Loading...
20070404 Original SEPA checklist November 2007SOUND ENGINEERING, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS • LAND PLANNERS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR CREEK ROAD MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THURSTON COUNTY, WASHINGTON NOVEMBER 2007 PREPARED FOR: YELM CREEK APARTMENTS, LLC 240 STADIUM WAY SOUTH TACOMA, WA 98402 PREPARED BY: STEPHEN K. BRIDGEFORD - LAND PLANNER SOUND ENGINEERING, INC. 1102 COMMERCE STREET, SUITE 300 TACOMA, WA 98402 (253) 573 -0040 PROJECT 07118.10 DATED 11.07 CITY OF YELM ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if any: Creek Road Mixed Use Development 2. Name of applicant: Yelm Creek Apartments, LLC. CITY USE ONLY FEE: DATE REC'D BY: FILE NO. $150.00 3. Address, phone number and email address of applicant and of any other contact person: 240 Stadium Way South Tacoma, WA 98402 Phone: (253) 428 -0800 Agent: Timothy D. Holderman P.E. Sound Engineering, Inc. 1102 Commerce Street, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98402 Phone (253) 573 -0040 4. Date checklist prepared: November 13, 2007 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Yelm, Community Development Department 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Once all necessary approvals and permits are obtained, the project will be constructed. It is anticipated that construction will begin, weather permitting, in spring of 2008 and anticipated completion is summer of 2009. Construction will likely take place in two phases starting with multi - family component. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. There are no further plans for expansion or additions related to the proposed development. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 1 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A geotechnical engineering study dated August 29, 2007 was prepared for this project by GeoResources, LLC. A Wetland Review and Delineation Study Dated August 26, 2007 was prepared for this project by Forest Pro, Inc. See Appendix for Geotechnical Engineering Study and Wetland Review and Delineation Study 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals or other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. To our knowledge, no other government approvals are pending that directly affects the property on which the proposed development will be constructed. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit, Commercial Building Permits, Site Plan Review, and Site Development Permits 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The proposal is to construct a 164 -unit multi - family residential and five commercial /retail strip buildings totaling 54,540 square feet. The total site area is approximately 17.08 acres. The development will include stormwater facilities, utilities, public and private roadways, parking lots and open space. The various components of the proposed development will be discussed further in this checklist. See Appendix for Site Plan. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 2 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. You need not duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Address: 10520 Creek Rd. SE, Yelm WA, 98567 Section 29 Township 17 Range 2E Tax Parcel Number 64303400400, -0501, and -0502 See Appendix for legal description and vicinity map. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth A. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other B. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope on the site is approximately 2 %. C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The on -site soils are Spanaway gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, McKenna gravelly silt loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes, and Spanaway stony sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent according to the National Cooperative Soil Survey for the Thurston County Area, Washington. See Appendix for the Soil Map, and Soil Descriptions D. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe: There is no indication that this site has had a history of unstable soils, or could any such indicator be located in the immediate vicinity. E. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Site preparation will require grading activities for access ways, building pads, parking lots and stormwater facilities. The grading areas will encompass the majority of the parcel. It is anticipate that approximately 50,000± cubic yards of fill and 1,500± cubic yards of cut will be necessary for the completed project. The source of any fill will be dependant on availability and pricing at the time of construction. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 3 F. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes. Removal of the existing vegetation and the demolition of the existing buildings could result in erosion primarily through dust escapement. G. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction such as asphalt or buildings? Approximately 55 percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces once the project is constructed. H. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: As part of the forthcoming grading plan, a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan (TESC) will be prepared for approval by the City of Yelm. Erosion control features will be installed prior to construction and maintained until the threat of erosion ceases to exist. 2. Air A. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile exhaust, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The future grading activities at the site will cause dust particulate to be emitted to the air. Vehicles and equipment used during all phases of construction can be a potential source of emissions. When the project is complete, the site may be the source of vehicle emissions from vehicles using the site. B. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Vehicles using the surrounding street system may, at times, be a source of emissions or odor. However, it is not anticipated that off -site sources of emissions or odor will impact the proposed development of this site. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Unwanted dust particulate can be controlled to a certain extent by the application of water before and during grading activities. It is assumed that construction vehicles used will be equipped with factory- installed mufflers and spark arresters that would control excessive emissions. There are no measures proposed to control emissions as a result of vehicles using the site after construction. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 4 3. Water A. Surface Water 1) Is there any surface water body or wetland on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, and ponds)? If yes, describe type and provide names. State what stream or river it flows into? Yes, Yelm Creek (a seasonal stream) is located along the eastern property line. The creek flows due north to approximately 2 miles to the Centralia Canal then approximately 2 miles to the Nisqually River from the nearest proposed developed area. Per the Forest Pro, Inc Wetland Review Yelm Creek is categorized as a Type "S" stream. In addition, there area also wetlands adjacent to the Yelm Creek; per the Forest Pro, Inc Wetland Review the wetlands are categorized as Class IV wetlands. See Appendix for Site Plan, Vicinity Map and the Forest Pro, Inc. Wetland Review dated August 26, 2007. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 300 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, the eastern portion of the project is located within 300 -feet of the Yelm Creek and the adjacent wetland. However, all development will be located outside the required buffers See appendix for Site Plan 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No fill or dredge material will be place in or removed from surface water or wetlands. 4) Will the proposed require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No, surface water withdrawals or diversions will not be required. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note elevation on the site plan. Yes, there is a 100 -year flood plain along the western portion of the site. The base flood elevation per FEMA is approximately 341 -feet (NGVD -29) See Appendix for Flood Insurance Rate Map. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 5 The proposal does not require any discharge of waste materials to surface waters. B. Groundwater: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No ground water will be withdrawn. At build out the site will be served by the Yelm Water Utility. The on site well will be decommissioned per current DOE and local jurisdictional requirements prior to any onsite construction activities. There will be an onsite underground stormwater infiltration system to handle run -off from roof drains, paved surfaces and landscaped areas. 2) Describe the underlying aquifer with regard to quality and quantity, sensitivity, protection, recharge areas, etc. As with the entire city of Yelm and its urban growth area the subject site is located within a highly susceptible critical aquifer recharge area. All applicable City of Yelm and DOE regulations with be implemented to protect the aquifer recharge area. 3) Describe waste material that will be discharged into or onto the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (such as domestic sewage; industrial byproducts; agricultural chemicals). The site will be served by the City of Yelm Sewer Utility. No waste materials will be discharged directly into the ground. However, the proposed on -site underground stormwater infiltration system may result in discharges but will be limited to that which is expected to occur with such a system. The proposed system will be designed by a professional licensed civil engineer and approved by the City of Yelm. C. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The primary source of runoff will be from stormwater and roof drains, although, minimal water runoff is anticipated to occur as a result of landscape watering and other maintenance activities. The proposed project site will contain an underground stormwater infiltration system. The stormwater will flow into catch basins located within the drive aisles, then directed through a stormwater quality treatment system before being conveyed to the underground infiltration system. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Generally, a project of this type and size provides areas of landscaping as part of on -site amenities. If chemicals or fertilizers are used to maintain these areas are not handled properly, it is possible they could enter on -site stormwater facilities. To our knowledge, there are no other known sources of contaminants associated with this proposal. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 6 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: All stormwater runoff generated from this project site will be collected, treated and infiltrated into the ground by means of a stormwater quality treatment filter and underground infiltration system. 4. Plants A. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, oak, aspen, other: cherry, cottonwood evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grasses pasture crops or grains wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation B. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? It is anticipated that all existing landscaping, vegetation, grass and trees outside the wetland buffer will be removed as part of the grading process. C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. To our knowledge, there are no threatened or endangered plant species on or near the site. D. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: A professional licensed landscape architect will design the site incorporating some of the existing native vegetation as well as importing additional complimentary landscaping material. 5. Animals A. Circle any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, ducks, eagle, songbirds, other: Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Fish: bass, salmon, trout, shellfish, other: B. List any priority, threatened or endangered species know to be on or near the site. To our knowledge there are no threatened or endangered species known to exist on or near the project site. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 7 C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain: The site is located within the boundaries of the western flyway for migratory bird populations. D. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: The landscape areas will include some vegetation amenities that may attract both birds and small mammals. 6. Energy and Natural Resources A. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, gasoline, heating oil, wood, solar etc.) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, transportation, etc. The primary energy source required to meet the energy needs of the proposed multi - family development is electricity. It is not known at this time whether or not natural gas will be provided. Sufficient amounts of the available resources would be used to maintain a comfortable lifestyle and environment. B. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No, it is not anticipated that this project will affect the potential for adjacent properties to use solar energy. C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The buildings will be constructed to meet or exceed current building and energy codes. 7. Environmental Health A. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spills of hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Typically, a residential development is not a source of environmental health hazards. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. While not anticipated to occur, the services of the local emergency service providers may be required at some time. No special emergency services are anticipated. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None are proposed. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 8 B. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? There are no known sources of off -site noise in the area that would affect the proposed development 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. During the short -term, construction activity at the project site will vary considerably because the noise produced on the site depends on the equipment being used. The noise would vary from day to day. Construction noise levels can be expected to range from 57 to 89 dBA. (Based on a construction activity noise model, described in Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances). Noise associated with construction operations on the site will occur roughly between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Long -term noise impacts will result from vehicles using the site and noises typical to a multi - family development. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Noise impacts associated with the construction phases of the project will be limited in duration. To mitigate general noise impacts during the grading phase, measures such as using and regularly maintaining efficient mufflers and quieting devices on all construction equipment and vehicles can be anticipated. No measures to mitigate noise impacts during the building phase are proposed. Construction hours will be limited to those hours set forth by the county. 8. Land and Shoreline Use A. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The subject site is composed of two parcels with one parcels containing a single - family residence with accessory structures. The other parcel contains a retail commercial use. The current use of adjacent land is as follows: North: Commercial South: SR -507, Commercial West: Commercial East: Single Family Residence and Agricultural City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 9 B. Has the site been used for mineral excavation, agriculture or forestry? If so, describe. No, the site has not recently been used for mineral excavation, agriculture of forestry. C. Describe any structures on the site. Parcel 64303400400: single family residence, barn, mobile home, and sheds Parcel 64303400501 and -502: commercial building D. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, two single family structures on parcel 64303400400 will be removed. E. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? C -1 Commercial Zone F What is the current zoning classification of the site? C -1 Commercial Zone G. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Per the City of Yelm Comprehensive Plan and the Thurston County Shoreline Master Program, Yelm Creek is designated as a shoreline of the state. H. Has any part of the site been classified as a "natural resource ", "critical" or "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, Yelm Creek and the adjacent category IV wetlands along the eastern property line. The site is also located within an aquifer recharge area. See Appendix for Wetland Review by Forest Pro, Inc and Site Plan. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The proposed development could provide housing for approximately 410 individuals at an average rate of 2.5 people per unit. Approximately 40± individuals would work at the completed project. It should be noted that as exact tenants have yet to be identified this is purely an estimate. J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The proposed development will displace approximately 5 people at a rate of 2.5 per unit. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 10 k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None, the proposed development will provide more housing then what is being eliminated. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The project site is located on property zoned for multi - family development and will conform to the guidelines of the City of Yelm. 9. Housing A. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. The completed project site will contain 164 -units of low to middle income housing. B. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. Two low to middle income units will be eliminated. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: There are no measures proposed to control housing impacts. The proposed development will, in fact, create housing that will benefit a certain segment of the population in the City of Yelm. 10. Aesthetics A. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Buildings are not anticipated to exceed the maximum height allowed by the underlying zoning district of 40 -feet. B. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The views in the immediate vicinity would be altered to that of a mixed use commercial /multifamily residential development. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The proposed project will be designed to be consistent with the City of Yelm Design Guidelines. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 11 11. Light and Glare A. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light and glare will result from reflective surfaces, exterior building lights and streetlights. Interior lighting may be noticeable. The occurrence of light impacts would be anticipated from dusk to dawn. Glare impacts, including those associated with sunny days and headlights reflecting off window surfaces, could be expected both day and night. B. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Onsite lighting will be designed to project downward therefore not affecting surrounding areas. C. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? There are no known off -site sources of light or glare that are anticipated to affect this proposal. D. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: The exterior building lights will be of low intensity, typically used for safety and security purposes. 12. Recreation A. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are no known recreational opportunities in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project. B. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No, the project will not displace any recreational opportunities. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts or provide recreation opportunities There are no measures proposed to reduce or control impacts to off -site recreational opportunities. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 12 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation A. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. To our knowledge there are no known sites in the vicinity eligible for or listed in any jurisdictional historic register. B. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Does not apply. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: There are no measures proposed to reduce or control impacts. However, if objects are unearthed during site work that may be culturally significant, the Washington State Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation will be notified. 14. Transportation A. Identify sidewalks, trails, public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site will gain ingress and egress from Creek Street Southeast and 106th Avenue Southeast. See Appendix for Site Plan. B. Is site currently served by public transit? By what means? If not, what plans exist for transit service? Yes there is transit service available along Creek Street Southeast via Intercity Transit Route 94. See Appendix for Intercity Transit Route 94 Map. C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The proposed project will provide a total of approximately 527 parking stalls for the entire mixed use development. The proposed will eliminate only the parking stalls associated with the existing use and its accessory buildings. D. Will the proposal require any new sidewalks, trails, roads or streets, or improvements to existing sidewalks, trails, roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The proposed will not require any new roads or streets. Frontage improvements will be provided along Creek Street Southeast. City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 13 E. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No, the proposed is not in the immediate vicinity of water, rail, or air transportation. F. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? The City of Yelm will be conducting a Traffic Study for this project at a later date. The number of Vehicular Trips per day will be available at the conclusion of this study. G. If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Unknown at this time H. