washinqton Treatened
and Endanqered wildlife.
l7. Williams, R.W., Laramie, R.M., Ames, J.J., A Cataloq of
Washinqton Streams and Salmon Utilization, Vol. 1, Washington
Department of Fisheries, puget Sound Region, 1l/75.
-87-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Appendix A - Figures
-88-
l I \.--' 1
T
. I
I~__.J 4 I 1
I
.
I
.
I
I i
18 -=- 9 10 i 12
.~ .....
I I
I - en !
I G 0 [..tKE~
I I
T r - ---J ,--- ;.
~~
,,~
I ' .... ,",
_~ 1 VI ~
...
c VI
17 16 IS '" 14 c
! z '"
'" :a
CD
r ~ ....
I .... VI
.. :-
'" ;z c
co:
93 AV SE
FTANDER I
\J1 LAKE SIT LOCATION i
I 20 ~ 21 zz
FORT
. LEWIS
2'1 28 6 ..
/ ..
i" 09 AV S
r-" - ,.;)
. z '"
I ~ ...
... CD
'"
.... ....
'" VI
I Q. ...
II I 118 AV SE :a J4
r-c; ...
'" on
I Z
I ~
~
~ ''''1 .., rr , ~ I
"T1 IES ASSOCIATES
c;
i 1514 Muirhead A.ve.
m Olympia. Wa.hington
~ 98502
(206) 943-0127
THURSTON HIGHLANDS
YELM, THURSTON COUNTY, W
LOCATION MAP
,
\..
~'.
f - I ..........._
PoW:'.&
~a
5 IES ASSOCIATES
c
:0
m
""
THURSTON HIGHLANDS u.s. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
1514 Muirhead Ave.
Olympia, Wuhington
i8502
206) 943-0127
WETLAND CLASSIFICATION
~
....
,. ::;,
~. - r
I;
I
w
=!
~
,
'-- il
'" l )"1
II:
w
....
.. ~I "
" 'J
:; ",
Q.
-Ii
J
;!
e
u.
-
)
, .
? v, " .
,
~
~
cr: \
w .
... > 0
-'
dl ~ , -
4 ~ ~ II 0:: Q)
III L-
UI ( , ..
.. ;f v' <.(
II
! u
0 >-
'" lo- c-
.. .. .. .-J
UI III .. E .. &: .. .. i:>
II: .,. E
.J .. 0 E u .,. 0 11
0 ... .. " c. 0 .. 0 ~ Cl 2' .-J
III ii 0 -, E J: -
~ 0 u ~ 0 " ~ <I: (l)
II: lo- .. .. .,. 0 c (l. E E "
,.. .. 0 > 0 0 '"
IJl U <> E 0 0 ~ >-
... .. .. &: .. .. ..
0 ~
III IJl .;; .. 0
lo- 110 U.
... ~ t
-' $ ~ CJ)
m ~
4 i 0
VI i -
III
~ /" Z
.. <...:'....
5 ES ASSOCIATES
c
~ 1514 Muirhead Ave.
~ Olympia. Waahington
i8602
THURSTON HIGHLANDS
WASHINGTON DEPT FISH
STREAM MAP
206) 943-0121
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Appendix B - Tables
-97-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Table 1 - Definitions of Indicator Status
Indicator
Symbol
Definition
OBL
Obligate. Species that occur almost always
(estimated probability >99%) in wetlands
under natural conditions.
FACW
Facultative wetland. Species that usually
occur in wetlands (estimated probability
67 to 99%), but occasionally are found in
non-wetlands.
FAC
Facultative. Species that are equally likely
to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands
(estimated probability 34-66%).
FACU
Facultative upland. Species that usually
occur in non-wetlands (estimated prob-
ability 67-99%), but occasionally are found
in wetlands.
UPL
Upland. Species that occur almost always in
non-wetlands under normal conditions
(estimated probability 99%.
NI
No indicator. Species for which insufficient
information was available to determine an
indicator status.
Sources: Federal Interagency
Delineation, 1989.
Reed, 1988.
Committee
for
Wetland
-98-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Table 2 - Hydric Soil Indicators
Hydric Indicator
Diaqnostic Criteria
Organic content
*
> 50% by volume
Sulfitic material
*
"Rotten egg" odor
Soil color
*
Mottling
*
Dark soil matrix color
*
Gleyed colors.
Water saturation
*
Groundwater table at less than
l.5 feet from the surface for a
significant period (usually a
week or more) during the growing
season.
Sources: Hydric Soils of the United States.
U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1991.
Soil Taxonomy: A Basic System of Soil
Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil
Surveys, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Handbook
No. 436.
-99-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Table 3 - Hydrologic Regimes and Wetland Characteristics
Degree of
Inundation
or Saturation
Duration* of
Inundation
or Saturation
Wetland
Characteristics
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
Permanently inundated** lOO%
present
Semi permanently to > 75% - <100%
nearly permanently
inundated or
saturated***
present
Regularly inundated > 25% - <75%
or saturated
usually present
Seasonally inundated > 12.5% - <25%
or saturated
often present
Irregularly inundated > 5% - < 12.5%
or saturated
often absent
Intermittently or <5%
never inundated or
saturated
absent
*
**
***
percent of growing season
inundation> 6.6 feet mean water depth
inundation < 6.6 feet mean water depth
Sources: Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
January 1987.
Clark and Benforado, 1981.
from COLONEST(DeTray) 9/12/91
-100-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Table 4 - Partial List of Known or Expected Plants
Scientific Name
Acer circinatum
Acer macrophyllum
Achlys triphylla
Agropyron repens
Agropyron smithii
Agrostis alba
Agrostisscabra
Agrostis tenuis
Alisma plantago-aquatica
Alnus rubra
Alodea nuttali
Anthemis cotula
Anthoxanthum odoratum
Arbutus menziesii
Asarum caudatum
Athyrium filix-femina
Berberis aquifolia
Betula papyrifera
Brassia nigra
Bromus enermis
Carex obnupta
Carex stipata
Chrysanthemum leucanthemum
Cirsium arvense
Cirsium vulgare
Cornus stolonifera
Corylus cornuta
Crataegus douglasii
Cytisus scoparius
Dactylis glomerata
Daucus carota
Dicentra formosa
Dipsacus sylvestris
Dryopteris austriaca
Eleocharis palustris
Elymus glauca
Epilobium ciliatum
Epilobium augustifolium
Equisetum arvense
Festuca elatior
Fragaria vesca
Fraxinus latifolia
Common Name
vine maple
big-leaf maple
vanilla leaf
quackgrass
western wheatgrass
redtop
rough bentgrass
Colonial bentgrass
Water plantain
red alder
water weed
dogfennel
sweet vernal grass
madrona, madrone
wild ginger
subarctic lady fern
Oregon grape
paper birch
black mustard
smooth brome
slough sedge
stalk grain sedge
Oxyeye daisy
Canadian thistle
bull thistle
red-osier dogwood
beaked hazelnut, filbert
black hawthorn
Scot's broom
orchard grass
Queen Anne's lace
bleedingheart
teasel
forest fern
creeping spikerush
blue wild-rye
willow weed
fireweed
field horsetail
meadow fescue
wood strawberry
Oregon ash
-101-
Type
FACU
FACU
UPL
FACU
FACU
FACW
FAC
FAC
OBL
FAC
OBL
UPL
FACU
UPL
UPL
FAC
UPL
FACU
UPL
UPL
OBL
OBL
UPL
FACU
FACU
FACW
UPL
FAC
UPL
FACU
UPL
UPL
NI
UPL
OBL
FACU
FACW
FACU
FAC
UPL
UPL
FACW
WetlandS Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Galium aparine
Gaultheria shallon
Geum macrophyllum
Hedera helix
Heracleum lanatum
Holcus lanatus
Holodiscus discolor
Hypochaeris glabra
Ilex aquifolium
Juncus bufonius
Juncus effusus
Juncus ensifolius
Ledum glandulosum
Lemma minor
Linaria vulgaris
Lolium perenne
Lonicera involucrata
Lysichiton americanum
Mahonia repens
Maianthemum dilatatum
Matricaria matricarioides
Mintha arvensis
Oenanthe sarmentosa
Osmaronia cerasiformis
Parentucellia viscosa
Phalaris arundinacea
Phleum pratense
Physocarpus capitatus
Pinus contort a
Plantago lanceolata
poa pratensis
Polygonum cuspidatum
polygonum lapathifolium
Polypodium glycyrrhiza
Polystichum munitum
Populus tremuloides
Populus trichocarpa
Prunella vulgaris
Prunus emargenata
Prunus subcordata
Pseudotsuga menziesii
Psoralla physodes
pteridium aquilinum
Pyrus fusca
Ranunculus repens
bedstraw
salal
large-leaf avens
English ivy
cow-parsnip
common velvet grass
ocean spray
cats-ear
English holly
toad rush
softrush
dagger-leaf rush
glandular Labrador-tea
duckweed
butter and eggs
perennial ryegrass
twinberry
yellow skunk-cabbage
mahonia
false lily-of-the-valley
pineapple weed
Canadian mint
water-parsley
osoberry, Indian plum
lousewart
reed canarygrass
timothy
Pacific ninebark
lodge-pole pine
English plantain
Kentucky bluegrass
Japanese knotweed
willow-weed
licorice fern
sword fern
quaking aspen
black cottonwood
heal-all
bitter cherry
American wild plum
Douglas fir
California tea
bracken fern
Pacific crabapple
creeping buttercup
-102-
FACU
UPL
FACW
UPL
FAC
FAC
UPL
UPL
UPL
FACW
FACW
FACW
FACW
OBL
UPL
FACU
FAC
OEL
UPL
FACU
FACU
UPL
OBL
UPL
FAC
FACW
FACU
FAC
FAC
FACU
FACU
NI
FACW
FACU
UPL
FAC
FAC
FACU
FAC
UPL
UPL
FACU
FAC
FACW
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Rhamnus alnifolia
Ribes lacustre
Ribes sanguineum
Rosa gymnocarpa
Rosa multiflora
Rosa nutkana
Rosa pisocarpa
Rosa woodsii
Rubus discolor
Rubus lacinatus
Rubus leucodermis
Rubus parvifloris
Rubus spectabilis
Rubus ursinus
Rubus vitifolus
Rumex acetosella
Rumex occidental is
Salix lasiandra
Salix piperi
Salix scoulariana
Salix sessilifolia
Salix stichensis
Sambucus racemosa
Scirpus microcarpus
Senecio jacobaea
Smilacina racemosa
Sparagium evrycarpum
Spirea douglasii
SYffiphoricarpos albus
Tansineum vulgare
Taraxacum officinale
Thuja plicata
Tolmeia menziesii
Trifolium hybridum
Trifolium pratense
Trilium ovatum
Tsuga heterophylla
Typha latifolia
Urtica dioica
Vaccinium parvifolium
Veronica sp.
Vicia sativa
cascara
prickly currant
red-flowering currant
Baldhip rose
multiflora rose
Nootka rose
pea-fruit rose
wild rose
Himalayan blackberry
cut-leaf blackberry
black-capped raspberry
thimbleberry
salmonberry
trailing blackberry
dewberry
sheep sorrel
western dock
Pacific willow
dune willow
Scouler's willow
northwest willow
Sitka willow
European red elderberry
small-fruit bulrush
tansy ragwort
false Solomon's seal
burr reed
hardhack
snowberry
tansy
common dandelion
western red cedar
piggy-back plant
alsike clover
red clover
western trillium
western hemlock
broad-leaf cattail
stinging nettle
red huckleberry
speedwell
common vetch
-103-
FACU
FAC
FAC
NI
FACU
FACU
FACU
FACU
UPL
FACU
FAC
UPL
FACU
FACW
FACW
FACW
FAC
FACW
FACW
FACU
OBL
UPL
OBL
FACW
FACU
UPL
FACU
FAC
FAC
FACU
FACU
NI
FACU
OBL
FAC
UPL
UPL
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Table 5 - Partial List of Mammals
Common Name
Scientific Name
black-tailed deer
brush rabbit
chickaree
cottontail rabbit
coyote
deer mouse
dusky shrew
house mouse
long-tailed weasel
meadow vole
muskrat
Norway rat
opossums
Oregon vole
raccoon
red fox
striped skunk
Townsend's mole
Townsend's shrew
Townsend's vole
white-footed mouse
Odocoileus hemionus
Sylvilagus bachmani
Tamiasciurus douglasi
Sylvilagus floridensis
Canis latrans
peromyscus maniculatus
Sorex obscurus
Mus musculus
Mustela frenata
Microtus pennsylvanicus
Ondatra zibethica
Rattus norvegicus
Didelphis marsupialis
Microtus oregoni
Procyon lotor
Vulpes fulva
Mephitis
Scapanus townsendii
Sorex townsendi
Microtus townsendi
peromyscus leucopus
-l04-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Table 6 - Partial List of Birds
Common Name
American goldfinch
American robin
American widgeon
Audubon's warbler
barn swallow
Bewick's wren
black-capped chickadee
Brewer's blackbird
brown-headed cowbird
California quail
cedar waxwing
chestnut-backed chickadee
common bushtit
common crow
downy woodpecker
fox sparrow
golden crowned kinglet
golden crowned sparrow
great blue heron
great horned owl
green-winged teal
house finch
house sparrow
house wren
Lazulis bunting
lesser yellowlegs
long-billed marsh wren
mallard
mourning dove
orange-crowned warbler
Oregon junco
pileated woodpecker
plain titmouse
red tailed hawk
red-breasted nuthatch
red-winged blackbird
red-shafted flicker
ring-necked pheasant
ruby crowned kinglet
ruffed grouse
rufous hummingbird
rufous-sided towhee
Scientific Name
Spinus tristis
Turdus migrator ius
Mareca americana
Dendroica auduboni
Hirundo rustica
Thryomanes bewickii
Parus atricapillus
Euphagus cyanocephalus
Molothrus ater
Lophortyx californicus
Bombycilla cedrorum
Parus rufescens
Psaltriparus minimus
Corvus brachyrhynchos
Dendrocopus pubescens
passerella illaca
Regulus satrapa
Zonotrichia atricapilla
Ardea herodias
Bubo virginianus
Anas carolinensis
Carpodacus mexicanus
Passer domesticus
Troglodytes aedon
Passerina amoena
Totanus flavipes
Telmatodytes palustris
Anas platyrhynchos
Zenaidura macroura
Vermivora celata
Junco oreganus
Dryocopus pileatus
Parus inornatus
Buteo jamaicensis
Sitta canadensis
Agelaius phoeniceus
Colaptes cafer
Phasianus colchicus
Regulus calendula
Bonasa umbellus
Selasphorus rufus
Pipilo erythrophthalmus
-105-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
savannah sparrow
song sparrow
starling
Steller's jay
Swainson's thrush
tree swallow
varied thrush
violet-green swallow
western bluebird
western kingbird
white-crowned sparrow
Wilson's warbler
winter wren
Wood duck
yellow warbler
Classification and Wildlife
Passerculus sandwichensis
Melospiza melodia
Sturnus vulgaris
Cyanocitta stelleri
Hylocichla ustulata
Iridopracne bicolor
Ixoreus naevi us
Tachycineta thalassina
Sialia mexicana
Tyrannus verticalis
Zonotrichia leucophrys
Wilsonia pusilla
Troglodytes
Aix sponsa
Dendroica petechia
-106-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Table 7 - Partial List of Expected Reptiles and Amphibians
Common Name
Scientific Name
common garter snake
northwestern garter snake
Oregon salamander
Pacific tree frog
red-legged frog
western red-backed salamander
western terrestrial garter snake
bullfrog
Thamnophis sirtalis
Thamnophis ordinoides
Vatrachoseps wrighti
Hyla regilla
Rana aurora
Plethodon vehiculum
Thamnophis elegans
Rana catesbeiana
-l07-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Table 8 - Summary of Wetland Classifications
WETLAND # USFWS SYSTEM YELM SYSTEM
USFWS IES CATEGORY
1 PFOY II
2 PEMY PSS/EM/OWY II
3 PEMY PEM/OWY III
4 PEMY POWW III
5 PEMY POWY III
6 POWY IV
7 PSSY PSSY IV
8 PSSY PSSY IV
9 PFOY IV
10 PSS/EMY PSSY II
11 PEMY PFOY IV
12 PSSY POWW III
l3 PSSY PSSY III
l4 PSSY IV
15 PFOY PFO/SSY II
l6 PSSY III
l7 PEMY-POW II
l8 PSSY PSSY III
19 PEMY PEMY III
20 R2UB II
Off-Site PSSY PSSY II
(easement)
-108-
Wetlands Delineation, Plant Classification and Wildlife
Evaluation
Thurston Highlands Property
June 22, 1992
Appendix C - Field Forms
-109-
Appendix C
Housing Unit Demand Study
Prepared by
Mundy and Associates
Seattle, Washington
THURSTON HIGHLANDS
Housing Unit Demand Study
South Thurston County
Prepared For
Thurston Highlands Associates
l\1ay, 1992
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
ECONOMIC MARKET & VALUATION ANALYSTS
WATERMARK TOWER
SUITE 200
1109 1ST AVENUE
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101-2945
(206) 623-2935 FAX (206) 623-2985
September 17, 1992
Thurston Highlands AssocIates
c/o Mr Dennis T Su, AIA
General Manager
K.C.M.
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, W A 98101
RE' HOUSIng Demand AnalysIs of Thurston Highlands, our job #92-304
Dear Mr. Su:
Mundy & Associates has completed Its demographIc and hOUSIng demand analysis for the
proposed Thurston Highlands development In south Thurston County. The purpose of thIS
analysis is to provIde housing demand forecasts for Thurston County and the Yelm area to assess
the annexanon of this property relative to the gUIdelines of the Growth Management Act.
Our analysis of housing demand In Thurston County is based on employment projections for
Thurston County through 2010 The allocanon of housing demand to the Yelm area consIders
Yelm's location in the county and access to major employment centers WIthIn the county such as
Lacey and Olympia. In addItion, the potential for retuement hOUSIng and residential demand from
the staff increase at Ft. LeWIS and McChord have been consIdered.
ThIS report has been prepared In conformance with standards estabhshed by the AppraIsal InstItute,
a professIOnal appraisal orgamzatlon of which Bill Mundy IS a member (MAl #5439), certIfied
through September, 1992.
It has been a pleasure performmg this analYSIS for you and we look forward to being of continued
assistance to you. If you have any questions about the report, please feel free to call upon us for
clanfication.
SIncerely,
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
BIll Mundy, Ph.D, CRE, MAl
Rhoda Corbett Bliss, M.A
WMIRB.dh
T ABLE OF CONTENTS
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS.
INTRODUCTION. .. ... . ... . ...
Purpose of the Report........ ... . ...
IdentIfication of the Property..... ... ..... .
Research Participants and Time Frame. . . .. ..
I
HOUSING DEMAND
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
CERTIFICATION
. 1
.....1
1
1
1
..3
3
3
. 14
.22
.27
NEIGHBORHOOD DATA.
REGIONAL DATA. . ....
State of Washington
Thurston County. .
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAmE . PORTlAND' ANCHORAGE
92.3048
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6a
Table 6b
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9a
Table 9b
Table 10
Table 11
Table 12
Table 13
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
LIST OF TABLES
Employment Change 1975-1988 .. . 5
Population Growth Puget Sound's Fastest Growing Counues 5
Covered Employment and ResIdent Civilian Labor Force..... .. 7
Employment Wages, Thurston County . ................ .. 8
Resident Civihan Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment Estlmates. 9
Employment Forecast, Thurston County, 1990-2000 . .... .. .. 11
Employment Forecast, Thurston County, 2000-2010 .... ...... . .. ...... 12
PopulatIon Trends, Thurston County. . ... .. .. .. 13
Historic Demograpluc Trends, Thurston County. . ..... .. . .. .. 15
Projected Demographic Trends, Thurston County, 1990-2000 .16
Projected Demographic Trends, Thurston County, 2000-2010 17
Housrng Umt DIstnbution, Thurston County.. 19
Housmg Demand Summary, Yelm Area.. .23
Age DIstribution, Thurston County . . . .24
Populauon ProjectIons, Yelm Area 1990-2010 .. .. .... .25
LIST OF FIGURES
SIte Location Map .
Regional LocatIon Map . .
Thurston County Planning Sub-Areas
Thurston County Census Tract Map
2
4
20
26
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAmE . PORTIAND . ANCHORAGE
n~8
1
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
That the analyst IS not responsible for the accuracy of opinions furnIshed by others and con tamed
in this report. Nor IS he responsible for the reliabIlity of government data utIhzed herem.
That compensation for research services IS dependent only upon delivery of this report, and is not
contingent upon estImates provided.
That thIS report considers nothmg of legal character, and the analyst assumes no responsibihty for
matters of legal nature.
Unless otherwise stated in thIS report, the eXIstence of hazardous substances, including without
limitation asbestos, polychlonnated biphenyls, petroleum leakage, or agncultural cherrucals, whIch
mayor may not be present on the property, or other enVIronmental condmons, were not called to
the attentIon of nor did the appraIser become aware of such dunng the appraiser's inspection. The
appraiser has no knowledge of the existence of such materials on or in the property unless
otherwise stated. The appraiser, however, IS not qualIfied to test such substances or condItions. If
the presence of such substances, such as asbestos, urea formaldehyde foam msulatIon, or other
hazardous substances or envlfonmental condItIons, may affect the value of the property, the value
estimated is predicated on the assumption that there is no such conchtion on or in the property or in
such proxmuty thereto that It would cause a loss m value. No responsIbIlity IS assumed for any
such conditions, nor for any experuse or engmeenng knowledge required to discover them.
That testimony or attendance ill court IS not required by reason of this analysis unless arrangements
are prevIously made.
That information furnished by property owner, agent and management IS correct as received.
That no part of thIS study may be reproduced without permission of Mundy & ASSOCIates.
That no part of thIS study may be used as a part of or referred to m a public or pnvate stock
offering.
This report IS the confidentIal and pnvate property of the chent and Mundy & AssocIates. Any
person other than Mundy & ASsocIates or the client who obtams and/or uses this report or ItS
contents for any purpose not authonzed by Mundy & AssocIates or clIent IS hereby forewarned that
all legal means to redress may be employed against rum.
ThIS report IS based on mformatIOn which the author belIeves to be relIable. However, the
infomlation used reflects the author's personal opmion of market conditions and other factors
which mfluence employment, populatIon, commercIal and resIdenual real property markets and
value. The use of such informatIon IS at the user's own nsk.
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAmE . PORTIAND . ANCHORAGE
92-3048
1
INTRODUCTION
Purpose of the Report
The purpose of this report is to analyze the demographIcs of Thurston County and to translate
employment and population forecasts into hOUSIng demand for the proposed annexation of
approXImately 1,900 acres mto the City of Yelm.
Identification of the Property
The area under consideration for annexation IS approximately 1,900 acres located southwest of the
CIty of Yelm in southeastern Thurston County The annexatIon properties consist of four mam
ownerships. a 1,240-acre sIte owned by Thurston Highlands Associates, a 264-acre sIte owned by
Venture Partners, the 90-acre Nisqually Valley Golf Course, and addItIonal parcels under separate
ownerships, totahng approxImately 306 acres.
The 1,240-acre Thurston Highlands site IS a clear cut property that is currently cnss-crossed by old
logging roads. Current access to the property IS from State Route 507 through two adjacent fanns.
The property rises above the surrounding terrain and is rolling to somewhat rugged In some
locations. Some of the upper portIons of the property provide VIews of the mountains and the
surroundmg temtory
Research Participants and Time Frame
This study was prepared for Thurston Highlands Associates by Mundy & ASSOCIates under the
supervision of BIll Mundy, Ph.D., CRE, MAL Rhoda Bliss, M.A. and Senior Analyst,
performed the analysis and wrote the report. The data was collected and analyzed and the report
was ",'litten between February and Apn11992.
NEIGHBORHOOD DATA
The subject property is located southwest of the City of Yelm in east central Thurston County (See
Figure 1, SIte Location Map) The City of Yelm IS located near the county's eastern border with
PIerce County, approxImately twelve mIles southeast of Lacey and eIghteen mIles southeast of
OlympiafTumwater The City ofYelm is located In the rural southern portion of the county Other
towns m south Thurston County Include Raimer, approximately seven nules southwest of Yelm,
Ternno, ten nules southwest of RaImer, and Bucoda, five II11les south of Tenino These four CIties
make up the incorporated areas of southwestern Thurston County
The 1990 populatIon for the City of Yelm was 1,455 persons. There are 555 housing units located
within the city limIts. HOUSing In Yelm is predominantly in the low to moderate value range.
There is commercial space frontIng on the two main arterial streets, and a ISO-acre industrial area
that IS rail served located northeast of downtown. The center of town is the intersection of State
Routes 507 and 510 SR 510 proVIdes access between Yelm and Lacey and SR 507 provIdes
access to RaImer, Tenmo, and Interstate 5, approxImately 30 miles to the west. Fort Lewis
generally surrounds the Yelm area on three SIdes, to the east, north, and west. The Burlington
Northern Railroad tracks extend through the City ofYelrn m a southwest to northeasterly direction
The area surrounding the subject property IS predominantly rural In nature, WIth farms, forested
areas, and large acreage residential development
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAffiE . PORTI.AND . ANCHORAGE
92-3048
Fort LeWIS
"S::
~
y
3
REGIONAL DATA
The subject property is located in Thurston County, Washington, which contains Olympia, the
state's capItol, and is located at the southern end of Puget Sound in western Washmgton state (See
Figure 2, Regional LocatIon Map) The Puget Sound region expenenced very strong growth
during the latter part of the 1980s. While growth continues in the area, It decreased dramatically m
1990 and continued at a decreased rate in 1991 and mto 1992. PrOjectIons are for growth to
increase, but probably not to the levels expenenced in the late 1980s. The Seattle metropohtan
area, located north of Thurston County, includes the counties of King, Snohomish, and Pierce.
WhIle the Thurston County economy wIll be consIdered separately in thIS analysis, there IS a
definite hnk between economIc activity in Thurston County and economic aCtIVIty m the Seattle
metropohtan area and In Washington State as a whole. Therefore, economic trends in those areas
and theIr Impact on the Thurston County economy will also be considered in this analysis.
State of Washington
Employment
Of the five western states, Washmgton enjoyed the strongest employment growth rate from 1975
to 1988, WIth a growth rate of 36% compounded annually, as compared with Cahforma at 34%,
Oregon at 2.5%, Idaho at 1 9%, and Montana at 1.2% Over the 13-year period from 1975 to
1988, Thurston County experienced a rate of employment growth of 56% on an average annual
compound basis. (See Table 1, Employment Change 1975-1988). Dunng the same time period,
the United States average growth rate was 3 0% and the Seattle SMSA averaged 4.5%
Population
Growth in Washington state during the 1980s was concentrated in the state's western metropolitan
counties, especially in its largest metropolItan area, the Seattle-Tacoma SMSA. King, Snohomish
and Pierce CountIes accounted for 62% of the persons added to the state's population between
1980 and 1990, compared to only 36% in the previous decade.
Table 2 (population Growth, Puget Sound's Fastest Growing Counties) shows populatlon growth
from 1980 to 1990 m the state's five fastest growmg countIes whIch make up the Puget Sound
Comdor. These five countIes accounted for 74% of the state's populanon growth since 1980 A
total of 493,399 people were added to the five-county region during the 10-year period.
Thurston County
History
WhIle Tacoma and Seattle became fast-growmg settlements after the arnval of the railroads in the
1870s, Thurston County began Its economic hIstOry gradually Timber production began early m
the 1850s, WIth the Bald and Black Hills under the large ownershIps of Weyerhaeuser, Scott
Paper, SImpson Company and the State of Washmgton. Sandstone quarrymg and coal mimng
operations were active dunng the 1870s around Tenino and Bucoda. Subbitummous coal depOSIts
sull eXIst In the southern parts of the County, and large gravel deposits occur on the County's
prairies. A modern stnp rmmng and coal fired electnc generatmg plant operate on the border of
LeWIS and Thurston countles.
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAmE . PORllAND . ANCHORAGE
92.3048
berdeen
4
v
. Figure 2
Regional Location Map
"-1J
g
; w-~ R;IH"IER
_. ! ",::..-~-~-_....~.
"-;i"AT iO'H UP A
- _.~
~
5
Table 1
Employment Change 1975-1988
(in thousands)
1975-1988
1975 1988 Employment Cmpd. Ann.
Area Ann. Avg.. June Increase % Change Change
United States 76,945 106,021 29,076 378% 2.5%
California 7,847 12,121 4,274 54.5% 34%
Idaho 273 347 74 271% 19%
Montana 238 278 40 16.8% 1.2%
Oregon 837 1,148 311 37.2% 2.5%
Washington 1,226 1,942 716 584% 36%
West Coast 10,421 15,836 5,415 52.0% 33%
Seattle PMSA 685 1,220 535 781% 4.5%
Thurston County 28 57 29 103 6% 56%
Source. Employment & Earnings, B.L.S., 10/88, Thurston Regional Planning Council, Mundy &
Associates.
Table 2
Population Growth
Puget Sound's Fastest Growing Counties
1980-1990
1980-1990 Change 1989-] 990
County 1980 1990 Number Ann.Cmpd.% Number
King 1.269,898 1,482,800 212,902 16% 36,800
Pierce 485,667 574,500 88,833 17% 13,600
Snohomish 337,720 450,200 112,480 2.9% 19,800
Kitsap 147,152 188,800 41,648 2.5% 7,300
Thurston 124,264 161,800 37,536 2.7% 6,700
Total Region 2,364,701 2,858,100 493,399 19% 84,200
Washington Total 4,132,353 4,798,100 665,747 1.5%
Region as %
of State 57.2% 596% 741%
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAmE . PORTlAND' ANCHORAGE
92-304B
6
Until the 1970s and 1980s, when housmg construction began to move outward from the Olympia
area, growth m the rural areas was slow The centrahzatIon of state offices In Olympia in the
1960s, the impact of Fort LeWIS, and the establishment of The Evergreen State College have
contributed sIgmficantly to the populanon increase. The closmg of sawmills and quames, and the
decrease in farming have had a negative impact on employment growth. Other employment factors
Included construction of the Satsop Nuclear Plants in Grays Harbor (until shutdown In 1983) and
the development of industrial parks In the area. The growth in employment and the resultant
growth in population mcreased the demand for housing constructIon. Each of these factors has
contributed to increased econonuc actIV1ty in the rural areas of the county.
Economic Base
Industries and business that form the economic base of the community are those whIch export
goods and services outside the community and bring dollars mto the commumty In Thurston
County, state government IS the major base of the economy provIding or exporting servIces to the
entire state. In 1989, state government proVIded 30% of the employment In Thurston County
(Table 3, Covered Employment and Resident CIvIhan Labor Force), contnbuting 40% to the total
payroll receIved by local wage earners (Table 4, Employment Wages, Thurston County) The
proportlOn of people employed by government In Thurston County is more than double the
percentage for the entrre state.
In addItion to state government, the other economIC base indusnies involve the manufacturing and
agriculture/forestry/fishmg sectors Combmed, these sectors account for 9% of local employment
-- less than half the state-WIde percentage, whIch IS approxImately 18% ThIS Illustrates the
county's lack of dIversity In ItS economic base Thurston County has probably faired better than
its county neIghbors, gIven the relatIve stabIlIty of income In state government. Federal, state and
local government prOVIde a total of 42% of the employment m Thurston County Between 1980
and 1990 government employment grew at an annual average rate of 3 7% The trade and servlce
sectors of the county economy combmed proVIde 39% of the employment. These two sectors have
expenenced the largest percentage growth in employment over the last decade, but have the lowest
average Income in wages Between 1980 and 1990, wholesale and retail trade employment
Increased by an annual average rate of 44%, and the service sector by 6.2% annually
Unemployment
The unemployment rate In the county, state and natIon rose slIghtly over the decade of the 1970s.
Thurston County and Washmgton State's unemployment rates have been tradltlonally higher than
the natIonal unemployment rates ThIS IS due partIally to the lack of a dIverse industrial base in
both the state and the county The state IS hIghly dependent on two mam manufactunng mdustrIes,
lumber and aerospace, whIle Thurston County's main source of employment IS government.
The unemployment rate, whIle faIrly steady from 1970 to 1980, increased dramatIcally m 1980,
1981 and 1982 In Thurston County and WashIngton State. Dunng thIS period, unemployment In
Thurston County Increased by over 4%, peaking in 1982 at 12.2%, more than double the 1974
rate In 1983, the unemployment rate declIned, reflectIng a shghtly Improved economIC climate
locally and nationally Unemployment rates contInued to drop from a high In 1982 of 12.2% to a
low of 54% In 1990 (See Table 5, ReSIdent CIVIlian Labor Force, Employment, Unemployment
EstImates, Thurston County)
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAffiE . PORTlAND' ANCHORAGE
92-304B
Table 3
Covered Employment and Resident Civilian Labor Foree
Thurston County
1980-1989
~
Ann. A vg.
1980 1985 1987 1988 1989 1990 Chan\!e
'fotal EmplOyment'" 50,200 60,800 68.100 10,800 74,200 79,600 47%
% Covered Employment* 84.8% 78.6% 79.6% 80.2% 814% 81.0%
'fotal covered Employment* 42.568 47.762 54,236 56,796 60,390 64,449 4.2%
'fotal Manufacturing 3,381 3,202 3,759 3,591 3.683 4.241 2.3 %
'fota\ Nonmanufacturing 39,187 44.560 50,477 53,205 56,707 60,208 44%
Mining 26 39 57 52 44 36 3.3%
ConstrUction 1,636 1,767 2.202 2,461 2,618 2,982 6.2% .....:I
'fransp" Comm. & Uti\. 1.276 1.196 1,339 1.461 1,815 1,120 3.0%
Wholesale & Retail'fradC 8,607 9,998 10,956 11,666 12,580 13,201 44%
FinanCC, Ins. & R.E. 1,637 1,974 2,058 2,009 2,063 2,125 2.6%
Services 6,273 7,860 9,529 10.037 10,713 11,699 6.4%
Government 18,594 20,560 22,898 24,135 25,319 26,813 3.1%
Ag., Forest. & Fish. 1,1'38 1,166 1,438 1,378 1,555 1,632 3.1%
. covered E1nplOyment includeS only tho'" covered bY E1nploymCUt security Act and is eslimated 10 include
80% to 85% of'fotal Employment.
Source: W nsbinglOU S.... DcparIl"ent of EmplOyment Security. Thurston Regional l'\a1lning Council.
and Mundy & Associates.
Table 4
Employment Wages
Thurston County
1988 and 1989
Total Employment Wages Number of EmployeeS Wages per Employee Percent
1988 1989 1988 1989 1988 1989 of Total
-
Government $576.426,542 $632.948.348 24.135 25.319 $23.883 $24.999 52.3%
Federal $22.582,295 $24.769,351 786 827 $28,731 $29,951 2.0%
State $441.280,208 $482,275,011 17,170 17.974 $25.701 $26,832 39.8%
LoCal $112.564,039 $125,903,986 6,179 6.518 $18,217 $19,316 10.4%
Wholesale Trade $29.583.804 $35,284,882 1,286 1,533 $23,005 $23.017 2.9%
Retail Trade $110,064.694 $121,547,727 10,380 11,047 $10.604 $11,003 10.0% 00
Services $154.852,864 $176,150,898 10,037 10,713 $15.428 $16,443 14.6%
Manufacturing $86,579,052 $88,569,941 3,591 3.683 $24,110 $24,048 7.3%
Fin. Ins. &. Real Est. $37,939.967 $40,166,126 2.W 2,063 $18,885 $19,470 3.3%
ContrUction $45,648,373 $50.372,458 2,467 2,618 $18,504 $19,241 4.2%
Transp. &. Utilities $37,266,215 $45,778,314 1.461 1,815 $25.507 $25,222 3.8%
Agr., Forest. &. Fish. $16,195,414 $18,964,730 1,378 1,555 $11,753 $12,196 1.6%
Mining $1,012,615 $844,536 57 44 $17,765 $19,194 0.1%
Total $1,095,569,540 $1.210,627,960 56,801 60,390 $19,288 $20,047 100.0%
Source: w"",.nglOn State Deparunent of Employment Security. Thur.:ton Regional Plann.ng Cnuncil. and Mundy & A_iales.