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any At this time there are no proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts. 15. Public Services A. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: Yes, Whenever a residential development is constructed, the need for public services, such as police and fire protection, increases. There will also be an increased demand on the School District. It is also anticipated that further demand will be made on local health care providers. B. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Impacts will be controlled by the increase in tax base, tax assessments paid to the public services, and impact fees City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 14 16 C Utilities A. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. B. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. The proposed project will use the following utilities: Electricity: Water: Refuse Service: Telephone: Sanitary Sewer: Septic System SIGNATURE Puget Sound Energy City of Yelm Pacific Disposal Qwest Communications City of Yelm Not Applicable The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the City of Yelm is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 15 SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions.) When answering these questions, be aware of the extent of the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Does not Apply Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Does not Apply 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Does not Apply Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Does not Apply 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Does not Apply Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Does not Apply How would the proposal be likely to use or affect critical or environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection, such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or natural resource areas? Does not Apply Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Does not Apply City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 16 How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Does not Apply Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Does not Apply How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Does not Apply Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: Does not Apply 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Does not Apply City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 17 APPENDIX Table of Contents EXHIBIT SitePlan ......................................................................... ..............................I VicinityMap .................................................................... .............................II LegalDescription ............................. ............................... ............................III SoilMap ...................................................................... ............................... IV SoilDescription ............................................................. ..............................V FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map ............................... ............................... VI Geotechnical Report by GeoResources, LLC. dated Aug. 29, 2007......... VIII Wetland Review and Delineation by Forest Pro, Inc. dated Aug. 26, 07 ... IX City of Yelm Environmental Checklist Page 18 �i 1 ICI I 1 1 I �r! Emil lip 27: LU Lu LU r� - - tn .- - Lu or a I II ,�I I I I h • ' 1 wrur- a&Ud�M.VMftLudVoOrAsLOWow,a - .fao¢ - OM 10 Wr 1102 ��'WA Creek Road Development k=flvir; BM RNq sr&OM Inc- Fm (2W ar"142 Vicinity Map R-29 RAILWAY AY C3 • T `� � ? �KOTH ?p 100 z f{ Y- FOFk �r ve�s t+ ELI. k 19 0 NC. 103RD ST. -• .� - 103RD ST, 28.6' 507 PRA Y, SSE. v Site I �y CT n5O 7 l 8NKLAND ST. i N y �I x I� l CA -L, I h -iP 2 � - — — — — 5 s 1v1� 9 . 9 7 _ — — 13-29 Map by RoadRunner Maps 1995 ~� I I h -iP 2 � - — — — — 5 s 1v1� 9 . 9 7 _ — — 13-29 Map by RoadRunner Maps 1995 Legal Description PARCEL 'A' LOT 4, BLOCK 34 OF MCKENNA IRRIGATED TRACTS, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 OF PLATS, PAGE 43; PARCEL 'B' LOT 5 IN BLOCK 34 OF MCKENNA IRRIGATED TRACTS AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 OF PLATS, PAGE 43; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WEST 387.2 FEET AND EXCEPTING ALSO THE SOUTH 10 FEET FOR SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 5 -H AND EXCEPTING ALSO THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO STATE OF WASHINGTON BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 15, 1985 UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 8504150149; IN THURSTON COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 102 �WA Creek Road Development Luiv eus: PW era -■wa �IIVEERIIY�, fns Fm MM WnM42 Soil Map CINLe19lmN•LIVOPlA1fYeR fiC.L1p11 N Not to Scale at - 507 ■ i I rk Washin, ton { 30 Thuistoii 71TN R2E — r i •I ,1 G a http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/ 1102 Oomnmw St. Suft 306 LVW T�, WA ON= Butte (=" 5T3-&M §NP=flVZ; Inc- Fm (2W ar"142 tlNL °"""'9°M • LING PLM/HR9 Creek Road Development USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Description 65- McKenna gravelly silt loam, 0 to 5 percent. This moderately deep, poorly drained soil is in depressions and drainage ways. It formed in glacial drift. The native vegetation is mainly hardwoods. Elevation is 50 to 500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 45 to 55 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 50 degrees F, and the average front -free period is 150 to 180 days. Typically, the surface is covered with a mat of leaves and twigs about 3 inches thick. The surface layer is black gravel- ly silt loam about 9 inches thick. The upper 4 inches of the subsoil is very dark grayish brown gravelly silt loam, the next 8 inches is dark brown very gravelly silt loam, and the lower 15 inches is dark brown and dark yellowish brown, mottled very gravelly loam. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is grayish brown, dense glacial till, which crushes to very gravelly loam. Depth to the glacial till ranges from 20 to 40 inches. Included in this unit are small areas of Alderwood and Kapowsin soils on till plains, Belligham and Norma soils in depressions, and Everett and Skipopa soils on terraces. Included areas make up about 10 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is moderate above the dense glacial till in the McKenna soil and very slow through the till. Available wa- ter capacity is moderate. Effective rooting depth is about 20 to 40 inches. A perched seasonal high water table is near or above the surface from November to April. Runoff is ponded or very slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. Most areas of this unit are used as woodland. A few areas are used for hay and pasture. Red alder is the main woodland species on this unit. Among the trees of limited extent are western red cedar and west- ern hemlock. On the basis of 50 -year site estimated growth rate of an unmanaged, even -aged stand of red alder is 101 cubic feet per acre per year at 40 years of age. The main limitation affecting the harvesting of timber is the muddiness caused by seasonal wetness. Use of wheeled and tracked equipment when the soil is wet results in ruts and soil compaction. Unsurfaced roads and skid trails are soft and can be impassable when wet. Logging roads require suitable surfacing material for year -round use. Rock for road construction is not readily available on this unit. The seasonal high water table and the ponding limit the use of equipment to dry periods. Disturbance of the protective layer of duff can be minimized by the careful use of wheeled and tracked equipment. Seedling mortality is the main concern in the production of timber. Reforestation can be accomplished by planting western red cedar seedlings. If the stand includes seed trees, natural reforestation by red alder occurs readily in cutover areas. The high water table and the ponding inhibit root respiration and thus result in high seedling mortality. When openings are made in the canopy, invading brushy plants can delay the establishment of planted western red cedar seed- lings. Because the rooting depth is restricted by the high water table, trees are subject to frequent windthrow. Common forest understory plants are salmonberry, devilsclub, vine maple, trailing blackberry, and sedges. The main limitations affecting hay and pasture are the high water table and the ponding. Wetness limits the choice of plants and the period of cutting or grazing and increases the risk of winterkill. Grazing should be delayed until the soil has drained sufficiently and is firm enough to withstand trampling by livestock. Grazing when the soil is wet damages the plants and results in compaction of the surface layer. Subsurface drains, open drains, or both can lower the water table if a suitable outlet is available. Periodic mowing helps to maintain uniform growth, discourages selective grazing, and controls weeds. Animal manure can be applied periodically during the growing season. Areas that receive heavy applications should be harrowed at least once a year. This map unit is in capability subclass Vlw. 1102 Oomnmw St. Suft 306 LVW T�, WA ON= Butte (2N" ffr&0 M §NP=flVZ; Inc- Fm (2W ar"142 tlNL °"""'9°M • LING PLM/HR9 Creek Road Development USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Description 111- Spanaway gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 15 percent slope. This very deep, somewhat excessively drained soil is on terraces. It formed in glacial outwash and volcanic ash. The native vegetation is mainly grasses, ferns, and few conifers. Elevation is 100 to 400 feet. The average annual precipi- tation is 45 to 55 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 51 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 150 to 200 days. Typically, the surface layer is black gravelly sandy loam about 15 inches thick. The subsoil is dark yellowish brown very gravelly sandy loam about 5 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is dark yellowish brown extremely gravelly sand. Included in this unit are small areas of Alderwood soils on till plans and Everett, Indianola, and Nisqually soils on ter- races. Also included are small areas of Spanaway soils that have a stony sandy loam surface layer and small areas of Spanaway gravelly sandy loam that have slopes of 1 to 3 percent. Included areas make up about 20 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is moderately rapid in the subsoil of the Spanaway soil and very rapid in the substratum. Available water capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. The unity is used mainly as hayland or pasture, as a site for homes, or as a source of gravel. It is also used as wood- land. The main limitation affecting hay and pasture is the low available water capacity during the growing season. Proper grazing practices, weed control, and fertilizer are needed to ensure maximum quality of forage. Rotation grazing helps to maintain the quality of forage. Periodic mowing helps to maintain uniform growth, discourages selective grazing, and controls weeds. Animal manure can be applied periodically during the growing season. Areas that receive heavy applications should be harrowed at least once a year. In