'table 5
Residenl Civilian LabOr force, ElOplol"""nl. and unelOplOylOenl f,slilOales
'Thurston county
1970.1990
~
\9&0 \985 \9&6 \9&7 \988 \989 \ 990 Number ~
\970 \975
Residenl Ci"U1an 69 ,C)('/J 73,500 75,900 78,700 84,\00 29,300 53.47%
LabOr Force 32,990 40,230 54,800 65,fJYJ '"
64,300 68,\00 70,800 74,200 79,fJYJ 29,400 58.57%
EroplOy11lenl 30,520 37,240 50,200 60,400
5,fJYJ 5,400 5,\00 4,500 4,500 _\00 _2.17%
Unernp\oytnenl 2,470 2,990 4,fJYJ 5,200
percenlof 8.39% 7.93% 8.01% 7.35% 6.72% 5.72% 5.35%
LabOt force 749% 143%
SQIlICe: Vi .,bing",n S.... pepartn'enl o[ B1Oploymeol securitY.
r .. n,litlltY and prison pop.lalinn whO reside in Tb""",n CounlY
Exp_linn. lneludes all wnrkers e<eCll' or ",e '
10
Employment Projections
Since housmg demand IS population and household dnven, which in turn are driven by
employment, our housing demand model begms wnh employment forecasts for Thurston County
Estimated employment in Thurston County in 1990 was 79,176 whIch represented an annual
average increase of 47% over 1980 The fastest growing sector dunng the 1980s was Services,
with an average annual increase of 6.4% ConstructIon was second with 6.2% and Trade was
thrrd wIth 4 4% Total employment IS made up of two components. Total covered employment
which includes workers covered by the Employment Secunty Act and those workers that are self
employed or otherwIse not covered. Covered employment is estimated to mclude 80% to 85% of
total employment m Thurston County Total covered employment in 1990 was 64,446, wluch was
a 4.2% annual average mcrease over the 1980 figure of 42,568
Based on hIstOriC trends and our opmlOn of what IS hkely to occur m the future, we have
developed employment forecasts for Thurston County through the year 2010 (See Tables 6a and
6b, Employment Forecasts, Thurston County) Total employment IS projected to mcrease by 2.9%
annually through 2000 for total employment of 106,277 From 2000 to 2010, employment IS
prOjected to Increase by 2.8%, for a 2010 total of 140,151
Employment forecasts were done by Thurston ReglOnal Planning Council m 1989 through the year
2010 When we compare our forecast WIth the forecasts prepared by Thurston County, WhICh
were done for medium, low and hIgh growth scenarios, we find that In 1990, actual total
employment at 79,176 IS 15% higher than what was forecast under the high growth scenano
Consequently, our forecast tends to be higher than the county's forecasts through 2005 From
2005 through 2010, our forecast falls between the county's medium and hIgh forecasts.
Population
Population change and migratlon m Thurston County are mfluenced by national, state and regional
factors. At the turn of the century, as large numbers of immigrants arnved from the east and
Europe to homestead and work in the forests, the populatIon began to increase dramatically
Populatlon growth contlnued over the next several decades, but at a slower pace, for both Thurston
County and the state. In the late 1940s Puget Sound counties expenenced a rapId increase from the
post-war industnal expanslOn. Population change was fairly constant for Thurston County
throughout most of thIS penod, about 20% per decade.
In the 1960s, WIth the growth of state government and the opening of The Evergreen State
College, Thurston County's population increased very rapIdly. PopulatIon mcreases dunng the
1960-to-1970 and 1970-to-1980 penods were 40% and 62%, respectIvely ThIS by far exceeded
the 29% mcrease in Washmgton State's population for the same periods Thurston County
contmued to show a greater annual percentage of populatIon gain than other neighbonng counnes
and almost twIce the statewIde growth rate between 1980 and 1990
OlympIa IS the largest CIty in Thurston County, contaming 21 0% of the county's population
(Table 7, PopulatIon Trends) Lacey IS the second largest CIty WIth 12.0% and Tumwater IS thrrd
WIth 6.2% The mcorporated areas have been losing their share of total populatIon as growth m
the unmcorporated areas has mcreased in recent years. In terms of rate of increase, Tumwater and
Lacey lead the county wnh 4 1 % and 3.3% compounded annually. The unincorporated portIon of
the county was the next fastest growmg area at 2.7% annually from 1980 to 1990
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAffiE . PORTI.AND . ANCHORAGE
92-3048
Table 6a
EmplOyment Forecasts
Thurston County
1990- 2000
AIm. A.vg.
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1991 1998 1999 2000 Chan\!.c
'foml EmplOyment* 19.600 82,059 84.565 81.117 89.716 92.360 95,048 97,780 100.555 103.371 106,227 2.9%
% covered EmplOyment* 81.0% 81.0% 811% 81.2% 81.3% 814% 81.5% 81.5% 81.6% 81 7% 81.8% 01%
'foml Covered EmPl0yment* 64.449 66,506 68,606 70.147 72.930 75,155 17.420 19.125 82,069 84.452 86.812 3.0%
'foml Manufacturing 4.241 4.313 4.385 4.457 4.530 4.603 4.675 4.748 4.821 4,894 4.967 1.6%
'foml Nonmanufacturing 60.208 62,193 64.221 66.290 68.400 10.552 72.744 74,976 17.248 79.557 81,905 31% ~
Mining 36 31 38 39 40 40 41 42 43 44 45 2.3 % ~
Conslnlction 2.982 3.119 3.259 3,405 3.554 3.708 3,866 4.029 4.196 4,361 4.543 4.3%
'fran5P" Corom. &. Util. 1.720 1,159 1.191 1.831 1.816 1.916 1.956 1.996 2.031 2.078 2.119 2.1%
Wholesale &. Rctail'frade 13.201 13.628 14.063 14.505 14.955 15.413 15.817 16.349 16.828 17.313 11.805 3.0%
Finance.lnS. &. R.E. 2.125 2.167 2.208 2.250 2.293 2.335 2.378 2.420 2.463 2,506 2.549 1.8%
Services 11.699 12.256 12,831 13.425 14.038 14.670 15.321 15.991 16.680 17 .388 18.115 4.5%
Government 26.813 27.553 28.303 29.062 29.832 30.610 31.398 32.194 32.998 33.810 34.629 2.6%
A.g., Forest. &. Fish. 1.632 1.676 1.121 1.761 1.813 1.859 1.906 1.954 2,002 2,051 2.100 2.6%
Th""lon counIY Leal I'roploY-' ForccaslS. Thutsllln Rcg'onal Planning cmu>d\.
Medium Growth scenario 61,064 16.237 85.923 2.5%
High Growth scenario 68.969 82.133 97.358 3.5%
Low Growth scenario 64.169 70.668 78.027 \.9%
. CoY"od I'roPlo,-o' \nCludcS only those covc,od by Emplo,-o' Se<Ul"Y Acl,"" is ",.-od to 'nclude 80 '0 85% of Total I'roploy..ent
Source: Mundy &. AssociateS Forecast.
Table 6b
Employment Forecasts
Thurston County
2000-2010
-
Ann. Avg.
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2001 2008 2009 2010 Chanl!.e
Total Employment 106.227 109.169 112.200 115.323 118.540 121.855 125.271 128.191 132.418 136,151 140,151 2.8%
% covered Employment* 81.8% 81.9% 81.9% 82.0% 82.1 % 82.2% 82.3% 82.4% 82.4% 82.5% 82.5% 0.1 %
Total Covered Employment* 86,872 89.361 91.940 94,594 97.330 100,152 103.062 106.064 109.160 112.355 115.650 2.9%
Total Manufacturing 4.961 5.041 5.116 5,192 5.210 5.348 5,428 5.509 5.591 5.614 5.759 1.5 0/0
Total Nomnanufacwmng 81,905 84,326 86,82A 89.401 92.060 94.803 91,634 100,555 103,569 106.680 109,891 3.0%
Mining 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 54 55 56 2.2%
constrUction 4,543 4,726 4.916 5,114 5,319 5.533 5,756 5.987 6.228 6.478 6.739 4.0% .....
t-.>
TransP.. Corom. & Uti\. 2.119 2.160 2.203 2.246 2.291 2,336 2.382 2,429 2,477 2,525 2.575 2.0%
Wholesale & Retail Trade 17 ,805 18,311 18,831 19,366 19,916 20.481 21,063 21.662 22.277 22,910 23.560 2.8%
Finance. InS. & R.E. 2.549 2,593 2,638 2.683 2,729 2.776 2.824 2.872 2,922 2.972 3.023 11%
Services 18.115 18.872 19,661 20,483 21.339 22.231 23.160 2A.128 25.137 26,181 27.7J,2 4.2%
Government 34.629 35,468 36,328 37,208 38,110 39,034 39.980 40,948 41,941 42.957 43.998 2.4%
Ag.. Forest. & Fish. 2.100 2,150 2.201 2.254 2.307 2.362 2,419 2,476 2.536 2.596 2.658 2.4%
Th""'on County Local Employment Fo""'"''''' Thu<ston Regional Planning Council.
85.923 98.070 112,493 2.7%
97,358 121,238 140.998 3.8%
78.027 86.184 96,106 2.1%
* Covered Employm"" include' onlY tho," cov",,," by Employment S<<uri'y Ae' and i' estimated to include gO to gS% of Total Employmen'
source: Mundy & Associates Forecast.
Table 7
Population Trends
Thurston County by Incorporated and Unincorporated Areas
1970-1990
Year Bucoda Lacey OlympIa Rainier Tenino Tumwater Yclm* Inc. Uninc. County
1970 421 9,296 23,296 382 962 5,373 628 40,358 36,132 76,490
1980 519 13,940 27,447 891 1,280 6,705 1,294 52,076 72,188 124,264
1981 520 14,200 27,600 1,020 1,310 6,690 1,440 52,780 76,320 129,100
1982 520 14,175 27,700 990 1,340 7,000 1,420 53,145 78,155 131,300
1983 540 14,030 28,000 992 1,400 7,050 1,390 53,402 80,098 133,500
1984 535 14,520 28,790 1,010 1,375 7,240 1,385 54,855 81,345 136,200
1985 535 15,200 28,560 995 1,390 7,380 1,370 55,430 84,070 139,500
1986 530 15,270 28,990 995 1,390 7,890 1,385 56,450 85,750 142,200
1987 525 15,840 29,600 985 1,340 8,070 1,370 57,730 87,770 145,500
16,380 90,330 149,300 ......
1988 535 30,270 1,000 1,285 8,100 1,400 58,970 w
1989 525 16,940 31,020 1,020 1,290 8,200 1,425 60,420 94,630 155,050
1990 536 19,279 33,840 991 1,292 9,976 1,477 67,391 93,847 161,238
Annual Percentage Change:
1970-1980 2.1% 41% 17% 8.8% 2.9% 2.2% 7.5% 2.6% 7.2% 5.0%
1980-1990 0.3% 3.3% 2.1% 11% 0.1% 41% 1.3% 2.6% 2.7% 2.6%
Percenta~e Distribution of the Population by Area
Year B ucoda Lacey OlympIa Rainier Tenino Tumwaler Yelm Inc. Uninc. County
1970 0.6% 12.2% 30.5% 0.5% 1.3% 7.0% 0.8% 52.8% 47.2% 100.0%
1980 0.4% 11.2% 22.1% 0.7% 1.0% 54% 1.0% 41.9% 58.1% 100.0%
1990 0.3% 12.0% 21.0% 0.6% 0.8% 6.2% 0.9% 41.8% 58.2% 100.0%
Source: Washington State Office of Financial Management, Thurston RegIOnal Planning Council, and Mundy & AsSOCIates.
* Census data plus correction based on local count in 1992.
14
HOUSING DEMAND
Housing demand for Thurston County is based on the assumption that new housmg umts Wlll need
to be added to the stock as the economy of the area grows. Economic growth is measured ill tenus
of employment. Therefore, an analysis IS made of the relationshIp between employment and
populatlon, and population and housmg. thIS analYSIS IS shown m Table 8 (Histonc DemographIc
Trends, Thurston County) and Tables 9a and 9b (Projected DemographIc Trends, Thurston
County). Important relationshIps mvolved WIth the estlmate of housmg demand are.
. Covered-to-total employment. ThIS ratio accounts for people who are self-employed and
who do not have to report employment actiVIties to the State Employment Secunty
Department. The number of uncovered employees for most areas has been slowly declirung
WIth time. ThIs trend IS prOjected to contInue as the state contmues efforts to mclude a
hIgher proportion of the labor force as employment covered by SOCIal Secunty
· Commutmg factor EstImates by Thurston County mdlcate that approxImately 7% of the
county's reSIdents work outside the county and, for this reason, the total labor force is
actually greater than total employment located WIthin the county. We have esumated that
thIS factor WIll contmue to mcrease at approxlIDately 0 2% per year as employment centers
outSIde the county grow (such as Ft. Lewis) and housmg for those workers is provided in
Thurston County
· Percent unemployment. The unemployment rate for Thurston County has been decreasmg
over tIme. It cUlTently IS approximately 5 3% Based on an analYSIS of employment
projectlons for Thurston County, we have esnmated that the rate will remam level through
the year 2000
· Labor force partICIpatIOn rate. ThIS rate reflects the proportion of the population that IS ill
the labor force. ThIs rate has been mcreasmg WIth time, pnnclpally because of a higher
proportion of women entenng the labor force. Demographers project that this trend WIll
continue; therefore, the labor force participation rate mcreases by not qUIte one percent per
year as a part of our forecast.
· PopulatIOn per occupIed dwellIng umt. For the Umted States and for Thurston County,
this statistIc has been decreasmg WIth tIme. The reason is that as economIC conditIonS
improve, a hIgher proportIon of households seek independent housmg ThIS trend IS
forecast to continue for the Umted States and, because of the healthy economic conditions
of Thurston County, It is also forecast to continue there.
· Vacancy rate. The overall vacancy rate for housmg In Thurston County has been declimng
and IS forecast to contmue to decline slowly during the forecast penod. One factor for the
continumg decline IS the relatlvely high rate of growth for the area and another IS financing
constramts WhIch make constructIOn financmg more dIfficult to obtam by natlonally and
locally
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEATILE . POR1lAND . ANCHORAGE
91.30411
Table 8
Historic Demographic Trends: Employment, Population & Housing
Thurston County, Washington
1980-1990
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.
Employment
Total Employment 50,200 49,800 49,600 55,800 57,300 60,800 64,300 68,100 70,800 74,200 79,176 47%
Unemployment 4,603 5,595 6,828 6,826 5,875 5,215 5,591 5,363 5,084 4,485 4,520 -0.2%
% Unemployment 8.4% 10.1% 12.1% 10.9% 9.3% 7.9% 8.0% 7.3% 6.7% 57% 5.4% -4.3%
Local Labor Force 54,803 55,395 56,428 62,626 63,175 66,015 69,891 73,463 75,884 78,685 83,696 4.3%
Commuting Factor 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%
Total Labor Force 58,928 59,564 60,675 67,340 67,930 70,984 75,152 78,992 81,596 84,608 89,995 4.3%
Population
Total 124,264 129,100 131,300 133,500 136,200 139,500 142,200 145,500 149,300 155,100 161,238 2.6%
Labor force/Population 0.474 0.461 0462 0.504 0.499 0.509 0.528 0.543 0.547 0.546 0.558 1.6% ......
VI
Housing
Dwelling Units 49,734 55,301 56,487 57,576 58,698 59,666 60,749 62,391 64,055 65,844 66,464 2.9%
Occupied D.U 46,375 48,471 49,594 50,730 52,068 53,651 55,020 56,637 58,467 61,104 62,150 3.0%
Vacant U U 3,359 6,830 6,893 6,846 6,630 6,015 5,729 5,754 5,588 4,740 4,314 2.5%
Vacancy Rate 6.8% 12.4% 12.2% 11.9% 11.3% 10.1% 94% 9.2% 8.7% 7.2% 6.5% -04%
Pop,fOccup. D U 2.680 2.663 2.647 2.632 2.616 2.600 2.585 2.569 2.554 2.538 2.594 -0.3%
Starts/l000 Pop. 12.78 919 8.29 8.40 711 776 11.55 1144 11.98 16.36 17.24 3.0%
Housing Starts (1) 1,588 1,186 1,089 1,122 968 1,083 1,642 1,664 1,789 2,538 2,780 5.8%
1,586
Thurston County Population Projections 1990 Actual: 161,238
Medium Growth Scenario 139,500 157,618 2.5%
High Growth Scenano 139,500 160,844 2.9%
Low Growth Scenario 139,500 154,910 2.1%
Source: Thurston Regional Planning Council and Mundy & Associates.
Table 9a
projected Demographic Trends: Employmenl, populalion & lIousmg
Thurston county, Washington
1990-2000
- 10~
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 19~ 1997 1998 1999 AVL.
EmplOyment
Total Employment 79,600 82,059 84,565 87,117 89,716 92,360 95,048 97,780 100,555 103.371 106,227 2.9%
unemployment 4,096 4,593 4,733 4,876 5,021 5,169 5,319 5,472 5,628 5,785 5,945 3.8%
% Unemploymcnt 54% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3%
Local Labor Forcc 83,696 86,651 89,297 91,993 94,737 97,529 100,368 103,253 106,182 109,156 112,172 30%
Commuting Factor 7.0% 71% 7.2% 74% 7.5% 77% 7.8% 8.0% 8.1% 8.3% 8.4 %
Total Labor Force 89,995 93,244 96,238 99,297 102,421 105,611 108,866 112,185 115,568 119,015 122,525 31%
population
Total 161,238 167,000 174,000 178,638 183,342 188,112 192,944 197,837 202,789 207,799 212,863 2.8% ......
0\
Labor force{popu1ation 0.558 0.558 0.553 0.556 0.559 0.561 0.564 0.567 0.570 0.573 0.576
llousing
Dwelling units 66,464 68,664 70,754 13,532 75,455 17,414 79,409 81,440 83,506 85,606 87,742 2.8%
Occuplcd D U 62,150 64,579 67,504 69,528 71,590 73,690 75,821 18,002 80,213 82,461 84,744 31%
Vacant D U 4,314 4,085 3,250 4,005 3,865 3,724 3,582 3,431 3,292 3,145 2,998 -3.6%
Vacancy Rate 6.5% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.8% 5.8% 5.8% 5.8% 57%
pop./Occup. D U 2.594 2.586 2.578 2.569 2.561 2.553 2.545 2.536 2.528 2.520 2.512
StartS/looo Pop. 17.24 1317 16.81 11.33 11.25 1116 11 08 10.99 10.90 10.82 1073 12.32
Housing Demand 2,780 2,200 2,925 2,024 2,062 2,100 2,138 2,175 2,211 2,248 2,283 2,286
ThurslOO CounlY populatiou Projections (Revised 8/92)
Medium Growth Scenario 161,238 196,000 214,000 2.9%
SouKe: ThurstOn Regional Pl....ing council and Mundy & AsSOClal<S.
n..,,^'n. ncrmll data fer 1991 is aa esuma'" baSed on 1,737 penUlts issued Ihrougb 3rd quaner
Table 9b
Pro jetted Demographic Trends: Employment, 1'opnlation 8< llousing
Thurston County, Washington
2000-2010
2000 200~ 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2091 1008 'l~ Av~.
EmplOyment
'fotal Employment 106.221 109.169 112.200 115.323 118.540 121.855 125.211 128.191 132.418 136.151 140.151 2.8%
Unemployment 5.945 6,110 6,219 6,454 6.634 6,820 1,011 1,208 1.411 1,620 1,844 2.8%
% Unetn\>\oyment 5 .3 % 5.3% 5.3 % 5.3 % 5.3% 5.3% 5.3 % 5 .3 % 5.3% 5.3% 5.3 %
Local Labor Force 112.172 115.219 118.480 121,111 125,115 128.615 132,282 135,999 139.829 143.117 141.994 2.8%
Commuting factor 8.4 % 8.6% 8.8% 90% 91% 9.3% 9.5 % 91% 9.9% 10.1 % 10.3%
'fotal Labor force 122.525 126.\51 129.899 133.112 131.175 141.914 146,193 150.617 155,193 159,926 164,988 3.0%
"population .....
'fotal 212.863 216.994 221.221 225.568 230.018 234.581 239,262 244,062 248.988 254.041 259,486 2.0% -.l
Labor rotCe/po\>u1ation 0.516 0.581 0.581 0.593 0.599 0.605 0.611 0.611 0.623 0.630 0.636
Housing
Dwelling Units 81,742 89,910 91,138 93,616 95,541 91,530 99,510 101,666 103,822 106,039 108,320 2.1 %
Qccu\>icd D U 84,144 86,668 88,645 90.611 92,165 94,912 91,119 99,388 101.122 104,122 106,698 2.30/0
Vacanl D U 2.998 3,242 3.093 2,940 2.182 2.619 2,451 2.218 2.100 1.917 1.622 -6.0%
Vacancy Rate 51% 51% 51% 51% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.5% 5.5%
"pop.JOeeu\>. D U 2.512 2.504 2.496 2.488 2.480 2.412 2.464 2.456 2.448 2.440 2.432
SWJ\S/1000 po\>. 10.13 8.81 8.94 9.01 9.08 915 9.22 9.30 9.31 945 9.93 9.37
Housing Demand 2,283 1,924 1,911 2,032 2,088 2,141 2,201 2,269 2.334 2.400 2,516 2,203
Thurston CounlY population Projections (Revised &/92)
Medium Growth Scenario 214,000 231,000 253,000 1 1%
-
Source: Thurston Regional Planning council.nd ~undy 8< AssociateS.
18
· New housing starts per 1,000 populauon. ThIS ratIO IS an important part of our forecastmg
model smce It tends to keep all of the above ratIos in a proper synchromzation. For the
UOlted States, on a hlstoncal basis, the starts per 1,000 populatIon have ranged between 10
and 15, and for hIgh growth areas between 15 and 20 As can be seen in Tables 9a and 9b
(Projected DemographIc Trends, Thurston County), the starts per 1,000 number is in the 8
to 17 range. It IS vIrtually ImpossIble to produce housmg at a rate more than 20 starts per
1,000 populanon due to supply pIpelIne constramts such as pemutting, lack of aVailable
sItes, labor shortages, dramatic price mcreases, supply shortages and so forth.
Demand on an annual baSIS IS shown in the last row of Table 8 (Histonc DemographIC Trends,
Thurston County). Thurston County produced an annual average of approxImately 1,600 uOlts per
year from 1980 through 1990. In 1990, over 2,700 housmg uOlts were constructed. The forecast
shown in Tables 9a and 9b (Projected DemographIc Trends, Thurston County) IS a demand
forecast. In reflects what the area should be producmg, rather than what it IS producing
Therefore, the model could be labeled as "IdealIstic" in the sense that It reflects the quantIty of
hOUSIng WhICh should be constructed to adequately prOVIde for households in Thurston County.
Housing demand IS forecast to average almost 2,300 uOlts per year from 1990 to 2000, rangmg
from a hIgh of 2,925 m 1992 to a low of 2,024 In 1993
Housing Demand by Area
Table 10, (Housmg Umt DlstnbutIon, Thurston County), shows that Olympia, the largest
junsdlction In Thurston County, IS losing Its share of total dwellmg uOlts, havmg accounted for
248% of the total in 1980 and dropping to 23 7% in 1990. Lacey has maintained its share of
county housmg at 11.5% The Lacey EnVIrons, on the other hand, Increased from 20.2% in 1980
to 210% in 1990 Tumwater Increased ItS share from 5.8% in 1980 to 6.7% In 1990 Tumwater
experienced the strongest rate of growth at 64 6% for the decade. The Yelm unincorporated area
was second WIth a 53 8% growth rate. Dunng the 1980s, the overall county growth rate In
hOUSIng units was 41 5%, with the uOlncorporated area grOWIng at a faster rate (43 4%) than the
unincorporated areas (39 1%)
The Yelm area, which Includes the City ofYelm and the unincorporated Yelm-RaInler Area (see
Figure 3, Thurston County Planning Sub-Areas) accounted for approximately 7 1 % of the total
increase in housmg umts In the county from 1980 to 1990 The Yelm-Ramier Area contaIned
60% of total housing units in 1980 and Increased that share to 6 4% by 1990 ProjectIons by the
county are for the Yelm-Rmmer Area to cont1Oue to increase its share of new housmg In the
county, particularly as other areas In the north become more bUIlt-OUt. The Yelm-RalnICr Area is
located wlthm commutIng dIstance of Lacey, Olympia, Tumwater, and Fort LeWIS, as well as other
employment and actIVIty centers In Thurston and Pierce counties, makIng It the next logIcal
expanSIOn area for housing development. In addmon to hous1Og demand generated by growth
WIthIn Thurston County, there WIll be a substantIal increase 10 personnel at Fort LeWIS and
McChord bases In PIerce County The Impact of these Increases IS dIscussed In a latter section of
thIS report. Another Important factor affectIng future growth In Yelm is the proVISIOn of servIces.
Yelm is, at the present tlme, the only CIty 111 south Thurston County that has receIved grants for a
sewage treatment plant. The avaIlabIlIty of a broader range of housing options than is currently
avaIlable In the Yelm area WIll also 1I1crease housing demand 111 the area SInce It WIll appeal to a
broader specoum of households
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAmE . PORTlAND. ANCHORAGE
92.3048
Table 10
Housing Unit Distribution
Thurston County by Jurisdiction and Subarea
1980 and 1990
Tolal Housing Units 1980-1990 Change Percent of Tolal
Jurisdiction or Area 1980 1990 Number Percent 1980 1990
Incorporated Jurisdictions:
Bucoda 213 227 14 6.6% 04% 0.3%
Lacey 5,838 8,225 2,387 40.9% 11.5% 11.5%
Olympia 12,560 16,963 4,403 351% 24.8% 23.7%
Rainier 305 409 104 341% 0.6% 0.6%
Tenino 502 549 47 94% 1.0% 0.8%
Tumwater 2,920 4,807 1,887 64.6% 5.8% 6.7%
Yelm 470 555 85 18.1% 0.9% 0.8%
......
Incorporated Subtolal 22,808 31,735 8,927 391% 45.0% 44.3% \0
Unincorporated Areas:
Griffin 1,415 1,888 473 33.4% 2.8% 2.6%
Cooper Point 1,826 2,436 610 334% 3.6% 34%
Northeast Thurston 3,655 5,092 1,437 39.3% 7.2% 71%
Lacey EnvlTons 10,225 15,043 4,818 471% 20.2% 21.0%
Black LakeILittlerock 4,502 6,476 1,974 43.8% 8.9% 9.0%
Rochester 2,313 3,189 876 37.9% 4.6% 4.5%
Tenino Area 878 1,198 320 36.4% 17% 17%
Yelm-Rainier Area 2,605 4,007 1,402 53.8% 51% 5.6%
Summit Lake 408 563 155 38.0% 0.8% 0.8%
Unincorporated Subtolal 27,827 39,892 12,065 434% 55.0% 55.7%
Tolal County 50,635 71,627 20,992 41.5% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Thurston Regional Planning Council, 1991, and Mundy & Associates.
~
THURSTON COUNTY
PLANNING SUB- AREAS
1
2
3
4
Griffin
Cooper Point
Northeast Thurston
Olympla-Lacey- Tumwater
<Including County s McKinley
Sub-Area)
Lacey Environs
Black Lake-L1tllorock-Dolphl
Rochester
Tenlno-Bucoda
Yelm-Ralnler
Summit Lake
5
6.
7
8.
9
10
~
OOIl~
Scale
., I , J
- ----..
MAP 2
1-3
;:r
~
"'I
en
,.....
o
~
(j
o
~
~
,.....'T\
'< -.
C1Q
'"O~
-"'I
ll)rD
~
~v.l
5.
(JQ
en.
~
a
I
>
"'I
rD
ll)
en
IV
o
21
Military Demand for Housing
Approximately 300 advanced personnel will begin arriVIng in January, 1993 The fIrst major
group of 3,700 soldiers WIll begm amving In March, 1993 and theIr move WIll be spread over a
ten-week period. The second contIngent WIth 3,600 soldIers WIll begIn amvmg In May, 1993,
wIth the final phase of 2,900 begInnIng in August. About 1,200 soldIers wIll remain at Ft. Ord to
complete the shutdown and will amve at Ft. LeWIS sometime in 1994. The fIgures for Ft. LeWIS
include approximately 1,000 Madigan personnel. In addlt1on, there wIll be approxImately 1,000
addItional personnel at McChord dunng 1993 and 1994
During 1993, approximately 3,800 soldIers will be mOVIng from Ft. Lewis to Ft. Polk m
LoulSlana. These transfers WIll occur from May to August. Consequently, there will be a net
Increase of 8,200 personnel at Ft. Lewis dunng 1993 and 1994 The current strength at Ft. Lewis
IS 16,500 personnel. This number WIll Increase to 23,300 In 1993 and to 24,500 in 1994. The
number is projected to decrease to 23,500 m 1995
The current grade breakout at Ft. LeWIS IS 6% officers, 32.5% non-conumssIOned officers, and
61.5% enlIsted personnel. It IS lIkely that the personnel conung from Ft. Ord wIll tend toward the
lower ranks. ApproXImately 1,400 of the transfers from Ft. Ord are expected to be housed on
base.
Dunng 1993 and 1994, approxImately 12,000 soldIers are scheduled to move to Ft Lewis from
Ft. Ord AccordIng to informatIOn from the Public Affairs Office at Ft. Lewis, approxImately
6,300 WIll be mamed. Of the marned personnel, 97% plan to move thelI families to the Ft. LeWIS
area. Approximately 42% (2,500 familIes) WIll bring their fanulies at the tIme of then transfer,
28% will move their families later, 22% WIll move sooner, and 8% will waIt untIl summer when
school IS out.
We estimate that approXImately 5% of the new personnel would seek housing In the Yelm area.
This demand would be spread over the four-year penod 1994 through 1997 (Table 11, HOUSIng
Demand Summary)
Retirement Housing
The number of people in the 60-and-above age category WIll increase by 16,343 in Thurston
County between 1990 and 2010, or approXImately 817 per year (See Table 12, Age DIstrIbution,
Thurston County) In additIOn, there are nulItary personnel statIOned at Fort LeWIS and McChord
who retIre each year Accordmg to mformatIon from the Pubhc ServIces OffIce, they are havmg
approximately 25 retIrement ceremonies per month for people retiring from the post. This
translates mto approXImately 300 people per year Of these numbers, not all WIll remam In
Thurston County. Some WIll move to warmer cl1mates or to areas that are closer to their chIldren
or other famIly members We have estlmated that a well deSIgned retirement golf-course
commumty In Yelm can attract a segment of the retlIement housing market for Thurston County
As of the 1990 Census, there were 16,534 people m the 65-and-above age category reSIdIng in
Thurston County. In addmon, there are currently 16,000 retIred mIlItary personnel living WIthIn
50 nules of the bases. Some of the renred people residing In Thurston County may be retired
military personnel so there may be some overlap in the fIgures.
We estimate that imtIally approximately 24 uruts of retlIement housrng could be absorbed per year
at the Thurston Highlands golf course commumty In Yelm. Tills demand WIll Increase WIth hme to
63 umts per year by 2005 ThIS estImate IS based on the assumptIOn that the retlIement commumty
WIll be well deSIgned WIth semor actIVIty centers, golf course clubhouse, lots adjacent to or near
the golf course, and umts that cover a broad pnce range, Includmg a large proportion In the
moderate pnce range. It IS our OpInIOn that a well-deSIgned and aggressIvely marketed retirement
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAffiE PORTlAND. ANCHORAGE
92-3048
22
community at the subject property would be instrumental in increasing Yelm's overall share of
housing demand In Thurston County
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Housing Demand
Table 11 (HoUSIng Demand Summary, Yelm Area), shows estlmated hOUSIng demand for
Thurston County and for the Yelm area by year through the year 2013 BegInmng in 1994, when
the first lots would be scheduled to come on lme at the subject property, there wIll be estimated
demand for some 247 dwelling umts ill the Yelm area. Demand wIll Increase to 268 In 1995,277
In 1996,287 In 1997, and then decrease to 181 In 1998 when the demand generated by new
personnel at Ft. Lewis has been absorbed Demand will then Increase each year through the
forecast period to 375 umts m 2013 Dunng the 20-year period 1993 through 2013, an estimated
5,314 housing umts could be absorbed In the Yelm area. These projectIons are based on the
assumptIon that a broad range of housmg WIll be offered in the Yelm area dunng the forecast
peflod m terms of pnce, housing type and SIze, lot SIze, and amemtIes.
Yelm Area Population Projections
Table 13 (PopulatIon Projectlons, Yelm Area, Thurston County) shows populatlon Increases by
year in the Yelm Area through the year 2013 The Ye1m area mcludes Census Tract 124 (see
Figure 4, Thurston County Census Tract Map) County projectIOns are for the Yelm area to
account for approxImately 10% of the county populatIOn growth through 2010 Our prOjectIOns
are for the area to capture 10 4% of the county populanon growth, from 1993 through 2013, based
on several major factors.
.
The provisIon of expanded sewer facilIties In the Yelm area WIll allow the area to
accommodate higher denSIty development.
Expansion of personnel at Fort LeWIS and McChord AIr Force Base Will add to Yelm's
share of county populatIon growth.
.
.
Yelm WIll be the first town in the south county area to have a 20-year comprehensive
transportation plan for local traffic improvements.
The growth management act WIll restnct growth In areas outside deSIgnated urban areas
thereby mcreasmg the share of population growth that IS captured by urban areas.
The development of a Wider varIety of housmg by qualIty, pnce range and style, wIll attract
a greater share of the population to the Yelm Area.
.
.
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAmE PORTLAND' ANCHORAGE
92.30411
Table 11
Housing Demand Summary
Yelm Area, Thurston County, Washington
1993-2013
Total % Yelm Yclm Area Military Yc1m Area Retirement % Yelm Yelm Area Total Yelm Cumulative
Year County Area Demand Increasc'" Demand Households Arca Demand Arca Dcmand Dcmand
1993 2,024 2.0% 40 8,400 0 773 0.0% 0 40 40
1994 2,062 5.0% 103 1,200 120 773 3.1% 24 247 288
1995 2,100 5.3% 112 120 797 4.5% 36 268 556
1996 2,138 5.7% 121 120 797 4.5% 36 277 833
1997 2,175 6.0% 131 120 797 4.5% 36 287 1,120
1998 2,211 6.4% 141 797 5.0% 40 181 1,301
1999 2,248 6.7% 151 797 5.0% 40 190 1,491
2000 2,283 7.0% 161 923 5.0% 46 207 1,698
tv
2001 1,924 74% 142 923 5.0% 46 188 1,886 VJ
2002 1,977 77% 153 923 5.0% 46 199 2,085
2003 2,032 8.1% 164 923 5.0% 46 210 2,295
2004 2,088 8.4% 175 923 5.0% 46 222 2,516
2005 2,147 8.7% 188 1,252 5.0% 63 250 2,767
2006 2,207 91% 200 1,252 5.0% 63 263 3,030
2007 2,269 94% 214 1,252 50% 63 276 3,306
2008 2,334 9.8% 228 1,252 5.0% 63 290 3,596
2009 2,400 101% 242 1,252 50% 63 305 3,901
2010 2,576 10.4% 269 1,252 5.0% 63 332 4,233
2011 2,625 10.8% 283 1,252 5.0% 63 346 4,579
2012 2,676 111% 298 1,252 5.0% 63 360 4,939
2013 2,726 11.5% 312 1,252 50% 63 375 5,314
Totals 47,220 8.1% 3,828 9,600 480 21,418 47% 1,006 5,314
'" Includes FL Lewis and McChord.
Source: Mundy & Associates Forecasts.
Table 12
Age Distribution
Thurston County
1980-2010
Age ]980 ]985 ]990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Changc % of Total Ann.%
4 and undcr 9,680 10,471 11,582 12,556 13,418 14,655 16,860 5,278 51% 1.9%
5 to 9 9,628 10 ,511 11,532 12,730 13,848 15,400 17,208 5,676 54% 2.0%
10 lo 14 10,460 10,382 11 ,468 12,569 13,895 15,618 17,672 6,204 5.9% 2.2%
15 lo 19 11,109 11 ,310 11,462 12,638 13,883 15,885 18,170 6,708 6.4% 2.3%
20 lo 24 10,759 12,605 13 ,215 13,531 14,963 17,415 20,417 7,202 6.9% 2.2%
25 lo 29 11 ,4 73 12,253 14,499 15,271 15,850 18,502 21,958 7,459 71% 2.1% tv
.p..
30 lo 34 11,028 12,577 13,663 16,016 16,981 18,480 21,881 8,218 7.9% 2.4%
35 to 39 8,734 11 ,678 13,408 14,563 17,021 18,548 20,510 7,102 6.8% 2.1%
40 lo 44 6,582 9,085 12,115 13,875 15,090 17,865 19,663 7,548 7.2% 2.5%
45 to 49 5,853 6,787 9,332 12,348 14,133 ]5,569 18,499 9,167 8.8% 3.5%
50 lo 54 5,860 5,975 6,956 9,464 12,450 14,402 15,976 9,020 8.6% 4.2%
55 to 59 5,762 5,882 6,057 7,025 9,477 12,544 14,585 8,528 8.2% 4.5%
60 to 64 5,106 5,630 5,796 5,981 6,924 9,391 12,415 6,619 6.3% 3.9%
65 to 69 4,197 4,827 5,354 5,522 5,716 6,705 9,067 3,713 3.6% 2.7%
70 to 74 3,209 3,754 4,327 4,803 4,966 5,218 6,145 1,818 17% 1.8%
75 and over 4,824 5,773 6,853 8,007 9,147 10,120 11,036 4,183 40% 2.4%
Total 124,264 139,500 157,619 176,899 197,762 226,317 262,062 104,443 100.0% 2.6%
Source: Tl:urslon Counly Population ProJcctions and Mundy & Associates.