summer, irrigation is needed to maxi- mum production of most forage crops. Sprinkler irrigation is the best method of applying water. The amount of water applied should be sufficient to wet the root zone but small enough to minimize the leaching of plant nutrients. This unit is suited to homesites. The main limitation is the slope. Cutbanks are not stable and are subject to sloughing. A plant cover can be established and maintained through proper fertilizing, seeding, mulching and shaping of the slopes. Pebbles and cobbles should be removed, particularly in areas used for lawns. In summer, irrigation is needed for law grasses, shrubs, vines, shade trees, and ornamental trees. Mulch, fertilizer, and irrigation are needed to estab- lish lawn grasses and other small- seeded plants. Topsoil can be stockpiled and used to reclaim areas disturbed during construction. The main limitation affecting septic tank absorption fields is a poor filtering capacity in the substratum. If the density of housing is moderate or high, community sewage systems are needed to prevent the contamination of water supplies caused by seepage from onsite sewage disposal systems. The slope hinders the installation of the absorption fields. Absorption lines should be installed on the contour. Douglas -fir is the main woodland species on this unit. Among the trees is limited extent are Oregon white oak, lodge - pole pine, and red alder. Douglas -fir and Scotch pine are grown on Christmas tree plantations. On the basis of a 100 - year site curve, the mean site index for Douglas -fir is 140. On the basis of a 50 -year site curve, it is 108. The highest average growth rate of an unmanaged, even -aged stand of Douglas -fir is 145 cubic feet per acre per year at 65 years of age. ..............continued on next page................. 1102 Oomnmw St. Suft 306 LVW T�, WA ON= Butte (2N" ffr&0 M §NP=flVZ; Inc- FM (2W ar"142 tlNL °"""'9°M • LING PLM/HR9 Creek Road Development USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Description 111- Spanaway gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 15 percent slope., continued. This soil is suited to year -round logging. Unsurfaced roads and skid trails are slippery when wet. Logging roads require suitable surfacing material for year -round use. Rounded pebbles and cobbles for road construction are readily available on this unit. Disturbance of the protective layer of duff can be minimized by the careful use of wheeled and tracked equipment. Seedling establishment and seedling mortality are the main concerns in the production of timber. Reforestation can be accomplished by planting Douglas -fir seedlings. If the stand includes seed trees, natural reforestation of cutover areas by Oregon white oak and lodgepole pine occurs infrequently. Droughtiness in the surface layer re- duces the seedling survival rate. When openings are made in the canopy, invading brushy plants can delay the establishment of planted Douglas -fir seedlings. Common forest understory plants are cascade Oregon - grape, salal, western brackenfern, western swordfern, Indi- an plum, and Scotch - broom. This map unit is in capability subclass IVs. 1102 Oomnmw St. Suft 306 LVW T�, WA ON= Butte (2N" ffr&O M §NP=flVZ; Inc- Fm (2W ar"142 tlNL °"""'9°M • LING PLM/HR9 Creek Road Development USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Description 112- Spanaway stony sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes. This very deep, somewhat excessively drained soil is on terraces. It is formed in glacial outwash and volcanic ash. The native vegetation is mainly grasses, ferns, and a few conifers. Elevation is 200 to 400 feet. The average annual precip- itation is 40 to 50 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 51 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 150 to 200 days. Typically, the surface layer is black stony sandy loam about 16 inches thick. The subsoil is very dark brown gravelly sandy loam about 6 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is grayish brown extremely gravelly sand. Included in this unit are small areas of Aldersood soils on till plains, Baldhill soils on terminal moraines, and Evertt, Indianola, and Nisqually soils on terraces. Also included are small areas of Spanaway soils that have a gravelly sandy loam surface layer and small areas of Spanaway stony sandy loam that have slopes of 3 to 15 percent. Included areas make up about 15 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is moderately rapid in the subsoil of the Spanaway soil and very rapid in the substratum. Available water capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. This unit is used mainly for hayland, pasture or homesites. The main limitations affecting hay and pasture are the low available water capacity and the stones on the surface. Proper grazing practices, weed control, and fertilizer are needed to ensure maximum quality of forage. Rotation grazing helps to maintain the quality of the forage. Because of the sur- face stones, spreading animal manure, mowing, and seeding are difficult. In summer, irrigation is needed for maximum production of most forage crops. Sprinkler irrigation is the best method of applying water. The amount of water ap- plied should be sufficient to wet the root zone but small enough to minimize the leaching of plant nutrients. This unit is well suited to homesites. Pebbles, cobbles, and stones should be removed, particularly in areas used for lawns. In summer, irrigation is needed for lawn grasses, shrubs, vines, shade trees, and ornamental trees. Mulch, ferti- lizer, and irrigation are needed to establish lawn grasses and other small- seeded plants. Cutbanks are not stable and are subject to sloughing. The main limitation affecting septic tank absorption fields is a poor filtering capacity in the substratum. If the density of housing is moderate or high, community sewage systems are needed to prevent the contamination of water supplies caused by seepage from onsite sewage disposal systems. This map unity is in capability subclass IVs. a q log O fli J C 0 o = n 60 a S'6£. 1 1, fag. Pa 9 81 Is ,� MA ae max. e P. 01 KN Ke o0 e ® a .3 a 1� 8 w � °��53 13 gg�s +a� ➢ °�� iSS �s+�iE +® nan � � e � :m SnP� Ig��L��S a za Eg g 31 �i��P'o� S Se fi�,a s 3$.eg�gi;�ai� Mimla bi d sg c g it bi Ir. I 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 log O fli J C 0 o = n 60 a o °oQE�np u� o= W 6m� MA ae max. e P. 01 KN Ke o0 e ® a log — Pao _ 6m� o z Amy _ m H -M A .e � Ph. 253- 896 -1011 Fx. 253 - 896 -2633 Sound Engineering, Inc. 1902 Commerce Street, Ste. 300 Tacoma, WA 98402 Mr. Jeremy Haug GeoReso rcesj LLC 5007 Pacific Hwy. E., Ste, 20 Fife, Washington 98424 -2648 August 29, 2007 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Creek Road Residential Development NE Creek Road SE Yelm, Washington Job No: Avil a. Creek Rd. RG INTRODUCTION This preliminary report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering and hydrogeologic services for the proposed Creek Road Residential site to be constructed east of NE Creek Road and north of SR 507 in Yeim, Washington. The location of the site is illustrated on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. Our understanding of the project is based on our discussions with you, our review of the documents provided and our experience in the site area. We understand that the site will be developed as a multi - family development with access from both Creek Road and SR 507. The site development will include typical roadways, parking areas, and utilities. We further understand that stormwater infiltration systems are proposed for the site. The exact number and locations of the stormwater systems have not been determined at this time. This report provides preliminary geotechnical engineering recommendations and design criteria, and preliminary storm water infiltration rates for the site, A site plan was not available at the time of our report. We have included a general site layout as Figure 2. Our services were provided at your request. The purpose of our services is to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site to develop geotechnical recommendations and design criteria for the proposed site development, and to determine a preliminary design infiltration rate for on -site stormwater infiltration. Specifically, our scope of services includes the following: 1. Review the available geologic, hydrogeologic and geotechnical data for the site area. 2. Explore the shallow subsurface conditions at the site by monitoring the completion of a series of trackhoe test pits at the site. 3. Collect select soils samples from the explorations, several of which will be submitted for laboratory testing. 4. Address the appropriate geotechnical regulatory requirements for the proposed site development, per any Pierce County requirements. 5. Provide geotechnical recommendations for site grading including site preparation, subgrade preparation, fill placement criteria, suitability of on -site soils for use as structural fill, temporary and permanent cut and fill slopes, and drainage and erosion control measures. .7T 2:007 Avila — Creek Road August 29. 2007 Page 2 5. Provide recommendations and design criteria for conventional foundation and floor slab support, including allowable bearing capacity, subgrade modulus, lateral resistance values and estimates of settlement. Specific criteria can be provided based on your building design loads, if provided. 7. Provide recommendations and design criteria for the design of conventional subgrade/retaining walls, including backfill and drainage requirements, lateral design loads, and lateral resistance values. 8. Provide recommendations for pavement subgrade preparation. 9. Provide our opinion with regard to the feasibility of on -site stormwater infiltration /dispersal, and if appropriate provide individual infiltration rates for each system. 10. Provide appropriate IBC seismic design parameters for the proposed residential structures. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions . The project site is located in the central portion of the Yelm glacial outwash plain. The site is currently developed with a single family residence and trailer in the west, commercial buildings in the southeast with the remaining portions as pasture land. A BPA transmission line traverses the east portion of the site. The area is bounded by existing commercial and residential development and vacant lots. The site has been historically used as agricultural pasture. The southeast portion of the site was recently developed as a commercial building with a infiltration pond to the north. The storm water facilities are approximately 4 to 5 feet below grade. A paved roadway traverses the south portion of the site, related to several commercial properties. Several stockpiles of waste materials are located in the south portion of the site, likely related to previous construction activities. The ground surface at the site is generally flat. We observed a broad drainage swale with localized surface water in the east portion of the site at the time of our reconnaissance. The Swale is identified as Yelm Creek which flows to the south. We understand that a wetland area has been mapped adjacent to the creek. The site is vegetated with pasture grass with scattered brush and isolated evergreen trees. The northwest portion of the site has a cluster of trees. A larger number of trees also occurs along the east drainage swale area. Geologic Conditions The site is situated in the central portion of the Yeim glacial outwash plain. The existing topography, as well as the surficial and shallow subsurface soils in the area, are the result of the most recent Vashon stade of the Fraser glaciation that occurred between about 12,000 and 15,000 years ago, and weathering and erosion that has occurred since that time. A description of the surficial soils is included in the "Site Soils" section of this report. In general the site is underlain by Vashon glacial recessional outwash. The recessional outwash material consists of sandy gravel with cobbles and occasional boulders, and minor silt. The outwash material is in a loose to medium dense condition near the surface (0.5 feet to approximately 2 feet) and becomes medium dense to dense below that depth. Based on our experience in the area, we expect that the site area is underlain by glacial till at depth, likely several 1 0s of feet. Avila — Creek Road August 29. 