Table 13
Population Projections
Yelm Area, Thurston County
1993-2013
Yelm Area
County County Capture Rate Yelm Area** Yelm Area*'" Yelm Area**
Year Population* Increase of County Pop. Increase Population Housing Units
1990 161,238 44% 7,174 2,938
1992 173,143 11,905
1993 179,349 6,206 1.5% 93 9,504 3,895
1994 188,091 8,742 6.5% 568 10,072 3,935
1995 196,897 8,807 7.0% 616 10,689 4,183
1996 205,401 8,504 7.5% 638 11,326 4,451
1997 213,647 8,246 8.0% 660 11,986 4,728
1998 218,531 4,885 8.5% 415 12,401 5,015
1999 223,399 4,867 90% 438 12,839 5,195
2000 228,408 5,009 9.5% 476 13,315 5,386
2001 232,735 4,328 10.0% 433 13,748 5,593
2002 237,089 4,354 10.5% 457 14,205 5,781
2003 241,479 4,389 11.0% 483 14,688 5,979
2004 245,910 4,431 11.5% 510 15,198 6,189
2005 250,706 4,796 12.0% 576 15,773 6,411
2006 255,545 4,839 12.5% 605 16,378 6,661
2007 260,435 4,890 13.0% 636 17,014 6.924
2008 265,382 4,947 13.5% 668 17,682 7,201
2009 270,394 5,012 140% 702 18,383 7,491
2010 275,653 5,259 14.5% 763 19,146 7,796
2011 280,952 5,299 15.0% 795 19,941 8,128
2012 286,296 5,344 15.5% 828 20,769 8,473
2013 291,686 5,390 16.0% 862 21,631 8,833
Annual Average Increase:
2.5% 5,645 10.3% 582 4.2% 4.2%
*Note: The figures in this column reflect population increases from outside the county as well as the
employment generated increases in Tables 9a and 9b.
** The Yelm Area includes Census Tract 124
Source: Mundy & Associates Projections.
{'C!C?' 1-
~:-&. /- -- --'It-
._____. --'.- -----T
_ ::=-;;:-- ---y,-----F:::::;:;.,,;-:- -- -
-----)' -~:
L
26
>-
if) ~
-<I:
r ~ Q
Z
E-< U :::>
Z <r. 0
~ ~
OZ o~ ~
u~ Cl
Cl ().lb :::>
ZZ
~ - ().lif) :::;:
o::c ~
E-<Ul .-I~ t.J
~ E-
(f)~
~ if) Cl
~ Z
~ Z 0
...J
E-< W
U []
Figure 4
Thurston County Census Tract l\1ap
;,0-
r
.,.
"
... ::
u
~
;;::
~~ l
\
\
:::
....
~
.,
~
~
..:
I
);
I Ii \ 1.',
, I " .
I
..... If /'
-" \.
, " JI
, I:
~
- ,..\
'1,\1
~
.-'
,,'
j
, \
.' \
I
i:
...
o
/. U
C
;.
Ii
.,.
'-
\
-j
(. S
CERTIFICA TION
I certIfy that, to the best of my knowledge and belIef,
the facts and data reported by the appraIser and used in the appraisal process are true and
correct.
the reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptIons
and limiting conditions, and are my personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and
conclusions.
I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and I
have no personal mterest or bias WIth respect to the parties mvolved.
my compensatIon is not contingent on an action or event resulting from the analyses, opinions,
or conclusions in, or the use of, this appraisal report nor was this assIgnment based on a
requested rmmmum valuatIon, a specific valuatIon or approval of a loan.
my analyses, opinions, and conclUSIons were developed and this appraisal report was prepared
in conformity with Uniform Standards of the Professional Appraisal PractIce, and the
requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Practice of
the AppraIsal Instltute.
the use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appralsal Institute relatmg to review
by its duly authorized representatlves.
as of the date of thIS report, I have completed the requirements under the continumg educatIon
program of the Appraisal InstItUte.
Rhoda Bliss has made a personal inspectlon of the property that is the subject of this report.
no one proVIded significant profeSSIOnal assIstance to the person(s) signing thIS report.
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
BIll Mundy, Ph.D, MAl
State of Washmgton CertIfied Real Estate AppraIser
#MU-ND-YW-H603D2
Rhoda C. BlIss, MA
Senior Analyst
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAffiE . PORTIAND . ANCHORAGE
n- 304 WcJcano/Ibape
27
CERTIFICA TION
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
the facts and data reported by the appraIser and used in the appraIsal process are tme and
correct.
the reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are lnruted only by the reported assumptlons
and hnuting condltlons, and are my personal, unbIased professIOnal analyses, opmions, and
conclusIons.
I have no present or prospective interest In the property that IS the subject of thIS report and I
have no personal Interest or bIas WIth respect to the parties Involved.
my compensation IS not contingent on an action or event resultIng from the analyses, opinions,
or concluslOns In, or the use of, this appraIsal report nor was thIS aSSIgnment based on a
requested nunimum valuatlon, a speCIfic valuation or approval of a loan.
my analyses, opmions, and conclusIOns were developed and thIS appraIsal report was prepared
In conformity WIth Uniform Standards of the Professional AppraIsal Practlce, and the
requirements of the Code of ProfesslOnal Ethics and the Standards of ProfessIOnal Practlce of
the Appraisal Instltute.
the use of this report IS subject to the reqUIrements of the Appraisal InstItute relating to reVIew
by its duly authonzed representanves
as of the date of this report, I have completed the requirements under the continuing educatIOn
program of the Appraisal InstItute.
Rhoda Bliss has made a personal inspectIOn of the property that is the subject of thIS report.
no one provided sigmficant professional assistance to the person(s) sIgmng this report.
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
BIll Mundy, Ph.D, MAl
State of Washington Cernfied Real Estate AppraIser
#MU-ND-YW-H603D2
Rhoda C. BlIss, MA
Semor Analyst
1\1UNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAffiE PORTlAND. ANCHORAGE
92.3048
BILL MUNDY
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICA nONS
EXPERIENCE
Bill Mundy has over twenty years of experience in real estate market. economic and valuation
research. Over this time span he has held the following positions
. Doane Agricultural SeIVice (1965-67) Fann Manager and rural appraiser
. Fenton. Conger & Ballaine (1967-68) Real estate appraiser and market analyst.
. Weyerhaeuser Real Estate Company (1971-73) Land economist and housing market
analyst
. Bill Mundy & Associates (1976-present) Owner Real estate development.
. Mundy. Jarvis & Associates. Inc dba Mundy & Associates (1976-present) President.
Real estate market. econOrrllC and valuation (appraisal) analysts and consultants.
· Real Estate Counseling Group of America, Inc. President Professional educational
organization of leading real estate experts from throughout the U S
Dr Mundy has been and continues to be heavily involved in the educational community He
has taught at the University of Washington and for the American Institute of Real Estate
Appraisers (AlREAl He developed a real estate and urban economics curriculum for Seattle
University Professional education development activities for AlREA include membership on
the continuing education committee. instructor of the Market Analysis course and developer of
the Market Analysis seminar
Bill has a broad range of analytical experience. including benefit-cost. economic base. market
and survey research, and real estate appraisal throughout a significant part of the United
States. the Midwest, South. Southwest, Pacific Northwest. Alaska and Hawaii. Several
important areas of concentration include market research involving litigation matters and
radioactive. hazardous and toxic waste He has also developed, for his own account.
agricultural. residential, office. retail and rehabilitation properties in Washington and
Alaska
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Science. Agriculture (Business Option), 1965
Washington State University. Pullman. Washington
Master of Arts. Urban Economics, 1971
University of Washington, Seattle. Washington
Doctor of Philosophy, Marketing, Urban Economics and Survey Research, 1977
University of Washington, Seattle. Washington
Fellow, Weimer School of Advanced Studies in Real Estate and Land Econorrllcs. 1992
SCHOLASTIC HONORS
Beta Gamma Sigma
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers Scholarship Recipient. 1970-71. 1975-76
University of Washington representative to doctoral consortium and American Marketing
Association Meetings. 1976
Arthur A. May Memorial Award. 1988, American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, for
developing the seminar "Market Analysis."
PUBLICATIONS
Urban Obsolescence -A Case History of Obsolescence-Renewal., Masters Thesis, University of
Washington, 1970
~Natural Resource Scarcities and the Cost of Housing~, monograph, University of Washington,
1976, Seattle, Washington.
~A Methodology to Optimize Building Rent~, Bm Mundy & Associates, Inc, 1977, Seattle,
Washington.
A Partial Test of a Multi-Stage Theory of Homebuyer Behavior: A Methodological and
Substantive Approach Using Judgmental and Behavioral Data, Ph D Dissertation, University
of Washington, 1977
The Seattle Metropolitan Area Economic Base with PopulatiDn and Housing Projections, 1984,
Bm Mundy & Associates, Inc.. Seattle, Washington.
lhe Valuation of High-Amenity Natural Land~, Bm Mundy, MAl and Victoria Adams, The
AppraisalJoum.al. January 1991, pp 48 - 53
~St1gma and Value~, Bill Mundy, MAl, The Appraisal Journal., January 1992, pp 7-13
lhe Impact of Hazardous and Toxic Materials on Property Values~, Bill Mundy, forthcoming
in The Appraisal Journal, Apr1l 1992
lhe Scientific Method and the Appraisal Process., Bill Mundy, forthcoming in The Appraisal
Journal., October 1992
Contributor' The Mwuly Insider
ARTICLES SUBMITTED FOR PUBUCATION
-rhe Impact of Hazardous and Toxic Materials on Property Values. Rev1sited~, Bm Mundy,
subrrutted to The Appraisal Journal.
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
American Arbitration Association.
Appraisal Institute (MAl #5439)
· Member, Textbook and Terminology Committee
· Course and seminar instructor
· Curriculum developer
ArneIican Society of Real Estate Counselors (CRE # 10 11)
· Currently developing market analysis seminar
National Association of Business Economistsm
Lambda Alpha (National Real Estate Honorary)
ACADEMlC AFFILIATION
Member, Real Estate Cuniculum Advisory Board, and Chainnan, Washington Center for Real
Estate Research Committee, Washington State University
APPRAISAL INSTITUTE EDUCATIONAL CERTIFICATION
The Appraisal Institute conducts a voluntary program of continuing education for its
designated members Dr Mundy is certified under this program through September 15, 1992
TEACHING EXPERIENCE
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers 5 day courses.
Memphis State University. Principles, Procedures
University of Houston. Principles, Procedures
University of Portland Market Analysis
University of San Diego Market Analysis
University of Colorado Market Analysis
Arizona State University. Market Analysis
University of OkJahoma !\1arket Analysis
University of North Carolina Market Analysis
AIREA- seminars (Market Analysis)
Chicago, IL
Omaha, NB
Anchorage, AK
Knoxville, TN
Houston, TX
Albuquerque, NM
San Diego, CA
WRITING/CURRlCULUM DEVELOPMENT
AIREA Terminology Handbook, Reviewer
The Appraisal of Real Estate, 8th Edition, Reviewer
The Appraisal of Real Estate, 10th Edition, Reviewer
Real Estate Market Analysis, forthcoming, Reviewer
The Appraisal Institute's Advanced Curriculum Course
Market & Highest & Best Use, Developer
AIREA Market Analysis Seminar, Developer
AIREA Survey Research Seminar, Developer
The Mundy Insider, frequent contributor
LICENSES
State of Oregon- Broker, Appraiser
State of Washington- Broker
State of AIaska- Broker
Licensed, Certifjed General Appraiser. Washington #270-11, MU-!\TD-YW-H603D2
Oregon #000234
EXPERT WITNESS
Various courts in.
Alaska
Oregon
Washington
RHODA CORBETT BLISS
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
Rhoda Bliss has accumulated over twelve years of real estate economics experience. Prior to
Joimng Mundy & AssocIates, she was WIth BetaWest Propenies, Inc (U S West) where she
conducted real estate market analyses natIOnwide for the Ponfolio Development DIvIsIon.
Previous expenence mcludes being responsIble for market analysis and research with several
plannmg, consultmg, and appraisal fIrms.
MARKET RESEARCH
Ms. Bhss has extensive experience m all aspects of real estate development includIng:
· residennal · office
· condommi urn · industnal
.
new commumty
retail
SpecIalty uses
.
congregate care
resort
golf course commumty
.
.
.
.
FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
Ms. Bliss has been responsible for conductIng the fIscal impact analyses for several major large
scale, mixed-use developments m urban areas, small towns and mountam communInes.
SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDIES
Many of the studies conducted by Ms. BlIss have mcluded SOCIo-econormc components. In
addition, she has conducted socio-econormc impact studles for new commumtles and for
proposed development that has a major lll1pact on eXIstmg fac1l1nes.
RECENT RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Smce Joinmg Mundy & ASSOCIates, Ms. Bliss has been involved m numerous studIes, some of
WhICh mclude:
· Rivershore enhancement study, Benton/Franklin CountIes, Washmgton
· Residential market analysis', PIerce County, Washmgton
· ResIdennal and golf course commumty market analYSIS, PIerce County, Colorado
· ReSIdentIal market analYSIS, Snohoffilsh County, Washmgton
· Appraisal and market analYSIS for apartment project and commerCIal center, Tacoma,
Washmgton
· AppraIsal and market analYSIS for shoppmg center, Lacey, Washmgton
. High-rise apartment/office/retall bUIlding appraisal, Seattle, Washrngton
· Townhome market analysis, Lacey, Washmgton
. Demographic and housmg unit demand analysis, golf course commumty, Yelm,
Washington
. Several appr3.lsals for portIons of trail acquisition, Snohomish County, Washington
· Industrial building appraisals, Seattle, Washington
· AppraIsal and market analysis for mobile home park, Farrbanks, Alaska
· Fiscal impact analysIs for retail shopping center, Issaquah, Washington
. ResIdential and golf course commumty market analysis, east King County, Washington
. Office, industrial and retail market analysis for Port of Seattle in Sea- Tac, Washington
EDUCA TION
M.A. Geography/Urban Economics, 1985
University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado
B.A. GeographylLocanon AnalysIs, 1977
University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado
Appraisal Institute courses completed:
· Course lAl Real Estate Appraisal PrinCIpleS
· Course lA2 BaSIC Valuauon Procedures
· Course SPP. Standards of Professional Pracuce
· Course IBA. CapItalization Theory and Techniques, Part A
· Course IBB CapItalizauon Theory and Techniques, Part B
· Course 2-1: Case StudIes in Real Estate Valuation
· Course 2-2. Report Wnung and Valuauon AnalYSIS
· Office Building Leasrng and Management Sermnar, Bellevue, Waslungton
· Appr3.lsal Theory and Pracuce Overview Seminar, Clucago, llirnOls
AFFILIA TIONS
CommercIal Real Estate Women Northwest, 1990 - present; Membership Chamnan, 1992
Amencan Plannrng AssocIation, 1983 - present
Adjunct ASSIstant Professor, Urban and RegIonal Planmng Program, Umversity of Colorado
at Denver, 1988-1990
Seattle Econonusts Club, 1990 - present
ProfeSSIOnal Geographers of Puget Sound, 1990 - present
Lambda Alpha Internauonal, an honorary land econOlTIlCS society, 1991
Women In CommerCIal Real Estate, Denver, Colorado, 1984-1990; Board Member, 1986-
1989
Appendix D
Traffic Study
Prepared by
S. Chamberlain, And Associates, Inc.
Lacey, Washington
Planning Context
Transportation planning for the Southwest Yelm Annexation was completed concurrently
wIth development of the CIty of Yelm ComprehensIve TransportatIOn Plan EnVIronmental
Impact Study (EIS) ConclUSIOns drawn by this study are drrectly related to and support
the comprehensIve transportation plan and its plannmg pohcles, recommended
transportation program and funding strategy
The summary of the transportation planning process for the Southwest Yelm Annexation
EIS mclude the followmg:
~ ReView of existing travel conditIOns in the study area,
mcludmg capacIty and aCCIdent analyses of major
intersectIOns;
~ An assessment of enVIronmental impacts created by the
proposal includmg no-action, preferred and alternate land use
alternatives;
~ Determination of SIgnificant rmpacts and appropriate
mItigatIOn created by the proposal on the eXlsting and future
transportatIOn system, and
~ Assessment of unavOldable adverse Impacts by the proposal.
Planning Assumptwns
For plannmg purposes, It was assumed the recommended transportatIOn program
mfrastructure to the comprehensIve plan are in-place as the Southwest Yelm Annexation
parcels are developed. Durmg the comprehensIve transportation planrung process,
development assumptions were made for the annexation parcels, and other growth
throughout the Yelm Urban Growth Area (UGA) A transportatIOn program was
developed to support thIS growth WIth a roadway network meetmg CIty'S Level-of-ServIce
(LOS) standard and fundmg abIhtIes (as mandated by the Growth Management Act)
Therefore, the study's focus is to determme the Impact the proposed actIOn has on the
transportation plan. A No-Action alternative was included m the analYSIS to determme
how sIgmficant an Impact the Southwest Yelm AnnexatIOn parcels has on the CIty'S plan.
ComparIsons were made WIth thIs alternative agamst the Preferred and Village
Alternatives proposed for the annexatIOn parcels.
A fourth alternatIve, entitled the Compact Alternative, was also developed for this EIS
The land use denSIties proposed for thIS alternative do not dIffer from the Preferred
Alternative for the proJect. From a transportation plannmg perspective, the Impacts
created by the Compact Alternative are Identical to those generated by the Preferred
Alternative. Therefore, the transportation planning analysIs effort for thIS EIS lid not
make any dIstmctIon between these two alternatives.
Fmally, the assumptIOn to mclude the Improvements proposed m the ComprehensIve
TransportatIOn Plan as a given mfrastructure m the future year analysIs IS conSIstent
with the Growth Management Act (GMA)'s concurrency prOVISIon. ThIs prOVISIon states
as development comes on-hne, then the necessary facIhbes to accommodate the growth
must be constructed. The Yelm Comprehensive TransportatIOn Plan mcluded
assumptions for future development (includmg the Southwest AnnexatIOn parcels) and
based a transportation program on thIs assumptIOn. ThIS plan represents the VGA's
future transportation system and it is appropnate to mclude the Infrastructure ill the
Southwest Yelm Annexation EIS
Existing Conditions
The transportation network m the rmmemate Vlcnnty of the Southwest Annexation
parcels includes the following maJor roadways:
Yelm Avenue (SR-510 and SR-507) is the primary prinCIpal arterial in the Yelm UGA. To
the west of the CIty, the SR-510 portIon ofYelm Avenue becomes Yelm Highway and
connects Yelm through Fort Lewis and the Nisqually Indian Nation Lands to the maJor
Thurston County CIties of Olympia, Tumwater and Lacey East of the CIty, Yelm Avenue
IS known as SR-507 and connects Yelm WIth Pierce County and the major urban areas of
Tacoma, Spanaway and Puyallup In the immedIate SIte VIcnnty, Yelm Avenue is a two-
lane roadway WIth a posted speed mmt between 35- and 25-mph. All mmor roadways
intersecting Yelm Avenue are under STOP control. The only signalized intersection along
Yelm Avenue is at SR-507/First Street, where separate left-turn lanes are provided. The
roadway is under the maintenance Jurisdiction of the Washmgton State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT)
SR-507 is another prinCIpal arterIal ill the Yelm UGA. ThIS two-lane roadway IS under
WSDOT mamtenance JurIsmctIon and connects Yelm WIth the South Thurston County
commurnties of Rainier, Tenmo, and the unincorporated Grand Mound area near
Interstate 5 All minor roadways intersecting with SR-507 are under STOP control. The
only signalized intersectIOn along SR-507 is at Yelm AvenuelFrrst Street, where separate
left- turn lanes are provided.