2007 Page 3 Site Soils The NCRS - SCS (Thurston County Soil Conservation Survey) has mapped the soils in the site area as Spanaway gravelly sandy loam (114) and Span away stony sandy loam (112). Both these soils are described as having a rapid permeability with a "slight' erosion hazard. An isolated area of McKenna gravelly silt (65) is mapped in the Yelm Creek area. The McKenna soils have little or no erosion hazard. A copy of the SCS map is included as Figure 3. We observed no active erosion in the site area during our reconnaissance. Based on our observations, the site soils appear to have little or no susceptibility to erosion, particularly where vegetation is established. Subsurface Conditions The subsurface conditions in the site area were evaluated by reviewing the geologic maps and and monitoring the excavation of test pits at random locations across the site. In general, recessional outwash was encountered to the full depth explored in the ten test pit explorations that extended up to 14.0 feet. The outwash material consisted of sandy gravel with cobbles and occasional boulders. The soil classification method used is included as Figure 4. Copies of the test pit logs area are included Figure 5. Based on our site observations and experience, the soils at the site are generally consistent. A grain size test were performed on a soil sample collected at the likely location and depth of an infiltration system. The grain size tests indicate the soils are poorly graded gravelly sand (SP) with cobbles and boulders. A copy of the grain size test is included in Appendix A. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL Based on our site observations, explorations and laboratory test results, we conclude that the site is suitable for the proposed high density residential development. It is also our opinion that the native site soils are suitable for the infiltration of stormwater, provided additional explorations are completed in the proposed infiltration areas, and the infiltration rates provided herein are confirmed. The Type A soils encountered at the site will allow infiltration of stormwater from both the paved areas and the roof areas of the structures. Based on the soils encountered in the subsurface explorations at the site and our understanding of the proposed site development, conventional earthwork and foundation support is feasible for the project. Pertinent conclusions and preliminary geotechnical recommendations regarding the design and construction of the proposed residential development are presented below. Landslide Hazards No slopes over 15 percent occur at the site. No evidence of soil movement was observed at the site. Seismic Hazards According to the Seismic Zone Map of the United States contained in Figure 16 -2 of the 1997 UBC (Uniform Building Code) and IBC (International Building Code), the project site is located within Seismic Risk Zone 3. Based on the subsurface conditions observed at the site, we interpret the structural site conditions to corresponds with a seismic Soil Profile type Sc, (Site Class "❑ ") as defined by Table 16 -J (UBC) and Table 1615. 1.1 in the 2003 1 BC documents, respectively. These conditions were assumed to Avila - Creek Road August 29, 2007 Page 4 be representative for the conditions beyond the depths explored. Structures located at the site that are constructed in accordance with the appropriate seismic criteria will have the same risk as other designed structures in the Puget Sound area. Erosion Hazards Erosion hazard areas are defined by the City of Yelm as those areas defined by the USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) soil survey maps as having a "slight to moderate" erosion hazard. The subject property is located in an area mapped by the SCS as Spanaway stoney and gravelly sandy loam (114 and 112). It is our opinion that any potential erosion hazard of the site soils during site development is not a limiting factor for the proposed development. Temporary and permanent erosion control measures should be installed and maintained during construction or as soon as practical thereafter to limit the influx of additional water to exposed or disturbed areas. Erosion control measures may include, but should not be limited to, berms and swales with check dams to direct surface water runoff, ground cover/protection in exposed areas and silt fences where appropriate. Graded areas should be shaped to avoid concentrations of runoff onto cut or fill slopes, natural slopes or other erosion - sensitive areas. Temporary ground cove rlprotection such as jute matting, excelsior matting, wood chips or clear plastic sheeting may be used until the permanent erosion protection is established. EARTHWORK The following section of this report addresses our general conclusions and recommendations regarding site preparation, structural fill, and the re -sue of onsite soils. Site Preparation Areas to be graded should be cleared of deleterious matter including any existing structures, foundations, abandoned utility lines, debris and vegetation. The portions of the site still covered with vegetation should be stripped of any organic -laden soils. We anticipate stripping depths to be on the order of 2 to 5 inches, although localized areas of deeper organics may occur in areas of heavy organics or low lying areas. The stripped topsoil may be stockpiled and later used for erosion control and landscapinglrevegetation. The areas of stockpiled material on the south portion of the site should be considered unsuitable. Materials that cannot be used for landscaping or erosion control should be removed from the project site. Where placement of fill material is required, the stripped /exposed subgrade areas should be compacted to a firm and unyielding surface prior to placement of any fill. We recommend that trees be removed by overturning in fill areas so that a majority of the roots are removed. Excavations for tree stump removal should be backfilled with structural fill compacted to the densities described in the Structural Fill section of this report. We recommend that a member of our staff evaluate the exposed subgrade conditions after removal of vegetation and topsoil stripping is completed and prior to placement of structural fill. The exposed subgrade soil should be proofrolled with heavy rubber -tired equipment during dry weather or probed with a 112- inch - diameter steel rod during wet weather conditions. Any soft, loose or otherwise unsuitable areas delineated during proofrolling or probing should be recompacted, if practical, or over- excavated and replaced with structural fill, based on the recommendations of our site representative. Avila - Creek Road August 29, 2007 Page 5 Structural Fill All material placed as fill associated with mass grading or as utility trench backfill should be placed as structural fill. The structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts of appropriate thickness to allow adequate and uniform compaction of each lift. Fill should be compacted to at least 96 percent of MDD (maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM D- 1557). The appropriate lift thickness will depend on the fill characteristics and compaction equipment used. We recommend that the appropriate lift thickness be evaluated by our field representative during construction. We recommend that our representative be present during site grading activities to observe the work and perform field density tests. The suitability of material for use as structural fill will depend on the gradation and moisture content of the soil. As the amount of fines (material passing US No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult to achieve. During wet weather, we recommend use of well- graded sand and gravel with less than 5 percent (by weight) passing the US No. 200 sieve based on that fraction passing the 314 -inch sieve. If prolonged dry weather prevails during the earthwork and foundation installation phase of construction, higher fines content (up to 10 to 12 percent) will be acceptable. Material placed for structural fill should be free of debris, organic matter, trash and cobbles greater than 6- inches in diameter. The moisture content of the fill material should be adjusted as necessary for proper compaction. Suitability of On -Site Materials as Fill During dry weather construction, any nonorganic on -site soil may be considered for use as structural fill; provided it meets the criteria described above in the structural fill section and can be compacted as recommended. If the material is over - optimum moisture content when excavated, it will be necessary to aerate or dry the soil prior to placement as structural fill, We generally did not observe the site soils to be excessively moist at the time of our subsurface exploration program. However, laboratory test results indicated that many of our samples had moisture contents above optimum moisture. The soils at the site generally consist of a fine to coarse sand with gravel, cobbles and boulders. These soils are generally comparable to "common borrow" material and will be suitable for use as structural fill provided the moisture content is maintained within 2 percent of optimum moisture. However, the outwash does appear to have a significant amount of cobbles and boulders, which may require removal in the upper two feet of fill. Care should be taken when placing and compacting granular material over 3 inches in size near utility lines. Fill material within 2 feet of the foundation, slab or roadway subgrades should contain no material greater than 6 inches in size. This will result in localize pressure points and potential cracks in the concrete. All fill material in building and driveway areas should be placed as described in the "Structural Fill" section of this report and compacted to at least 95 percent of the MDD. If fill material is imported to the site for wet weather construction, we recommend that it be clean sand and gravel mixture, such as high quality pit run with less than 5 percent fines, or crushed rock. Cut and Fill Slopes. Avila — Greek Road August 29, 2007 Page S All job site safety issues and precautions are the responsibility of the contractor providing services /work. The following cut/fill slope guidelines are provided for planning purposes only. Temporary cut slopes will likely be necessary during grading operations or utility installation. As a general guide, temporary slopes of 1.5H:1 V (Horizontal: Vertical) or flatter may be used for temporary cuts in the upper 3 to 4 feet of the soils that are weathered to a loose /medium dense condition. Where ground water seepage is encountered, flatter temporary slopes may be required. These guidelines assume that all surface loads are kept at a minimum distance of at least one half the depth of the cut away from the top of the slope and that significant seepage is not present on the slope face. Flatter cut slopes will be necessary where significant raveling or seepage occurs. We recommend a maximum slope of 2H;1 V for permanent cut and fill slopes in areas of medium dense sand and gravel. Where 2HA V slopes are not feasible in these soils, retaining structures should be considered. Where retaining structures are greater than 4 -feet in height (bottom of footing to top of structure) or have slopes of greater than 15 percent above them, they should be engineered. It should be recognized that slopes of this nature do ravel and require occasional maintenance. Where raveling or maintenance is unacceptable, we recommend that flatter slopes or retaining systems be considered, Foundation Support Based on the encountered subsurface soil conditions encountered across the site, we recommend that spread footings for the new residences be founded on medium dense native outwash soils or on structural fill that extends to suitable native soils. The soil at the base of the excavations should be disturbed as little as possible. All loose, soft or unsuitable material should be removed or recompacted, as appropriate. A representative from our firm should observe the foundation excavations to determine if suitable bearing surfaces have been prepared, particularly in the areas where the foundation will be situated in fill material. We recommend a minimum width of 2 feet for isolated footings and at least 16 inches for continuous wall footings for structures of two stories or less. Where taller structures are considered, site specific recommendations for the proposed loads can be developed. All footing elements should be embedded at least 18 inches below grade for frost protection. We recommend a minimum width of 2 feet for isolated footings and at least 16 inches for continuous wall footings. Footings founded as described above can he designed using an allowable soil bearing capacity of 2,504 psf (pounds per square foot) for combined dead and long -term live loads. The weight of the footing and any overlying backfill may be neglected. The allowable bearing value may be increased by one -third for transient loads such as those induced by seismic events or wind loads. Lateral loads may be resisted by friction on the base of footings and floor slabs and as passive pressure on the sides of footings. We recommend that an allowable coefficient of friction of 0.35 be used to calculate friction between the concrete and the underlying soil. Passive pressure may be determined using an allowable equivalent fluid density of 300 pcf (pounds per cubic foot). Factors of safety have been applied to these values. We estimate that settlements of footings designed and constructed as recommended will be less than 1 inch, for the anticipated load conditions, with differential settlements between comparably loaded footings of 112 inch or less. Most of the settlements should occur essentially as loads are being applied. However, Avila - Creek Road August 29. 2007 Page 7 disturbance of the foundation subgrade during construction could result in larger settlements than predicted. Floor Slab Support Slabs -on- grade, if constructed, should be supported on the medium dense native outwash soils or on structural fill prepared as described above. We recommend that floor slabs be directly underlain by a capillary break material with minimum 5 -inch thickness of coarse sand, pea gravel, or gravel containing less than 3 percent fines. The drainage material should be placed in one lift and compacted to an unyielding condition. A synthetic vapor barrier is recommended to control moisture migration through the slabs. This is of particular importance where the foundation elements are underlain by the silty till or lake sediments, or where moisture migration through the slab is an Issue, such as where adhesives are used to anchor carpet or tile to the slab. A thin layer of sand may be placed over the vapor barrier and immediately below the slab to protect the liner during steel and/or concrete placement. A subgrade modulus of 400 kcf (kips per cubic foot) may be used for floor slab design. We estimate that settlement of the floor slabs designed and constructed as recommended, will be 112 inch or less over a span of 50 feet. Pavement and Driveway Subgrade We understand that asphalt pavements will likely be used for the driveways and parking areas. All structural fill should be compacted according to our recommendations given in the "Structural Fill" section. Specifically, the upper 2 feet of soils underlying pavement section should be compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM: D -1557, and all soils below 2 feet should be compacted to at least 90 percent. The subgrade areas should be proof - rolled with a loaded dump truck or heavy compactor to verify that a firm and unyielding surface has been achieved. Any areas where this proof - roiling operation reveals soft, organic, or pumping soils at or closely beneath the pavement subgrade should be overexcavated to a maximum depth of 8 inches and replaced with a suitable structural fill material. Stormwater Infiltration Rates Based on the soils encountered in our preliminary explorations and the results of the grain size tests, we conclude that the infiltration of storm water is feasible at the site. The thick underlying deposits of recessional outwash soils have adequate permeability and storage capacity to infiltrate storm water from the site, provided adequate design, construction and maintenance practices are used. Preliminary storm water infiltration rates for the site soils were determined in accordance with the Yelm/Thurston County Stormwater Manual guidelines, Table 1. Grain size distribution tests were performed on select soil samples collected from the test pits. The results of the grain size test are included in Appendix A. Based on the soils observed in the test pits and the laboratory test results, it is our opinion that a design infiltration rate of 50 inches per hour may be used for the infiltration system if located in the shallow soils, less and 12 feet below the existing site grades. An appropriate factor of safety should be applied to this value. Once the locations of the infiltration systems are determined, additional explorations will be required to verify the soils and the depths. Suspended solids could eventually clog the soil and reduce the infiltration rate for retention ponds or trenches. Because of the potential for clogging, we recommend that an appropriate factor of safety be utilized in the design. To reduce potential clogging of the infiltration systems, the Avila — Creek Road August 29, 2097 Page 8 infiltration ponds or galleries should not be connected to the stormwater runoff system until after construction is complete and the site areas are landscaped and paved. Temporary systems may be utilized through construction, or the pond/trench bottom left a minimum of 1 -foot high during construction and later excavated to the design grade. Periodic sweeping of the paved areas will help extend the life of the infiltration system, LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for Mr, Mike Avila and the project consultants for use in design and construction of the various components of this project. The data and report can be utilized for bidding or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and recommendations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions, as they may vary both vertically and laterally. If there are changes in the locations or assumptions stated for this project, the conclusions and recommendations presented may not be fully applicable. If design changes are made, we should review the proposed changes to verify the applicability of our conclusions and recommendations. Additional explorations will be required in the stormwater infiltration areas. Variations in subsurface conditions are possible between the explorations and may also occur with time. Sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation should be provided by our firm during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those antici- pated, and to evaluate whether earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with contract plans and specifications, Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. No other conditions, expressed or implied, should be understood. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. Please call if you have any questions regarding this submittal, or if we can provide additional services, Yours very truly, GeoResources, LLC BPB: GC: bpb DoclD: Avila,CreekSt.PRG ' � J p Attachments: Figure 1 Figure 2 - Site Plan Figure 3 • NRCS SOS Map Figure 4 • Soil Classification System Figure 5 - Test Pit Logs Appendix A — Grain Size Analysis X, F 'vi- n ; Q Uflm- S Approximate Site Location GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone., 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 T '2 W A H I N G 75 1 rr ?7kv- ft IS E Not to Scale Site Vicinity Map NE Creek Road Yelm, Washington File: Avila.CreekRd I September 2007 1 Figure 1 Aim O T, Al A{51 L nt t1 a U C1 n co CD ol� 7-1 CL ps) d.L n- <11' LLI Of i7 S 0 ILJ uj 0 d, "i rL LLI m I w on- -1 t- J-u U) w I— u- 0 rl- APPROMMAT E LOCAMN OF TEST NT TP-1 M, irll(alv �"Fu LUD 5007 Padic Highway Fast, Suite 20 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone� 253-8%-1011 F�IX: 253-896-2633 NNE Cre-'ek, FRovqddl V e Fn, ii, ',�f K a s h 6 n,,,-, , � ci7 , FIW I —3vpip.wrlomw?-,#PQ7 I F �',g 19 vo 249 A -2Y,'iV 1) 41,51 M i T i7P-7 0 7P-6 M 7P-5 M 7P-8 0 cwvqRap I m, % 7P-4 0 7P-9 9 7PI-10 M 7P-1 M, 7P-2 0 AWN W11 k. 7P-1 0 , 04,4imo Wifavo ORT 45071, W.SIR ot, % APPROMMAT E LOCAMN OF TEST NT TP-1 M, irll(alv �"Fu LUD 5007 Padic Highway Fast, Suite 20 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone� 253-8%-1011 F�IX: 253-896-2633 NNE Cre-'ek, FRovqddl V e Fn, ii, ',�f K a s h 6 n,,,-, , � ci7 , FIW I —3vpip.wrlomw?-,#PQ7 I F �',g 19 vo 249 .- ys s - 1� _ j VHF_.... ;: pp i'..•�'r �. 1 - .`, � �' Lit ' t: - •:f.ti= ••'s:.- Vii; i.:_ R 4. '�- -:. -� - •.;: i�'- :may; ^i:! - �rTr]`0.�`5�[::.'.•_.. _ '.