93rd Avenue SE is a two-lane roadway WIth a posted 35-mph speed hnnt providing access
for residences along the Fort LeWIS boundary to Yelm Avenue. A Thurston County
roadway, Its approach to Yelm Avenue is under STOP control.
Longmire Street is a local two-lane roadway WIth a posted 25-mph speed IrmIt prOVIding
access for reSIdences north and south ofYelm Avenue At its mtersection with Yelm
Avenue, both north and south approaches are under STOP control. To the south,
Longmrre Street extends apprmamately 1 and 1/2 mIles to a dead-end. North of Yelm
Avenue, the roadway extends four blocks (112 mIle) to Its termmus WIth Coates Street.
Berry Valley Road is a local two-lane roadway WIth a posted 25-mph speed hmIt proVldmg
access to Yelm Avenue for reSIdences south of the Yelm HIgh School campus. The
roadway has several curves throughout Its 3/4 mIle length before Its terminus at
Thompson Creek.
McKenzie Street is a local two-lane roadway servmg southwest residences wIthm the
Yelm CIty Lrmits. It currently extends from LongmIre Street to R31lroad Avenue and has
a posted 25-mph speed mmt.
George Road is a local narrow gravel roadway servmg reSIdential umts. It extends from
SR-507 to the west for apprmamately 1,300 feet.
121st Avenue SElManke Road SE/118th Avenue SE/Filman Road SEIl23rd Avenue
SElMihtarv Road SE IS a two lane route extendmg from SR-507 to R31mer Road m
Thurston County The roadway serves resIdentIal and agrIcultural uses along the
southeastern boundary of Fort Lewis.
Exzsting Traffic Volumes and Capac~ty Analyses
Figure 1 illustrates existmg peak hour travel volumes on the major roadways throughout
the Yelm UGA All traffic counts were collected from WSDOT data sources and surveys
by Skillings & Chamberlam, Inc. m preparation of the comprehensive transportatIon plan.
Major intersections were analyzed to assess eXlstmg capacIty deficiencIes. The analyses
were completed using procedures outlined by the current edItIon of the Highway Capac~ty
Manual for unsignalized mtersections, and the planning analyses of Transportation
Research Crrcular 212, entitled Intenm Matenals on Highway Capac~ty Results from the
analyses are recorded m a Level of Servlce (LOS) SIX-letter scale rangmg from A to F
(similar to standard high-school grachng) LOS A represents free-flowmg travel
condItions, and LOS F represents congested travel.
Analyses were also completed using the gmdelmes of the penchng Yelm Concurrency
Management System (CMS) program. The CMS IdentIfies fifteen major mtersectIons for
momtormg traffic rmpacts. These mtersectIOns are IdentIfied m the followmg figure. LOS
results compared to the CIty'S LOS standards to determine defiCIency or concurrency The
CIty has adopted two LOS for the UGA
-<;{ LOS D for all mtersections along Yelm Avenue between 93rd
Avenue SE and the FIve-Corners JunctIon, and
-<;{ LOS C for all remainmg roadways m the UGA
In future year analyses, a SIXteenth mtersection was IdentIfied for analYSIS. the South
SIte DrIve to the Southwest AnnexatIon parcels mtersectIOn WIth SR-507 The eXIstmg
LOS results are summarIZed ill Table 1
Table 1
Base Year CapaCIty AnalYSIS Results
System Peak Hour Volumes
LOS Concurrency
IntersectIOn Standard LOS Result
2 93rd Ave, and SR-510 D B
4 Yelm Ave and Edwards Street D D
5 Mosman Ave. and SR-507 C B - north mtersec.,
B - south mtersec.
7 Yelm Avenue and 103rd Avenue D D
8 FIve-Corners D E
9 Grove and SR-507 C D
10. 3rd Street and Yelm Avenue D D
12 Yelm Avenue and FIrst Street D C
13 First St. and Canal Rd-Wilkensen Rd. C A
EXIstmg travel conmtIOns throughout the Yelm UCA are consIstent WIth the expectatIOns
of rural LOS wIthm the A-C range However, segments of Yelm Avenue are at or exceed
the LOS standard establIshed by the CIty In admtIOn, field observatIons found severe
congestIOn eXIsts durmg other times of the day and are assocIated WIth brief traffic bursts
related to school msmlssals (near Edwards Street and the HIgh School Campus area) and
post office operatIOns (near 3rd Street)
Traffic ACCLdents
A comprehensIve aCCIdent analYSIS was conducted for the UCA as part of the
comprhenslve transoprtatlOn plan proJect. The four mtersectIOns havmg the hIghest
aCCIdent rates mclude
-<. Five-Corners (jct. of SR-507/Morns Road/Creek Street/Bald
HIlls Road)
-<. 93rd Avenue SENelm Avenue
'" 3rd StreetNelm Avenue
-<. First StreetNelm Avenue
The transportatIOn plan Improvements mclude mltIgatmg safety defiCIenCies of these
m tersectlOns
Public TransportatIOn
Presently, the Yelm UCA IS not served by public transportation In May 1992, InterCity
TranSIt sought and won voter approval to extend ItS benefit area to the southern
Thurston County commumtIes (mcludmg the Yelm DCA) ImtIal service IS expected to
pnmanly benefit peak penod commuters along SR-510 between Yelm and urban areas to
the north, as well as rual-a-nde customers on an as-needed baSIS
Pedestnan and Ble;) des
The City ofYelm or Thurston County do not mamtaIn separate trall facIlities for
pedestnans or bicyclists wlthm the Yelm DCA. The CIty has developed a piece-meal
Sidewalk system along major roadways In the area mcludmg segments of Yelm Avenue
(between the High School Campus and the City Center) and SR-507 (between the City
Park and the City Center)
Planned and Programmed Improvements
A summary of the CIty'S Comprehensive TransportatIOn Plan IS prOVided In the followmg
figure Slgmficant Improvements effectmg the Southwest AnnexatIOn parcels melude
"" Y-l, SR-51O/SR.507 Connector, relocatmg SR-51 0 as an
alternate route around the City Center through the Southwest
Annexation parcels I mtwl constructIOn IS for three-lanes
With major IntersectIOns at 88th Avenue SE (the Y-3
proposal), 93rd Avenue SE-Yelm Avenue, the Southwest
Access roadway, and existmg SR-507 Twenty-year forecast
volumes indicate the need for a five-lane facility (included in
the comprehensive transportation plan)
<. Y-2. SR-507/Five-Corners Connector. relocatmg SR-507 as an
alternate route around the City Center to the south. Y-2
begms at the Y-I intersection WIth existing SR-507 and locate
along a due-east alignment to the present Five-Corners
mtersectIon. Improvements are planned at tlus intersections
to ehmmate fifth- and SIXth-legs mcludmg sIgnahzation.
Initial construction IS for three- lanes; ultrmate construction IS
for five-lanes.
<. Y-5. Yelm Avenue Imnrovements mclude wldenmg the
roadway to allow for a bi-directIonal center left turn lane
between 93rd Avenue SE and FIve Corners. Edwards Street,
3rd Street, and Jayhawks Shopping Center access
mtersectIons are recommended for SIgnalS.
<. Y-7. Southwest Access IS a collector roadway to hnk the
southwest annexation parcels to the CIty Center and enVIrons.
The new roadway could use eXlstmg LongmIre Street or Berry
Valley Road, or have dIrect access to 93rd Avenue SE The
comprehensive transportation plan recommends conducting a
deSIgn study to determme the route of tlus faCIlIty (For
plannmg purposes, It was assumed the facilIty is south of
93rd Avenue It would intersect Yelm Avenue near the
intersections of Longmire Street or Berry Valley Road.)
<. V-B. CIty Center ConnectIOns are linkmg two dIscontinuous
roadways. Washmgton Street and Mosman Road. These
connectIOns are mtended to "fill-m" the grid system south of
the CIty Center and prOVIde better cIrCUlatIOn m these
reSIdential areas.
The CIty'S SIX-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), mclude Y-5 and Y-B
constructIOn and deSIgn studIes for Y-I, Y-2, and Y-7 as immedIate prIOrities. Fundmg for
these rmprovements are expected from DOT mItigation to eXlstmg defiCIenCIes for Y-5, a
combmatIon of CIty/state Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) fundIng for Y-B, and
developer mItigatIOn for the Y-I, Y-2 and Y.7 deSIgn studIes.
PublIc transportation m Yelm from InterCIty TranSIt IS expected by 1993 The actual
semces plans, other than prelImmary estimates preVIously mentIOned, are not aVaIlable
at the wntmg of thIS EIS The CIty'S ComprehenSIve TransportatIOn Plan supports
tranSIt expanSIOn mot the UGA and mcludes a TranSIt Center (near the CIty Center) and
polICIes on constructIOn of transit frIendly facilities (i.e., bus pullouts, etc.) along new
roadways and facilIty upgrades.
Environmental Impacts
Alternative No. 1 No Action
No annexation would occur and traffic levels would contmue to grow at or near theIr
present rates.
Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 Annexation Proposals
Assumptwns
Two alternatives and a no-action alternative were studIed. As indIcated m a previous
section, three alternatives are proposed, however, the preferred and compact densIttIes do
not drlIer and have identical traffic impacts. The alternatives mclude varymg reSIdential
and commerCIal development densities over a twenty-year (2012) build out. Two mterIm
phase years are included in tms EIS analYSIS. five- and ten-year horizons (1997 and
2002) The following table summarIZes the planned denSIties for the parcels over the
three horIZon years and alternatives.
Table 2
Assumed Development DenSIties
Southwest Annexation EIS
Preferred and Compact
Alternatives Village Alternative
Land Use 1997 2002 2012 1997 2002 2012
Smgle Family 360 1420 1780 320 1270 1590
Dwellmgs
Multi-Family 260 1000 1260 220 910 1310
Dwellings
Retail Employment 100 400 500 100 400 500
Non-retail
Employment 190 790 980
(Office)
Tnp Generation, DLStnbutwn, and Assignment
Forecastmg travel growth consists of three components. Tnp Generatwn IS applymg trIp
rates, developed from preVIOUS local studIes or natIonal surveys by the Institute of
TransportatIon Engineers (ITE), to the forecasted land use to determme the traffic volume
associated with the development. In Tnp DLStnbution, a study IS conducted to determme
where the development traffic IS eIther destmed or orIgmated. The final component, Tnp
Ass~gnment, applys the results from the trIp dIstribution study to the trIp generatIon
values to develop a SIte travel forecast. SIte traffic IS then combmed WIth eXIstmg
volumes and traffic generated by other planned developments to produce a total SIte
travel forecast for the study area.
All travel forecastmg was completed WIth the aSSIstance of the Yelm TransportatIon
Planmng Model. ThIS model, based on the software package TMODEL2, was developed
for the Yelm Comprehensive Transportation Plan project and for the City to use ill
assessing impacts created by future development. The process used to developed this
model mcluded.
<{ IdentifyIng the model area (wlnch was the Yelm UGA),
<{ Collectmg base year roadway and travel characterIstics data
including land use data for a Traffic AnalYSIS Zone (I' AZ)
system (Figure 23a presents the T AZ system for the Yelm
model),
<{ Converting the land use data into traffic volumes and
calibratmg a gravity model for trIp dIstribution and capacIty-
restramt auto assIgnment; and
<{ Developmg forecast volumes from future land use forecasts for
bmldout of the Yelm UGA.
Traffic generated by the parcel alternatives was developed through trIp generatIOn rates
by ITE. Table 3 on the following page summarIZes the horIZon year estimated traffic
generated by the alternatives for each T AZ comprIsmg the annexation parcels.
Table 3
Estimated Traffic Generation
Southwest Annexation EIS
HOrIZon Year
1997 2002 2012
Alternative TAZ In Out Tot. In Out Tot. In Out Tot.
32 90 140 230 180 280 460 355 555 910
33 20 40 60 40 75 115 85 160 240
Preferred 34 110 100 210 220 205 425 440 405 845
/Compact
35 15 25 40 25 50 75 55 100 155
36 25 45 70 50 90 140 95 180 275
Total 260 350 610 515 700 1215 1030 1400 2430
32 65 100 165 265 405 670 330 510 840
33 20 35 55 95 140 235 120 170 290
Village 34 85 80 165 350 320 570 435 400 835
35 20 25 45 70 95 165 85 120 205
36 40 45 85 135 180 315 170 220 390
Total 230 285 515 915 1140 2055 1140 1420 2560
Trip distribution and assIgnment for the parcel alternatives was generated by the
transportation plannmg model. Included in the model are calibrated IDstributIOn and
assIgnment algorIthms that are representative of Yelm traffic patterns. Figures 4 and 5
illustrates the parcel traffic aSSIgned to the roadway network as generated by the
transportation plannmg model for the preferred/compact and village alternatives,
respectively Figures 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 summanze the forecastmg traffic volumes,
including parcel and other future land use traffic, by 1997, 2002, and 2012 horizon years;
and preferred/compact and village alternatives respectively
Traffic Impaets
Table 4 summanzes the LOS-capaCIty analyses completed on the fifteen recordmg
mtersectIons of the pendmg eMS A SIXteenth mtersection, the south SIte drIve and SR-
507, was added because of a dJrect relation to parcel-generated traffic volumes.
In summary, the capaCIty analYSIS results mdIcate traffic generated by the planned action
is accommodated at most locatIOns by the improvements of the comprehenSIve
transportation plan. However, there are some locations requrrmg mItigatIOn to bring the
LOS back to the CIty standards as a dJrect result of the proposed action. These locatIOns
need signalization and are identIfied in following section.
Acc~dents
Many improvements m the comprehenSIve transportation plan are meant to mItigate
safety defiCIenCIes over the next twenty-years. In addItIOn, CIty standards were upgraded
m the comprehenSIve plan process to Improve the system's safety and relIabihty
Therefore, It IS anticIpated aCCIdents will contmue in to the future, and may be the dJrect
result of traffic generated by the proposed actIOn. However, the transportation plan's
enhanced design and safety standards for the UGA should decrease, but not dnnmish,
the lIkelIhood of aCCIdent occurrences throughout the study area.
Pubhc Transportatwn
Presently the Yelm area does not have regularly-scheduled tranSIt servIce InterCIty
TranSIt, IS in the process of developmg semce to Yelm m 1993 The exact service
operatIOn IS undefmed at this tune At thIS time, the Yelm ComprehenSIve
Transportation Plan calls for peak perIod service to accommodate a 5% modal split along
the SR-510 corrIdor However, tills servIce level needs IDscussIOn WIth InterCIty TranSIt
before unplementatIon.
Demographics show many reSIdents commutmg to the OlympIa-Tumwater-Lacey area for
employment, shopping, and recreatIOnal opportumbes. It IS hkely reSIdents WIll use
tranSIt servIce for these actiVIties. However, the unpact IS not assessable until the service
level IS defined by InterCIty TranSIt and the CIty of Yelm. AB the planmng process
contmues for the Southwest Annexation parcels, addItIOnal proJect-specIfic studIes may be
reqUIred, at whIch time a true impact assessment to publIc transportation can be made
Fma1ly, reSIdents may also participate m vanpoolmg opportumtIes. The CIty IS also
workIng WIth InterCity Transit to establIsh frequent vanpool semce to help employers
meet the Commuter TrIp Reduction (CTR) legislation. The exact rmpact, however, IS not
measurable at tills tune
iab\e24
Level o( Service Analysis
50"""'-' y..", ,......".. En'"'''''''.'''''''''.''' swd,
Bori1,on I"'" HI!)7 2002 '20\'2
Prefcrred Preferred Preferred
COl\C\1trcl\l:Y AJ,torl\Gti"O AJ,l.CrnGu"e Alt.ernAu'Ie
1-o"cl of No_Action Gnd CompGct 'iiUGgo No_Action Gnd Compact. 'iUlage No-Action and ComPa~ Village
ll'ltcr!'-cction ~r.r"ice J\ltr.rnnli"ll J\'tllrnnti'lll J\lternnl.iVIl J\\tl'rnnti'lo J\ltllrnnti'lO J\\wrnlltive Alternat.ive Alternl\t.\ve Alternative
C NIJ\ D; A (silt.) 1\ (silt) 1\ (silt.) A A A
\ 58t.h A"c & 5\\-510
C C C D 'E. 1\ (silt) E. A (si\l.) A A A
2 93rd !\'1e & SR-510 D
NIJ\ NIA D' 1\ (si\:.) D: A (silt.) NtA A A
3 SW !\cccss &:. SR.510 C
D E. J\ (si\:.) E, !\ (silt.) A 1\ A A A A
4 '{elm Avo &. Edwards St. D
13 \3 A 1\ A B B B
5 Mosmnn &:. SIt-507 C A
NIJ\ !\ 13 B A C C
G 5\\-510 &:. SR-501 C
C D D ^ 1\ ^ B A ^
1 '{elm ^'10 &. 103rd !\VO D
SIt-501 &. Morris ^" '{elIn!\'1 C D D D f, ^ (sig.) f. ^ (sig~ ^ A A
B (Fi'lc Corners) D
9 Grovo Rd \3ald Hills Rd F. ^ (sig.) ^ (sig.) ^ (sig.) A 13 13 ^ A A
C
&. SIt.50' ^ ^
D D ^ A ^ A
10 '{elm Ave &. 3rd 51. D D
costes.Ste"ens &. 11 \3 ^ 1\ 1\ B B 13
11 First St. C 11
A ^ A
12 '{elm ^"e &. First. 5t. D A- n \3 1\ A 1\
A B ^ A
13 first 51. &. Cannl Rd C 1\ ^ 1\ A- A
E,11 (si\:.) E. 11 (si\:.) ^ ^ A A ^ A
14 '{elm A'Ie &. sW ^CCess D D
^ A 1\ D: A (sil') A A
15 Canal Rd &. Crystal Sp\:s C N1J\
NI^ f: ^ (silt.) F. 1\ (si\l) NtA C C
IG S Site Dr &:. SIt-501 C NI^
KEY N I A. Not applicable to thi3 altcTnotive.
X, X (,ig J' Pi'" X "p""'u LOS .,,,,,",,,,,5"". X "p'''''u LOS w.,. ,ig'""
6/23/92
Pedestrians and Bicycles
All improvements from the Yelm ComprehensIve TransportatIon plan include provisions
for sidewalks and bicycle lanes. It is anticIpated most travel by this mode related to the
Southwest Annexation parcels is recreational, or minimal number of shor commutes.
Further, since most reSIdents will work in the Olympia-Tumwater-Lacey area, it is very
unlikely many commute by either bicycle or walking due to the dIstance and lacking
separate trail facilities. Therefore, the impact to these facilities is minimal.