�a '_�[!::•i':�'' -i... - :' ..5; _ F 4o L f,`a,, Ij _ '�': :��: _-F� - � � ;fit•,'.. _ SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM f ' MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP GROUP NAME SYMBOL f GRAVEL GLEAN GW WELL- GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL GRAVEL COARSE GP POORLY- GRADED GRAVEL GRAINED More than 50% SOILS Of Coarse Fraction Retained on GRAVEL GM SILTY GRAVEL No. 4 Sieve WITH FINES GC CLAYEY GRAVEL More than 50% SAND CLEAN SAND SW WELL - GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND Retained on No. 200 Sieve SP POORLY - GRADED SAND More than 50 °/° Of Coarse Fraction SAND SM SILTY SAND Passes' WITH FINES Nc, 4 Sieve Sc CLAYEY SAND SILT AND CLAY INORGANIC ML SILT FINE GRAINED CL CLAY SOILS Liquid Limit Less than 50 ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT AND CLAY INORGANIC MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT More than 50% Passes No. 200 Sieve CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY Liquid Limit 50 or more ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT s HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS � PT PEAT NOTES: SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS: 1, Field classification is based on visual examination of soil Dry- Absence of moisture, dry to the touch in general accordance with ASTM D2488 -90. 2. Soil classification using laboratory tests is based on Moist- Damp, but no visible water ASTM 02487 -90. Wet- Visible free water or saturated, usually soil is 3. Description of sail density or consistency are based on obtained from below water table interpretation of blow count data, visual appearance of soils, and or test data. GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253 -896 -1011 Fax: 253 - 896 -2633 Soil Classification System 3477 Harris Road SE Kitsap County, Washington JOB# WilleyEstates.HarrisRd.USCS I August 2007 Figure 4 Test Pit T.P -I Location: South center of site, south of roadway (See Figure 2) De th ft. Soil Tvioe Descri tion 0.0 - 0.5 TS Sod over Topsoil wl gravel 0.5 - 1,0 SM Dk Brn si SAND wl gravel, cobbles (loose, moist) 1.0-3.0 SP Brown cobbly SAND wl gravel, (loose to med. dense, moist) 3.0-7.0 GP Brn sdy GRAVEL wl cobbles, boulders (med, dense to dense, moist) 7.0-12.0 SP Brn gravelly SAND wl occ. cobbles (dense, moist) Terminated at 12.0 feet below ground surface Minor caving observed No groundwater seepage observed Test Pit TP -2 Location: Bottom of existing pond, north of commercial site (See Figure 2) De th #t. Soli T e Description 0.0-4,0 GP Brn sdy GRAVEL wl cobbles, occ, boulders (dense, moist) 4.0-7.0 GP Brn sdy GRAVEL wl cobbles, boulders (FeO Staining )(dense, moist) 7.0-11.0 SP Brn SAND wl gravel, occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 11.0 feet below the ground surface Minor caving observed No groundwater seepage observed Test Pit TP -3 Location: South Center, North of roadway by fence (See Figure 2) Depth ft. Soil T _ype Descr otion 0.0 - 1.0 TS Sod over Topsoil wl gravel 1.0-2.0 S Dk Brn si SAND wl gravel, cobbles (loose, moist) 2.0 - 8.0 GP Brown cobbly GRAVEL wl sand, boulders (loose to dense, moist) 8.0-12.5 SP Brn gravelly SAND wl occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 1215 feet below the ground surface Moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed GeoResources, LLC Test Pit Logs 5007 Pacific highway East, Suite 20 NW Corner Yelm Avenue SE & Creek Street Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253- 896 -1011 Yelm, Washington Fax: 253 -896 -2633 JOB: C�evelopmentatYelm .YelmSCornersRetaii.TR May 2007 Figure 5 Test Pit TP-4 Location: Ctr east pasture area (SEE Figure 2) De th Otj Soil Tvpe Descri Lion 0.0 - 1.0 TS Sod over Topsoil wl gravel 1.0 - 1.5 SM Dk Brn si SAND wl gravel, cobbles (loose, moist) 1.5 - 7.0 GP Brown sdY_GRAVEL.w/ cobbles, boulders (loose to dense, moist) TO-11.5 SP Qrg Brn gravelly SAND 4 occ. cobbles (Min. FeO Stain)(dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 11.5 feet below the ground surface Minor caving observed No groundwater seepage observed, but FeO staining 8 to 10 ft. .° Gf Location.- NE corner by wetland area (SEE Figure 2) Test Pit TP -5 0.0 - 1.0 TS 1.0-4.0 SM 4.0-14,0 SP . };v Sod over Topsoil wl gravel, occ. cobbles Drk Brn si SAND wl gravel, cobbles, boulders (12 — 16 inches) (loose -to m. dense, moist to wet) (appears to perch water t east) Qrg Brn SAND';wl gravel, occ. cabbies (med. dense to dense, moist) Terminated at 14.0 feet below the ground surface Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed, but wet @ 1.5 to 2.5 ft. 41i Test Pit TP -6 Location: NW corner of east pasture (SEE Figure 2) De th ft. Soil T yQe Description 0.0-0.8 TS Sod over Topsoil wl gravel, occ. cobbles 0.8-2.0 GM Dk Brn si GRAVEL wl cobbles, occ. boulders (loose to m. dense, moist) 2.0-5.0 GP Brn sdy GRAVEL wl occ. cobbles /boulders (med. dense to dense, moist) 5.0 - 11.5 SP Brn gravelly SAND wl occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 11.5 feet below the ground surface Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed Logged by BPS GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253 -896 -1011 Fax: 253 - 895 -2633 Test Pit Logs Creek Street Development Yelm, Washington JOB: Avila.CreekSUP August 2007 Figure 5 Test Pit TP -7 Location: East of trailer house, NE corner of site (SEE Figure 2) De th ft, Soil Type Descri tion 0.0 - 1.0 TS Sod over Topsoil wl gravel, occ. cobbles 1.0 - 2.0 SM Drk Brn si SAND wl gravel, cobbles, boulders (12 – 16 inches) (loose to m. dense, moist) 2.0-65 GP Drg Brn sdy GRAVEL wl occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) 6.5-10.5 SP Brn gravelly SAND wl cobbles, occ, boulders (dense, moist) Terminated at 10.5 feet below the ground surface Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed Test Pit TP -8 Location: NW corner of site, pasture (SEE Figure 2) 0.0-1.0 TS Sod over Topsoil wJ gravel, occ. cobbles 1.0.1.5 SM Drk Brn si SAND wl gravel, cobbles, boulders (12 inches) (m, dense, moist) 1.5-55 GP Brn sdy GRAVEL wl occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) 5.5 - 9.5 SP Brn gravelly SAND wl cobbles, occ. boulders (dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 9.5 feet below the ground surface Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed Test Pit TP -9 Location: Southwest pasture area, 100 feet from house (SEE Figure 2) Depth ft. Soil T -Ype Descri tion 0-0-1.0 TS Sod over Topsoil wl gravel, occ. cobbles 1.0 - 1.5 SM Drk Brn si SAND wl gravel, cobbles, boulders (loose to m. dense, moist) 1.5-50 GP Brn sdy GRAVEL wJ occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) 5.0-9.0 SP Brn gravelly SAND wl cobbles, occ. boulders (dense, moist to damp) Terminated at 9.5 feet below the ground surface Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253- 896 -1011 Fax: 253 - 896 -2633 Test Pit Logs NW Corner Yelm Avenue SE & Creek Street Yel m, Washington JOB: DevelopmentatYelm .Yelm5CornersRetail.TP May 2a-07 Figure 5 Fast Pit TP -1 0 Location: South pasture area, 50 feet fence (SEE Figure 2) Depth (ft.) Soil Type Descri Lion 0.0-0.5 TS Sod over Topsoil wl gravel, occ. cobbles 0.5- 1,5 SM Drk Srn si SAND wl gravel, cobbles, boulders (loose to m. dense, moist) 1.5-55 GP 8m sdy GRAVEL wl occ. cobbles (dense, moist to damp) 5.5-11.0 SP Bm gravefly SAN w/ cobbles, occ. boulders {dense, moist to damp} Terminated at 9.5 feet below the ground surface Minor to moderate caving observed No groundwater seepage observed GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 20 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253- 896 -1011 Fax: 253 - 895 -2633 Test Pit Logs NW Corner Yelm Avenue SE & Creek Street Yelm, Washington JOB: Developmentatyelm ,Yalm5OornersRetail.TP May 2007 Figure 5 APPENDIX "Ap$ S 50,07 Pacific Highlivay E, SLHi to 20 ifs, _01A. 98424 Weight Retained GeoResources LLC 01 f ice (253)896-1011 Fw (253) 895 -2533 Cumulative I l Passed Grain Size Analysis 4' Project Number: Avila.CreekSt Date Sampled: 811712007 Project Name: Creek Street Residential Plat Sampled by: BPS Client: Mike Avila Date Tested Sample ID, S., Tested by. bpb Description, 100,0% Test. pit sarn Ple, baq TP 3 932.5 �Screen Weight Retained Percentage Specif ication Summary Individual Cumulative Retained l Passed Max Min. 4' rem 100.0% 1 70.2% Coarse 10.9_% Fine 3.1 -71 _12" rem 0.0 100.0 °I° rem -1.0't.. 100,0% 34" 932.5 70.2% 29.8 °I° 318" 100.1 1 77,7% 22.3% #4 45.3 81.1% 18.9% #10 26.2 -1.19-41- 83.1% 16.9% 2.0% Coarse 11.4 I° Medium 41% Fine 17.8x9= - 420 663 .1-1 70A 88. 1% 11.9% #40 85.7 `Agsd.f_ 946% 5,4% #60 36.0 97.3% 2,7% #100 13A 98.3% 1.7% #200 5.0 ::131 Q. 98.6% 1,41% 1.4.% I FlW. an 095 = 33•55 D50 = 24,324 Dis = 1,5671 0,, = 26,959 D,, = 19-053 D,, = 0.7257 Cu = 372 Cc = 18-56 USCS Classdicatiom I Dust Ratio 0,251 Moisture % 2.9% Sand Equivalent ­ 17_1 q.na NOW ME III 1111�11 Um� II �� I ­ 17_1 q.na Input Data: 4" Wet + Tare 1551.1 Dry + Tare ...151 ?.7 Tare 1.84.4 AW + Tare .149.:9 After Wash 1313.5 - #200 % #10 2 Dry Weight 1328.3 Depth: 0.425 Moisture 2.9% eve Izes 4" Tar 3" 75 1 -112" 37.5 314" 19 318" 9.5 #4 4.75 #10 2 #20 0.85 #40 0.425 #60 0.25 #100 0.15 #200 0.075 Gravel - Sand 4.75 0 4.75 100 Sand - Silt 0.075 0 0.075 100 R�icari nn 1�- 1:i[1fi Parameters: D85 D60 D50 D30 015 D10 33.54715 26.95907 24.32383 19.05337 - - 1 .567145 - - 0.725674 LeA4,* 7r :a ti - • ,. '.` � '.�:. .fit ��T � '.. ..-- r. :��•. 'p�� �� rr ''per• r•i,.�.�: • �r. F .�_af. ^_ j� �.. {dr :. �.7'.' - _ ',� ! j � �. r� :�..'F`�t� jy�.F. .�•cP, 9��j�.�_S��y' � �. .�i- ..- r } . i j, .� I•' �'I;• -, Y �� � �'�s; t yr, TM# .�'i� +ii . � r JL Fi 14, •1 S i• t.'�i1},1 's!. �.i •, :v i� f,' �� 4•j;:. pp •i� Y i � f r 'fie � f. August 26, 2007 WETLAND REVIEW AND DELINEATION PARCEL #64303400400 NW 1/4, NW '/4, SECTION 29 (17N -2E) Prepared for: Mike Aviiia Pacific Rim Real Estate 315 39t�' Ave SK Suite 8 Puyallup WA 98373 I__ Wetlands __Forest Management GPS Services Consulting 204 Senn Rd Chehalis WA 98532 Qf x*JFax: 360 -262 -9225 Home 360- 262 -3846 Mobile: 360- 520 -0479 E -mail: g -qjonesQbcalaccess.com FOREST PRO, INC. August 26, 2007 City of Yelm Attn: Grant Beck P D Box 479 Yelm WA 98597 RE: Wetland Review and Delineation Dear Mr Beck: On Saturday, August 25"', 1 reviewed a site as requested by Mike Avilla, Pacific Rim Real Estate. They are planning on developing the property. He had checked with Pierce County Planning and found the site mapped as having "hydric soils ". The parcel number is 64303400400 in the NW ' /a, NW '/4, Section 29 (17N -2E) at 10520 Creek Rd SE in Yelm. ON SITE: The property is mostly pasture with two residences and outbuilding on the west end of the property. Yelm Creek, a type "S" flows northwesterly through the east end of the parcel. Upon reviewing the area described and having completed training based on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual Technical Report Y -87 -1 (1987 Manual), as provided for in the training materials developed in conjunction with Section 307 (e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 for Wetland Delineator Certification Program, I found said parcel to have jurisdictional wetlands. DETERMINATION METHOD- 'Routine ", Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (1997) No. 96- 94. SOILS: The soils are mapped as poorly drained "hyddd" #110 Mckenna gravelly ashy loam and somewhat excessively drained #110 Spanaway gravelly sandy loam. Mckenna is moderately deep to dense till formed in glacial drift in depressions and drainage ways. Spanaway formed in very strongly weathered ancient glacial drift on glacial hills, terraces and terrace escarpments. Soil pits #1 and 3 are in Mckenna and #2 and 4 are in Spanaway. Soil pits marked with blue painted T wooden stakes and blue flagging. HYDROLOGY: I found indicators of hydrology to be at or within 12" of the soil surface in the area designated as wetlands. See drawing. VEGETATION: Vegetation plots are marked with green painted T wooden stakes and green flagging. See attached pictures and data forms. CONCLUSION: Per Yelm City Critical Areas 14-08. 