Mitigation
Options
The major comprehensive transportation plan Improvements are related to actiVitIes
proposed for the Southwest Annexation parcels. These improvements are identIfied as
SR-510 and SR-507 relocation (Y-1 and Y-2) and the Southwest Access roadway (Y-7) As
indicated in the capaCIty analYSIS results, most intersectIons remain within the City's
LOS standard. Therefore, the options for more mitigation related to the direct Impacts
are very mmted.
The prrmary optIOn, then, IS to determine responsibility for improvements. Traffic
generated by the Southwest AnnexatIon parcels account for 50% of traffic volumes on the
SR-510 relocation, 35% on the SR-507 relocation, and 100% on the Southwest Access
roadway In addItIOn, the capacity analysis results indIcate responsibility for traffic
SIgnalS and mtersectIOn rmprovements at the followmg locations by horIZon year.
1997 Horizon Year
Yelm Avenue and Southwest Access Roadway
2002 HorIZon Year
93rd Avenue SE-Yelm Avenue and SR-510
Southwest Access Roadway and SR-510
SR-507 and the South SIte DrIve
Effectweness of Optwns
AddItIOnal capaCIty analyses WIth signals and rmprovements show the above mtersectIons'
LOS r31se above C ThIs IS well WIthin the CIty'S LOS standard.
Other mItigatIOn optIOns mclude construction of bus pullouts and tranSIt shelters
throughout the annexation parcels to accommodate transit, and constructing bIke lanes
and separate tranSIt facilitIes to accommodate non-motorIZed modes. These measures will
provide means for residents of planned dvelopments to use other transportatIOn modes.
EnVIronmental benefits include reduced traffic on the regIOnal network, whIch results in
lesser traffic congestIon and velucle emissiions than those the potentIal trIp generation
based on present travel characterIstics and commutmg habIts.
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
The following unaVOIdable adverse Impacts on the transportatIOn system may be found.
~ Increase vehIcular actIVIty on the CIty'S transportation
network.
"" More vehicular accidents, despite the increased safety desIgn
standards.
"" More locations for vehicular-pedestrian and vehicular-bicycle
accidents, despite increased safety desIgn standards.
"" Construction of improvements, as direct result of tills action,
may delay travel in the Yelm UGA
'0
5
o
5
15
5
t~
00
",,,,
rt)~
0'"
~~
0'"
c..art)
93rd AVE 55
20
~
r .)>0-<1 ~
~.. ,c90 .
S/
OJ
I
q;~
5 . W. ACcr.SS
5 ~
.... ....
00
~lt)
,0
'0
~
ILT.r.
Southwest Yelm
Annexation El=
AGtI<E 2 I
I 9 9 2 PEAK I-/OUQ VOLUMES
5 . CHAMBeI2LAIf'
e ASSOCIA res II
.......dyr.. .......... MG ..... ~
~
J2ECUIVIIVILo-I ~-
TRANSPORTATION rrc.'-'-
~
89th. ~\le. S.t.
~
~
t
0;;
94th. ~"e. S.t.
~
~
6
,\\ '09t.\'\ Ave. S.t.
RE.COMME.NO'" 1I0NS
Sft_507/SR-5'O
coNNEC'tOR
Sft_507/f\'IE CORNERS
coNNEC1'ot\
c~~ f\O~ NOft-n\
Lor:N
CO~1tS-~S-'03rd.
coNNEC1'Of\
'{EUA ~ 'JE. \)Apf\O\lOAEN1S
CR'tS1'~ spf\\NGS f\O~
~S\oN
~ ~CCf-SS
O'N cEN\tJt CONNEC1\ONS
a~ ",\\.1. RO~
Ru,UGN\AEN1'
y-10 '1/oNC1L l<olD COlINEC'\1OH
'(_" "Oth. t-,'JE. s.E.
~ CROs5\NG
'(-'1 N\SQU~Y p\NES
SECoNO ~~
'(-\
'(-1
'(-3
'(-~
'(-5
'(-6
'(-7
'(-8
'(-9
\
~,...
southwest Yelm
Annexation EIS
S. CHAME3eRLAIN
e ASSOCIA rES Ii'
~ ..~....", .... ..----
- --
__tl
~
E<12
(Dill
I-
c
+-0
CJ)--
<D+-
3~
.e(1)
+-c
:::JC
~<t
4.=\
....1(,0\
{Y\ll~
Ujr-Q
m<t.~
2.0.
<f. 0\
I(j}
O(J)'
m:\
)
j
r)
'Y..
1.\
~
Z
.p'd )\JoQ
W
vi
!
;i
(1l
o
.-
iii
.p'O \\\Y\
f;
$
W.
en
~
'0
~
(Jl
.,;
.;.
---:::J \ 8
_ I "- -
\\ \ ~J
\ ' _ D~o~~~
\
-
_.-dJ
-
Ol.yMPIA fST Drv,07
\J
-
-
')
f'\ "'..,.
".r, ..'
-
-
-
-.
-
I
.....
~
T K j-J\r I .-
-
v
-
U!!
\
Mol'"
~4
southWest Yelm
Annexation i::IS
S. CHAMseRLAIN
e ASSOCIA Tes 11\
~ "'~ ~..~--
-
.
- ~
.
~
..,
..., 0
0 -
- \0
\0 ,
, \n
em
\
'0
'\O~
~'A
'O~
co
::;,
\
,~<.
.......'3
~o'
,
",,'
Ave. ,
9 3rd .
r>."'\\\fbf';)}
fbOt...9VJ
/ ,.",
\-'1l':> 1-<;,0 '{If:>
__ 85t'\O)t'lOl
t'\51t'\O)55 -
~
6~
~ ~
l>O~ ~
Yf~ ~
~
"
I
\
,
'.,.~~~
8.$ .
...........
5. 'tI. p.~
__ 8ot'lO)t~Ol
t~51.,\O)45 -
~~
~~
~\O
'0 co
co~
::;,
\
~<O\ ~
oJS 9;)<:J
/: ~~
- (245)[430]
[J70](205) _
~ ~/
~#
qj~
0' /
~ ~
~ ~
/ oS
ci
~
,
L~
)01. - 1991
OO() - 2002
ooa - 20 I 2 - ,,,.....
. _ cess I t"tI"'" '0
~24
,..,~ A peAK ~oU~
__~ ,rnMPACT
VOLUMes
AL fe~NA five
southWest
Annexation
S. CI-tA~E
e A550C1A"
...----. ~. JIIIIJ
5 TJ2PS
I
\
-
.
- ~
.
~
....,
..., 0
0 -
- \0
\0 ,
, ~
~
,
'0
N
rc;-
O~
t") ~
~ -
"O~
\C)
~
\
,~<.
......'0
6'0........
,........
93rd . Ave- ........
I
~
rc..r
cD:L
~~
~as
r-:;'
~
~
'.J$-<l~
>$
"
\
5 _ '/'l - p.~
__10t~5)t~51
t 45l.'2.0)40 --
\1 Cf) )\.1.\ Cf)"\
" bcft>'\. ",.
e..'\j\~fb)1,)O
\.\6~1'
__ 65t'\5)t'\51
t'\5l'2.0)55 -
~r.::
~ ~~
~..t ~
~ v'~
~J: ~
~
"
~.
to
~~ f?/
~~ ~
V:: rov
-;- (385)[ 490J
430](345) _
u=~
XX - 1991
000 - 2002
ooa - 20 I 2
southwest Y
Annexation
FlGLJ<f= 25
"")1\ A peAK HOUR VOL.UMeS
A I -,-~QNA rive
s. C~
& ASSOC1A TE
~_ _.. ,.-.._ 1fG"
,\0
'\5
,\0
~~
~ ~noN
PJ<OPf32TY Aca;ss -
~
010
O)~
1010
('Il~
93rd AVE 75
35
,
r.~ ~;o$-<l~
~"'S 6>0$ .
/0
J
5 . W. Ac;cess
00
55
85
55
~UI
~~
'\5
20
southwest Y E
Annexation f
~26
1097
peAK HOUR VOLUMes
~ _~ ,rnMP AcT AL TeRNA Tlve
s. c~f32L
e AssoC1A n=~
-' -- ..,...- ~......
,\0
'\5
o
,\0
~~
~~~-
\ \ ~o
'\ 1!>
00
(J)~
\0\0
~....
9Srd Ave 65
35
~
r ~ 6~lS~ It:::
....$ uO
5. W.
65
55
.... ....
(Jl
~~
'\0
'\5
southWest )
Annexation
~27
1007
peAK HOUR VOLUMes
A I ..~QNA rive
s. c~
e ASSOCIA i
... _"."--' _ t
'\00
'2.'\0
50
,\'\0
(J)("l
....cD
oU'
~~ ~~ ~~
O<J\
\0\0 ~g.
.,.,\0
93rd Ave .,..""
gO
50
0 ~
- '8$..q~
\C) \0 0
, C4.... '80 .
~\O.,.,
S.w. AcCJ3.SS
5
20
~ ~TION
~ Access "
\. ( ~
'\ ,,"
0"
,tj
Jf
~
rcr~
,,"
g<- 507
6'2.0
\0\0
~co
5
southWest '(
AnnexatIon
~28
nnn2
peAK HOU~ VOLUMes
__..... f("'nMP ACT AL Te~NA Tlve
s. c~
e ASSOC1A TI
-~ _..~.- -'"
00
'\95
'\00
O'>>~
<f>o
'A 'A
'A~
...'"
~~
O'>>~
<f>o
~~
\0 \C) 0
, co
~'J,'"
s.'N.
93rd A \If:. 90
50
o
~ ~T\ON ~
~ Access
'25
~O
52 - 501
720
f58
......
0'"
,t;)
Jf
~
",,:> ~
rolfJ
5
~29
J"')/ln2
peAK HOU~ VOlUMes
^ I -rF:~NA fiVe
southWest
Annexation
s. c~
e ASSOC1P
,..,-f!IIB.'~'-
350
zoO
...,J",",
(J\cD
00
~~
00
~~
\1')0
C'll'l
55
0>>10
go
\1')0
r-Q)
93rd Ave '\ 5
80
o
\0 00
, C'l \t)
~r-~
oat)
CJ)f'
5 . "". Ac;eJ3SS
irS
45
~~~~
30
25
0"
,~
tj
~
~ro ~
~ro
512- 501
860
~~
It)
.,-
20
~30
') n J 2 peAK HOUr2 VOL.UMes
_,"",.-:::n/~OMPAcr AL. rer2NA rIve
southWest "1
Annexation
s. c~e
e AssoC1A i
..... 117.~''''' ·
3'2.0
350
0\&
(J\O
~~
\t1~
&~
\t10
~t')
50
0)1;
~O
\t1&
.--
93rd A\,ff; '\ 0
80
~
r~ II}.'O ..q~
"'S'O
/0
'.)
o
-
\0 \t1 0
, ~~
~.-~
5. W. AcceSS
50
60
30
'2.5
\t1
.-
~~
C'-&.-
0"
,~
tj'
~~
,,() ~
~"
900
'2.0
southWest J
Annexation
~31
'? n I 2 peAK HOUI2 VOL.UMes
~ ^ I -r~J2NA Tlve
s. cHAM6a
e AssoC1A TI
.4l- -ft. ......... .., ·
...
......
e ~
~ e ~ III <a
~ 0 ~ It .., <6 S- III .:
~ ~ ...
It ... i III ... .. ...
Qo ~ l ... .. 'J. ";II ..,. ... ..
It "'l " 19 ..,. ..
s:. III It
0- 0 .. .. .. 0 '"
~ " ~
It ... 0- S ~ 0 ... ~ ... ...
III It i tt i It to> "
... .. " ... 0
" ... " ~ ... 0- 0
It " -< ."
'B- "" -< tt
"- J " ~ III III <.
-- II III
"\ "" ~ " III It
" ~ It OIl " ...
II III It
II ... ...
\ ~ ~ 0 0 ..
...
" 0- ... ...
It 0- ...
\.. ~
'"
\
1
,
, DB" C) I'~D~'-: ~~::
- . " . - -"
- : . ." ,', ~:;
- . .. " '.,- - ~"
: _ .. o~~ --' -'-'
- ....
(
,
'" - <.
I
\
\
\
, .-
..... ~
J---
/F-J
r",
/ "
) \"
\
\
\
.."
o~
t1
o.
~.a>
.-.1
01
.,
'%
o
r""
~ @ ;:.----
<'
It
-
G
_~-oOlZ
~~OljO
o.~jo.;
\'> j -"
III j -. \Il
~ ~~ 6 :}
~o-o-iit'
..c:; \'> C -,
Q:1.a~3
O~O~~
_w III 0......
g. ~ w. ~ c;,'
('0;:::- 0.....
:!I~~oQ
~%30':;'Q
10 ... -'
~Ol(;it~
0.~0I9t~
~"< 8 ~,.:=',
~~sog
\,>-<01:)"0
5.cTi9~c
~~3~.o
0. 1/10
IOD~ _\Il
\1lC ti~
. e.O \Il
_._ 0
~g. ~
o.~ -<
_/
./
~..-
. ....
..
\
\
___J
~-
\ \
\ - \-
\ \\\\~~
\ Ol \
r;
-" ~ r- ~ ~ to
0 .... CO
-:r cv co 0 ..
0 r"" ~. '0 ~ :s
3 - ct "
0' 0-
'0 :J :J ... :J
co ,. 0-
III 0- ..c:;
0 '% ~ ..
0'
:J C 0 0
(") 3 . c:
0-
... a Vt :J
tt
cv " 0-
~ -. 0'
....
'"
"egetat\"e tAa
.."
-'
Ul
~
"""
(0
(J'\
\ES ~5$Oc\ates
'5"\4 ,^U'f~e.d ~"e"ue
O\yf1\1)'.' 'II~ 9850'2
('206) 943-0'\'21
,\lurston t\i9\l,andS
'{e\fl\. ,\lurston coun\'l. '111\
0.\"
0,.",1\ 6'(.
"\.oJ", '~ . Jl'If\~~'"
I~~ , N. ~~ #~,. ,. , t."
. r.... # . Jill r ~. , : ~., ~ ~
~:*'. "::;. i;':":< ~t ,;:~.. ~
-t';~' .:. . ~t' ~ !! -r ~~ . ,
'<11 ,~~.,....~~ . '\,'. r... r .
J '.. '.1 t. 4 I tAl . .1'1" ..
in..., ,'''' " ... . _. ;4,J;,
.'":", ,. ,.,.~tl"
.....""1., "1' . ,.'-t.... 1'0 "ii'
-_ · '!.., '-:I~' t. .....
~..~ " ~~, ,., ~~:~'l'::
r! ~ r6~" j ,t~ ~~~,t
- A~i::~~~~'~' . .
N r~~K" :.. .'
~~ ..'. ,
.. ~ ..;J
i:: lJ. .1!1 .~
lJI ... - . ~..s')o. '~
. W '. r;~'ll~+-' ,
, ~\, .
,..~ .
.
~,
,~
.'
'.'=
''':'.. ,001 .. 1:
flt'~.. ',-. ~ . .....
~,.... ..... J
l~..~'" ~ :'
~ ., ~~~~~"
~i~~~ ~~, ~,~
~~~&. ~\~~'~'"
~~~J :t't~. :
T~
.,
:~~
t ,-.. \.
'\
"-...-*..
'YI '.,
~';'
~ ~. 4
~
. oJ.J "
~
i-:", .i.
'.
:r-\
~'
~. t
t .
, ~ .~:~
~~,. .
. 'I
'~'..
'~~i
.i.
~~.:~,. '~".~
~ ..
l"'r!~
~.' "
I ,.'1\ ,~
.., '~.,...
, i., f" .
L" .... ~...
'~ .
I. '\'..\.~ '
."
C>
C
::D
m
C>>
.,..- '.la~
So . ~i~l;
~
,
.
A. ,.
. ~W"'l.I
'" ...~
II 4 4 j
~
~ ' .
.:~ '9,.~.
. ~..... I' .~
I UI I!,':t, '.", ;."1
.A' '1 ~:.. i 'V ,r
~. ....-: ,.~
':';";1J. ~"
, ...~ '
..... .\.
o . . ....
. .
'.. '
tAl
~.
/.
'~~'I
.,..,-- 01
4. "
w .. '.~t.';: 1'.
~ ~ '~~""~'~~~'
o ~,~. !.:':'~._\ ~t
.....
~..,,, .... p
/f _ _.,~
en
o
I-' I-' I-' ....
NNI-'-...]O\O\~WW ....
-...]OCDO\OU1-"']~WW
*=
" "
...~,
~,
to
--
-<~~3:3:3:HtT]tT]>en
ro ....ro c c n ~ < < ~o
1-'00 ~ ;:r;;:r;~o.ro ro 0.....
3 n.... ........ro ....~ ~ ro ~
::r~I-'I-'~OIroro~
"'1 Ortrt~~rtrt:t"i
t-'.Ul roroOlOrtrtO,<
~ ....<;)00 I-' 0"0
rol-'~ <;)0I<;)<0.~
rtOl3:3:~ ~ro
en <cCOlt'401~<;)
OIt'4ronn<o<,<~
~OI-';:r;;:r;roOlro 01
0.011-' 1-'31-'<;)<
'< 3'< I 1-''< I-' ~ ro
'< '<011-'
t'4 t'4t:l Ul <'<
o O~ UlOlUlro
01 0101 ....~OI....Ul
3 3t-'. 1-'0.~~0I
~ rt 0.'< ~
ro '< 0.
0. t'4 Ul '<
o t'4 01
01 O~t'4
3 010.0
3'<01
3
t'4
o
01
3
r,.
.' ~;
_ 4 .. .... s.
,..
'Nl
I~' ~tr;tt- ~~ ~ ....,...~.~v -;m~~ ":.~~~ ~~~ ...~_...{ ......:'-"
~r~"'" , .' 'd~~"'" ',~~\. I . ~~t:~ ..' ';::, ,;,!~ ,,\;..: .~.i,\,~ ~t.... .... \t ~';\~~~~~~'~~;~.!~:,
~. . " A;~\' ~'~~~..._~. ..... <e'r t\,;, I. I ,;."', \ :-,;p,tof "~~!'t~..?t.,~~~!,
~ .-.l;~ . srI'" .... ~ --:'1'"..: ~ ' , !..:..", ".l,'~ ~f"''''\''' ~'t';ti! I '''~~''''''~l:~~<4~J.:.",~_
",,~. '> .,~. '~~~'4&k':~ ~I.I;" ~.\~, ""~'1'.~;~~';t~~~~'!:(~'I~t'~~1~"'~t~~'" ~. .~>o~~?;~~:~. :~~~, '
~.j:' t.t!... ~""~'. '= .. \ ~~~r..~~ ; ~~~,~l.,,~~..\.~~ ,,'
'. ~~o! ,:;'1';4.11:;< ~~ l ~~~ ..' ;\~:...;;., ~~~~l:r"+tt'~~. ~~"~~~~".~~~~~~)J~~'
"'~." "";1t ;!+~i~"!,t~l.:~~1~:fUrli.JI~~~~~-;~~~
~ . .:.' ~ .' :T.\' t'~. ,. ~ '. . ....iIII ~~...~ ~ :~:i :t~ ~~~1r~'I\~~~~i~ ' \.'i~.~~~
~m' ':~~5 fu~R~~~~,"""_,~", . .~, =--:....., . S!f~~~. . '. ..~t{ '.
~ ~" r . ~~ /:~ .~~~~,1 ~"j;t.~r,,~ \;~ ~ i,;' .~. ~~~~ ~~ ~~~ :~~ . I ~ t'tG~
II' ':~, ~.... ~~ ;~~~'.~~~\ .... ~l": ~ cl;,.~~~. -:~:,f. >',,~"'.. "';~
~ ,'....... ~. I~":S~_'" ,1 . '~.' .", . . i.
~ ~ .~..~.: '.;~~~~il~ .', :' ~, >i;'" ~'i.J'~~f. '.~ '~~~
I,' "'. ~ ' ..tt~~~~f : ' ~ \ '. (:, ,," :.~
" ' '~~~'~\'~,.. -\
\t ~lM ~~ .'1' . ~ ~
1;;..'\ .\*'~\':li:I'~'.' . "';~ .1.3.'\';"~I~\~~tf.\~~\:,~ ~. .~:' \; ,,~>,.~"t.2.~~J.~at,::~,~J:~':- .~'~ ...f~ ~\(;:',\~
~~~.~"""\'~~~;~~~". . .... " " ...,\)."t:~\;i~!~' :....~~~tI,~~;~ ..r"":'~\;f.:....~,.~:t~~;:~~:,,~~ J ;;~~:;~'>>C' ~.,.I.\\
,'\Ii ~\,:~]'.. . .... .~~,\ ~~~~ ',!..~~I}~ .. ~Il~.i~'t'.. )i,ffl-..:H~..J:' ';:.,::<\ :~.: I.. ~'N '~l'~'!."""
~"-~-:':'~t'~;'I'~~~'~~~~"'~. ~~~\..'; ~~ t~~" "'~' ~*f.x~~~~~~ .'~' '~$i]..~~-~~ :s '€
' '''~.rF 12:..;~ '~:' ;.&-"'''4..11;''~~ "~~\!1:.~ ~! ",' ~'O;;.'f. ',~";~,,,ttl,'-'';.' II' ,.t,,,,,,:'~~' !'~;".
'~".~I~~' ~.~' ........~~'~. ~\';'~.~~~~ '~:. '. ~~ .', ;. ...,~~_~~~ - . ".;. ~~~~. 1 "~
. .' . .~'!' t.~W..I' ,. :-..~' '~:.ll '~~':i"~"'" ~""...' . ;~~:,', '4a iJ!(~,:r,..~~.~,. "!; ~ ::~,,"', ~...~~ .... ~..
'J~ ..~~~ '.. ~'!Ia:.~~ ..., 't~..._" ~~... ,~'~;,.;.,.......I' ~. . l~,.I...~.~"......
~\'~'~ ~ '. . \ :i ..: ,~~~ ~.'~'~ ~\ . :..~I. :i; .; .;'~o( . i:~f;t.'?ti>!\?~ ~~It.-, ~~~
!:1'7~: -~ 'i;~. :'\'.'11. ' ~ :,': ''%-~t~~ ..~ ul~~.,......" i)'.., . " '" \'(l' '= .. '-': '::)~~~J1i~"-:! t l'rA.\~h.~~~.
.'~' ~ ~\ ~" \O~. ' l"f if.. " .~'1;-.:'" ~. ~.~:-oa .!~'=f. 't ~~:.~~~ ~~'9:i:&~~~;';'~I1' '~_'. ~ ~ '.' 'F~
.,!.~:J.!f. n;",-t; ", t'd."...,\1 ~-I:"~. ~: '~~,..,. . ~~~" ~ 1 t. .~'~,. '''\1l~
~.~. ... ~. . ~~. ' ~~ ~.~k' ~'#llfu~~::.J:tt.l' ~:~ ""'.. .,.j,~~&~ '~" .~ '.... ..' . ~.~.ju.~...~~~
~~..... . ;~I" ~~':~~K' ~~. -f~~~~1t~~~'~.. tQ~ ~~~'. ':4 I. '..i;~'. ~~ ~~
~'''~~~''':.'~' . W~~~~~. ~!~~~:~~'~~ ~ ~~""~. '~'!J~~. ':~~~T~',~' .~
. - ~\=,' '. it.:~. ..~~~~*I,;\"~~, ....~;jr~~~. t4-~ r......_ .~, "'n'~\c~~
-'~ .' . ;t~-r;~~I~::&~""\" "~~.~~ ....~.;" " . '
" ""~' '~"~~"l~ 'll\'~", ~ ~l4:~~' "!Ij' '~\." 1.......~ :t., -+". ~~ :?l>.,. ~ ~"'.)'f;~~. ~,~ ..'"
.~ 'N.:.. ,"I ~ fl" . '~\e ~~-::\ ~~~~~ ~"'~7f~~ I.': ~.r 'r'rJ..~ :~~:~~:tf~
''I '''';~'' : ( ,,'i t. . - "'. ' ";"clt I." ~~~~ " I; ',JO ~". ::rs;(l ~"~'i'~ "~:""
, .1~' "I ~5!~~ ;~8 ~t\ t~i1~~~t~i'~~'~' . , ~ ,. .,..~.;r,(,. ,1n;.r~' ~.~"~i.: ~
",. I . ~ ~~1. ~.. t~1 ~;,.. ~ .tu~~il' ~.~~ ~q~~l~; I . ...,.~~~~.}.IQ:
, ~. ,);~~~.i} kf.~~~' .~ ":fl.~~~~~l'}Y~ "~ ,:,.~~~~~~~;~!:t.~~~ I. ":-': :..~. ~'_': ~ ~
\ '. ' ~I ~~. ~~"iJ);~~-~1~,~~~i~ 1~'W.I'~~~I~I~ ~~,~~'oI.:~.,. ~ V'. , . ,j;.: .A',~ ""_ ~
",\1 .~. ;~ "'1-Ot1k~ . &..~~~~ .~~~. ~ ~. ,;. 'hr. ~t..l>'. ~ r~~1fE ,<11('.... ~.;
", · ".' I' ~ . ~,~:.~~~~ti~~~ ~'lli ;~~~~~~.~f~~~J~( .;~' .',~~1;;"'. ~".~ . I; '.'~, ~.~
~. h ~j " .~~~~e'. W;fa~ ~~ .~ ~~-;: . ':'~:l,~i .~,}~;~~~ ' !:- .t~N~\'Jrrj':.~~;i~; )t ....f -~. '. ~ 'f,'.. '. ~lF;
~ ~ ..::i~'~;S' ... .1\~'1 ~ : ..t. .: ~~ ,.'i~ {';. . "~~i~ . .' '~\l .
. .. . ~ -;' ,. \ . ~'I'!l ... ~F ,,' '~~~~)
. , ~ , '.. . ..' P' I . . , ~~ ,: ~ 1I.~ ':if i~. '.. ~ .,"~ ~~'"
.~"'I '-';' >\.<;~, "l ,,' ~ '\ " .. .~~~: '}T.-,,~ . of ~
"G,li'. ~'~~~~~~~m" :~,~.~~:~.~~~~;ii;~~~\;,. . ", ,," ~ . . · ~4;~.~
.:'~;.t" .... "'. ,~;r ,,~. I:,'". ~,.!';.~; : ;,' ' , . .' . .
....'\~' '}"",~ \.~. , ~ '1 ;}p{~:'.~H.;' . ';'..\ -,~ :If..~' ,. . ..._l~; .
\: ~\ ",':. ... J.! ' >? ~.~' r~~ ::r"~ ~\. I' :: ... 'I;' .~~. \.,. .
..},;t ...... :;., (t f 'I ~ · . '/i~'~ .... ......10. .,1;, . . ,.. . .. 4'ff..:~
.~"'- ..~.! ,- 'Ir""" f L'\J.. '-'( . . ..." en ~_. " ..
'.", 'I'-. .;.... " .~. ::' . I . ~:. .... - UI m '"
". ....",.. ".., 0", J: '., ll.' ,". ~. . ,!
: ~'.~~"" ,. ;:.'..,~, 'L~ .'l:'~~',r~~:.,' ~.').~\;i.r...~.: :_f~
.l~ :!l' , '?'0'9' ..;', N ......' ,,,....4~, I. ' :I 4+~j&-'"
1)0 II. '.'!- 1T1li" ~ 1. ..,h.., 0 - \,0 " r..~ ''''V'J ,,~; ".,... .
..~ ~~ -... ~0,d 'I'U" A.. .........
,:t; " "., J. , y,""~' f~ \. ,~, I ,.." (
...._I~ '''' 'l~i; '$.' ..)~~. .;' 0 ~.~\ .,,,... ,;.:..... \: :"..!:,:
... l.' . .. . ., ~~'1
~. . ., .', ,".0 )' . ~..~.
~~I ~. .,.~: ',~ .......~..~. ~. ,..-r /.. I'~"" "f,::~~.Y/'
~":"' . , '. . , ._".....:...;,.........., "....
~ ~.. . l,.......- "
. .: " ;'{;"" ....... .,.,. ~( ., ..... " ,.."",. I ~ -
'..;'. l~'~' 4j~~i!' "~. , r" .~ '. :: '.... 0
-:-: "'~ ~~ I' ',' \ ..... ..... .... ... :........_
~~!~~~' ;';~t>... ~'.: " It ,J, ~ -\" }c;' V',. · - ; ~
) ~,~~;~(;.,~. .' , .~, ':. '.~'U'I~'~.' .
'... ~"'" .
....~. ...~..~~P,i(. .'~.', ' . ...l.;I'\?I.. ~," '. J.
- ~', :fl't~*~ i;"~:' t.... ...~. ~~.. M" I. ~ ( ~r'~
~~~~1~;,,"rt ~I,=" · t:" ~~: 'n'~~,'~~~
~f,Pl~J{^. ~ I ~. >." " . . " ~ I: .~." ": \ ~;:; . : ~~f,....,q ,
. .' :..~.l:.:\.r ~ r..-.. .... ..,' . . I .'... .r~;~ ~-i,""~
.~~; """~~:::"1ar...:t,J;; ~~. ,,"~; I I, '. ......"iV{.N t -il....~',
.... 00; .... ."&1C~ .... >" ..~ ," ~J;"" .. ...-...
.T,:,.. .I,... .f" ' . .")"0' . ..' ~.... O~~~. '.': '__ '
. . >l,. }"l:',V" ..,,/J':1' f460. . \ ~~: ~ .~. ~.... ~. J I
t'J4~~...J' . 0 ~ ..:J' ~' ,., ..( '~. . ~ .'.. ~. \~:-.... '::~
1't4'~/~ .. , '--::." '. . . '. r ."t""~"N'"
. ) '/~' ..~)~.. H;tJ~ ~ t ,.S; ': ,~;tID~ .~.~~~~
I oj 'Yf-2I~... ~P;. , " ,._ >I ...,fP~
en
o
"".
I-'
.;
~
CI)
tn
~,
IES Associates
1514 Muirhead
Olympia, WA 98502
(206) 943-0127
Thurston Highlands Site
Yelm, Thurston County, WA
Soils Map
DATE.
DRAWN BY
~
~ ~ ~
. """':"'-::':':"~""~ ~ ci:'\ ~
k::0&tift~~ ~ 8co. J ~
tIJ't'i~~ ~'<.:
~~:~~~r}tmt~h
- - ~ ~:'.:":'.-
~.r .'*? \::::t~;1
(. .: ). :i;,{fj
;" I
~~\~' I;' /... J ?:'~~'~"'"
.... ,. : ~ /1 :
:...~' -::\:~ .:.: / \. "', ~
1.0 ' ( " . .... j ~. ~
.. "'l'~ ~ \ . ,-- '",,",... . "\'J ~
. '\ ,\ t. ;.. J:. :
:';t~.~. .
. +-.:~\,. \. .(\'::: 1"[.:..' . .:':
; : . .:. ~ '..~ r.,. ~
. :', .-:
.:~\ \. . .~,~ \ }
. ~\. \.-
... ...~ " .... ~-"'--
"f . rEI \ i . ~.'",- "~'l!V.
W ',' ~ \,. :7 It.' ..........
. : ,: I' .}. . ....u.'~.".,:.:.......~. '. .~
: \ I .. l ..... ""~':)..
~~ (.. "-/ '~.~;~,
< _, 1
~ II .-:\
~ II \\\
~ ~'.
- ~~_.~
---=\1-
'-- .\
(....l......~\
\. :.'.
'\:.:j
;-
~: t
t ..'
~......,:.....
...., .,
':::.
'~~i~
..~~
. ""!h;r.
CJ)
(D
10
"T\
c.c
c:
..
10
(X)
-
~
10
:::
Il1
~
0.
3:
Il1
"0
-
o
..
o
("/
Il1
~
o
='
o
-
."
-
G')
.~
'-
:0
m
-.J
,
@1
JW
f' ..~\
@] ~~ .l~(
/~.-....~.~/ .~
/: ..... ;1
~ :,
~....
......~.
-:
~ .'.
r
I:'
\
".
@)....
...:
UI '.
f
.~.
.
~
.\
~
m
...
~
z
o
.
...
\II
~' ire
: ,~
, 'l
. .
\: ". ~~ ~
\f.: ., ~
; 1 r-
'. :l ·
. '.. :*;!;
,........~ '"
.
~
w
.~.~,..
.:..~=-..y
. '..
..,
,
....
~-II-' ....
.~ .. .~.;;.;/
~1r'~'~
.... II 4-
. :'I':~/:':'.' "~
: ;....... . r
. .' .,.
o . . \
~:, .)t:.~t['''~''~'' :. ':~',' ". . ~
~ ... . -'.
'.
<.
\ , 0 ""-
-
, h
,...
(D
i
(I)
,...
OJ
='
0.
~ ~
~:, ~
,.~.. ..:. ,. :z: 'I
f .."",..~ ~. :"
'\:. ';: .~:~ W1. ,
'\..,; 'I" . . .. 4 IV ~ "
'\ : ;.;.; ......"
(~;": ..-:~. ~"
It: ..~'
\t,.~. ,l.. . 'l.r~
\: :( \: (t~~. ;l
:::"':{I~',_,::~
t 'J' \ t~:' ':~
..~. . ~, ..-: .....Nt: '\:::
"-tq?t)
~
r..................,. . · . 't
.... . ' r" .......,...---.. . . .. .~. · , ·
,'. '.' .' . " . .. .. . . . .' .' .. .' . . . .
...........
1.......... ..'
....... .
,.....
. . .
. .
. .
:~' .'
". . ..0:1"....
~
[@ ~
OJ
J
0.
,.
t-)
o
~
I1l
~
OJ
:3
0.
~
IES Associates
1514 Muirhead
Olympia, WA 98502
Soil core Location Map
Thurston Highlands Site
,
Yelm. Thurston County. WA
(206) 943-0127
Note: This map is lor orientation purpOses only
and is not intended lor jurisdictional Or site
planning purposes. A more aCCurate map of the
wetlandr can result from a Survey by a qualified
land Surveyor 01 the flagged wetland edge.
~,e;,
o
~v
4(0
G>
Not to Scale
",...-
r--'
)
{
(
I
___J
'*14
~
\.r'
--
'*10
~*6
0*7
~.8
"
......
~
" ..
>-
- I "C ...
\ t: f:
legend \ to =
- 0
.c 0
\ 0)
Wetlands .- f:
J: 0
Property Boundary f: ...
0 U)
...
.... =
logging Roads " rl:
I ...
:;, f-
.c ..
Wetland Number f l- E
-
~
Thompson Creek
.._,
- L
"- --1
l
/1
,r 1
J
*18
--
-
IIDFJ
---
#a
-- -
Off-Site
Wetland
Bear "'alley Rei Sf
a.
to
2
U)
"
t:
to
-
....
~
;..
CD
r::
~
..
..
Q
ti
-
III
Q
Durant St SE
en GI
CP ~ ('II
... c: 0
to : '" ,...
._ <I( CO N
(,)'tJO)O
o : ~ I
fI).c>('I)
II. ... . "It
", ._ ftl .....
.... ~.- ...,
~ :E Q. .....
C/)'lftE8
UJ 'f'- ~ N
_~O'-'
-\
~
-
(/l
.-
o
:;)
:t.
~
0>
::>
0-
(/l
Y'
(/l
(/l
o
o
~
.-
CO
(/l
?IS "1:.! 'to
~~-Jr1r1ila to
t;"""-<" - .l.
".~ ?.ot. ~ ..
3 'l' !\ 'it (>. .t. <1J b ~
~.......'6'c.f'''\
.. "1'" pe.W\...
~.. ".~..~
1\ ". 't" or.
r>. ~!1 ~
..
.,
'"
...: 0
Ot f
: :J
"'" '!.
(;l ~.
~ '0
.,.
(') '@
a
~ 0
'"
'" ...
III ~
l' III
,.
'1! ,.
~
0 0
f. a
2.. "'"
ft
(J'I
;;
'"
c..
3
'"
2..
...
?
'!.
...
-I
-:s
~
'"
,.
o
:l
:t
~
0;
6-
'"
".
'"
...
o
(>
~
III
...
------
------------------
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
'Z.
;;,'
~
Ot
~
'5'
~
0-
c
~
<:
III
:l
-
S
III
"1)
~
~
.....
-.
". . ~ ~ ~. \
...........
...
'-- \
~~ ..........
" ~ :--.......
...
-
... .
.... ......
........... ~
\ \ , \
\
.
\
\ .
I \
I
i
, ,\ '.
\
,c..-
CO
---
...
. ,
. ,'.
~
, I '
...
. ,CO
.::>
1.-
Ie
. -.
,(0 ..
'.." .
. ~.
0.>
~
\
......~ .
I
.'
\
.---
\
\
"
\
.
\
..-.-- .. ......
\
. - ..--'-
.~_ ._ _'t . ..-'~"
\
,
\
I
,
\
\
~--
\'
\ , \
. ".. ~
, . \ ; \;
\ \ \
i \'
\ ',~
\ '. . ':'
\ I
, \
~
. .. . \
. '
\
,
,
. \ \
\' ,\ \ \,' \ .
, ;,. ,I
\ "\
\
\
Sft'E
i
, \ _._1. .---
,.\-\u~S,.Otl \-\\G\-\LjI.,tlDS
."
-
G'>
c:
:D
rn
~
\E.S Associates
~5~4 ,,^uirnead
Olympia. VI '" 98502 '
(206) 943-0,\21