100 Wetland Review/Identification Procedures: WETLAND: The area designated as wetland meets the hydrology, soils and vegetation requirements of Jurisdictional Wetlands. The bvetland boundary marked with red/ orange painted 3' wooden stapes and pink flagging. CATEGORIZATION: Per Washington State Department of Ecology's Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington #1504 -06 -025, the wetland is a Class IV Wetlands. See attached rating forms. BUFFER: Per Yelm City Critical Areas 14.08. 100 (F) 6a "Standard Buffer Widths ", Class IV, the Wetland Buffer Width is 50 feet with the possibility of reduction as allowed under 14.08. 100 (F) Bd "Wetland Buffer Width Averaging ", with a minimum of 75% or 35 feet, whichever is greater, Please call with any q estions or comments. Greg Jones, President Enclosures: Wetland Dravring Maps: Vicinity Map County Ortho /Parcel Map County Wetland Map Contour Map Soils Map Wetland Data Form Wetlands Rating Photos Qualifications cc: Mike Avilla, Pacific Rim Real Estate ' Wetland Delineation Forestry Services 244 Senn Rd Chehalis WA 98532 Office /Fax: 360 -262 -9226 Mobile: 520 -0479 dome. 360- 262 -3806 E -mail: g- cjones @localaccess.com GPS Services 1 1 V w � � o v; Wr• ►41. b` q a M rn X 4 ��; a� � t�i � r • V d � '�G YYff 7i'i1 U U F b c � x W 00 O'w p N Y a m r o z m OLII = w CD x no H r 5 E a LU Q C e W U m0 7L fl� Vi N } n L L 9 D A PAAPQVES'T 10520 Creek St Se Yelm WA 98597 -9610 US Notes: Only text visible within note field will Iprint. MAPQUEST S � 3 V it �: �`•s f i�k� �.�� `�� L ,, W 07 h �• 1: G[ ccm Ln SP - -- a 55 c 3 L% f u t h y'•, G 1 z- L•1 L ti Five Carnerx l; 1If,IS plffi�l;lf�l! f1n1� -, -,t It,: Safest tim,niti of dw v) -drive, it s lu1'? tr,r Driver's Ed for the Real World - f I MAPU ►OT rid Allstate. ` =14M m **Kl V.� c 7� 3 AI4 rights reserv-ed. Use Subject to License Cop riclht This map is informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. MapQuest and its supplier; assume no responsibility For any loss or delay resulting from such use, http: llwww. mapquest. cornlmapslprint. adp? mapdata= p5kgyoo6yZJXrA0gPL1aVW2MI21p..• 8/28/2007 s� !C31i,4v: Sz r .s IA Five Carnerx :. •ate: .zr'. u �n FT1��7r 4�� �r c 7� 3 AI4 rights reserv-ed. Use Subject to License Cop riclht This map is informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. MapQuest and its supplier; assume no responsibility For any loss or delay resulting from such use, http: llwww. mapquest. cornlmapslprint. adp? mapdata= p5kgyoo6yZJXrA0gPL1aVW2MI21p..• 8/28/2007 I 1 V -.1 - - - - - Q s R • 5A3D?AflD10 fl[At571EIt "v OR � i M6—L. .. tw f43T1t AVE 5E + . -,t aA34]•10aGa4 - 4i34.71443i7� � - r di,vlatmer Thurston Counn males e) en ef]brl to ensure that this map is a true and accurate re pre sentalwn ol'the aorA of Co unit go'<emment However, the Count} and a!I LEGEND related NrsonneI male ix? uarram5 - ezpresccd or itnplred, regarding the ace urm :y- cmnplCt;ness or con+cnienee of am information disclosed otT this map Nor does the Counn 8434 .14"40 arrrph liability for and damage or injure caused by the use of this rnsp / •./ i+I31 ?i P aid: Thurston County Ma � erw c* � � • ese:gaonea4 r; , a7�... � r -aaouo +cog • �- �� 6�acfevaaoo _ iA]P7�4a347 a3e7aoavraa f liable far any dhrcci. i Lid iract, incidental, special or con.;e juential damages thaT result from �"� - ZonL g the use of. or the imbiIih to use. Thurston Counti materials ' -= �? our-: r 2007 - Thurston Count) GeoData Cenlei i e`3r a3 C', ties 2404 }lcritageCourt 5W, 3rd Floor YTr3G,1a1at jf +Y X 0- ••f :7 ., ,. 6�5 ?3�'l0301 Q s R • 5A3D?AflD10 fl[At571EIt "v OR � i M6—L. .. tw f43T1t AVE 5E + . -,t aA34]•10aGa4 - 4i34.71443i7� � - r di,vlatmer Thurston Counn males e) en ef]brl to ensure that this map is a true and accurate re pre sentalwn ol'the aorA of Co unit go'<emment However, the Count} and a!I LEGEND related NrsonneI male ix? uarram5 - ezpresccd or itnplred, regarding the ace urm :y- cmnplCt;ness or con+cnienee of am information disclosed otT this map Nor does the Counn 8434 .14"40 arrrph liability for and damage or injure caused by the use of this rnsp / •./ i+I31 ?i P aid: Y' O- d zones= To the fullest extenh pennissible pursuant to applicable ia„ • Thurston Counn drsclarms all rtcr3ds %%arrantres. express or implied- including but not limited ho, implied % arranues of lnerchant ;.t $Egg �Gdia5 ahilrty- date fitness for a particular purpose, and non - infringements oi' proprretan rights gt ,v7Rlg Linder no circumstances. including. but not Limited to. negligence- shall Thurston Counh be liable far any dhrcci. i Lid iract, incidental, special or con.;e juential damages thaT result from �"� - ZonL g the use of. or the imbiIih to use. Thurston Counti materials ' -= �? our-: r 2007 - Thurston Count) GeoData Cenlei i e`3r a3 C', ties 2404 }lcritageCourt 5W, 3rd Floor '' t Olympia, N1r198.it}? -Lip31 ?':'eland Euff�rs F11'Cei= http : / /geomap I .geodata.org /servlet/com.esri. esrimap. Esrimap ?ServiceName= cadastralov &C... 7/9/2007 .rte - -- - - - - - -- r - r -r - - --aD Wallow; Me 94]974trEtw M7atC9:G2 E P_73ct4S_39 "V74186M GsaQ7►9QSPs ICGTN AVE SE cr.TPewas9a Giz9a2acsGa ,Al Tburs 6 en Countv Map accurate reprr;sentation of the W ork of County gof ernment Hoaner. tiro Count) and all "vr4 related personnel 'nal.e no i %arrant%. expressed or iraplr2d- regarding the accuran. Q;97d4Q9694 X N/ I•Tajor Rnad-s F=God Zorie-1 aceepi IiabiIiI% 1'or an% damage or injun caused h) the use of this map rN ..: T the fullest cxtenr permissible pursuant to applicable tau•, Thurston County drsciaims all Reads %%wrantres. cxpres or implied including- but not 1nTf iced to. implied %tarranties of merchant �7CM1dM abiIii% - data fitness fur a parrrcular purpose, and rnon- infringements of prop rietan rights �C °B�Y15 Under rio circumstances, mcIudin2. but nor Iin7lted to. negligence. shall Thurston Counn he $G0390QGT99 �A C'= C'a c the ttse nf, or the i nab t110 to we. Thurston Countx materials 4t7rai5P:i4 ;i 3P7A992d2 11 iai .i . C 2007 - Thurston Countx CieoDaia Center z,37aCtiP99C • f i ntr r Olympia, WA 98302 -6031 "•'_11and FT11yers Parr ?]c ELESGPG�BP4 t�i307t��1 21T3 @tf81Ci pj 11 t x u U u W r n a! tars or: 6 G_art Wallow; Me 94]974trEtw M7atC9:G2 E P_73ct4S_39 "V74186M GsaQ7►9QSPs ICGTN AVE SE cr.TPewas9a Giz9a2acsGa ,Al z:Tmiaaeaa cR:Qaneo � 2$b{i DiscIarrrier. Thurston Count? makes c�,cr% efi'nn to ensure dial [firs map is a true and accurate reprr;sentation of the W ork of County gof ernment Hoaner. tiro Count) and all LEGEND related personnel 'nal.e no i %arrant%. expressed or iraplr2d- regarding the accuran. completeness or cum emence of am inEirrmation disclosed on this map Nor does the Caunn X N/ I•Tajor Rnad-s F=God Zorie-1 aceepi IiabiIiI% 1'or an% damage or injun caused h) the use of this map T the fullest cxtenr permissible pursuant to applicable tau•, Thurston County drsciaims all Reads %%wrantres. cxpres or implied including- but not 1nTf iced to. implied %tarranties of merchant Weer B � cues abiIii% - data fitness fur a parrrcular purpose, and rnon- infringements of prop rietan rights �C °B�Y15 Under rio circumstances, mcIudin2. but nor Iin7lted to. negligence. shall Thurston Counn he liable l'or am direct- indirect. incidental, special or consequential damages That result Froin �A C'= C'a c the ttse nf, or the i nab t110 to we. Thurston Countx materials 11 iai .i . C 2007 - Thurston Countx CieoDaia Center i •' "1 r•it, 24W 1ieritage Count Sw, 3rd Floor f i ntr r Olympia, WA 98302 -6031 "•'_11and FT11yers Parr ?]c http; Ilceomap 1. geodata.org /servlet/com. esri .esriniap. Esri map ?Sery iceNamc= cadastralov &C... 7/9/2007 % 1969 'r •, • BSI! � _ ■ • i ■ 01901 ■+ ■■ ■ ■■ r J e• ■'■ t ' i or �?l� ''ti' ■ _ ■ ■ ■ a m p ■ it La Ir ■ ■, ■ y i •iM ■ ■ _ Rey. ■ r � ■ ■ ■ -- ---__ ■ ti, *r � : ` ■■ mum ' ■ �_ , �4th� tE Meld + 'r •■ ■ 1 tir , • SITE ■ tir. X 3b ■r f507 ■ • ■ OF .'••_.`• • _ ' Garner$ : a • 1129 r _ 30 I ' s ■ ■ I : Q k• ■E o r. ■ 1 I ■ L . AD ■ ■ - ■ ; ■ 4] ■ �/ ■ Lif r ■ ■ - - H$rr�meesmith �7 r -�_�_ 1►' + htetrc Field, r•r'` f r -� . r� ` scale 1 : ■1,606 I" — 1000 e IV 2002 DaLornr. )CMmp® 3.3. Drt■ mpy ight oleonsvtl o n■r. Z4mm Lwd: I" Datum: WGSS■ P I■ 217 sm au 590 �• Morz L ail— z ol ' ° °. ' m Cl) u cn 0 F 1.11 , Ir 1) f - . F : ? - r k a I VIM lu �iyrypu 77 If I f)191120 51 790 cr �s I Ew2 57 JT70 5 is 5191980 51 056 51 120 57 fB0 cn 2� =r 0 DATA FORM - ROUTNIE Yv"ETLAND (1987 COE V }JeV ands DeHneaUcn f4anua�) ProjectlSite: AvillaNelm Date: 8/2512007 Investigator: Jones/Helm Stratum Indicator Rumex crispus County: Thurston Do normal circumstances exist at the site: YES Plot ID: # 1 Is the site significantly disturbed (atypic a( situation) ?: NO Community ID: Is the area a potential problem area ?: NO Transect ID: V'EGE7ATEON Stratum: T -tree, Sp- sapling, Sh- shrub, Yhj- +rood;. vire, H -herb Dominant Plant Species Stratum.. Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Rumex crispus H FAC+ Polygonurn lapathifolium H FACW Leuanthemum vulgare H NI Texture 0 -6" A Agrostis gigantea H FAC Gravelly ashy loam 6 -16" Bw11 Bw2 Check all Indicators that apply & exptain below- None Regional knowledge of plant communities X Wetland plant list(nat'I or regional) X Physiological or reproductive adaptations Morphological adaptions Technical Literature X Wetland Plant Data Base Percent of Dominant Species that are DBL,FACW, or FAC(exctuding FAC -) 94% Rationa;0lRemar':s- Heavily grazed field Hydroph,dic Vegetation Present? YES wvna�n� nr;v -- - - Recorded data available? {If yes, describe in remarks} Field 0i serrviations. Depth of Surface Water Depth to Free Water in Pit: Depth to Saturated Soil Wetland Hydrology indicators: Primary Indicators: X Inundated X Saturated X12" SURFACE _Water Darks SURFACE _Drift Lines 15"+ ,Sediment Deposits X Drainage Patterns Check all that apply & explain below Other- Stream, Lake or gage data Aerial photographs. Secondary Indicators f2 reauiredl: Oxidized Root Channels < 12" Water - Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data FAC- Neutral Test Other(explain In remarks) RationallRemarks: Wetland Hydrology Present? YES SOILS Map Unit Name: 465 Mckenna Drainage Class: Poorly (series and phase) Gravelly ashy loam Confirmed dapped Type? Yes Taxonomy (subgroup). Aqandic Epiaquepts Profile Desription: Histosol X Reduced Conditions Organic Streaking in Sandy Solis Matrix Mottle Mottle _Listed on National Hydric Soils List Depth (in -) Horizon Color Color Abundance/Contrast Texture 0 -6" A 10YR 211 None Hydric Soils Present? YES Is this Gravelly ashy loam 6 -16" Bw11 Bw2 10YR 311 None Gravelly ashy loam myaric Soli Indicators- Histosol X Reduced Conditions Organic Streaking in Sandy Solis Histic Epipedon X Gleyed or Low Chroma X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Sulfidic Odor — Concreations _Listed on National Hydric Soils List x Aquic Moisture Regine _High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _Other (explain in remarks) RationaielRemarks: Hydric Soils Present? YES ''HETLANI'D DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES Wetland Hydrology Present? YES Hydric Soils Present? YES Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland ?: YES Rationale/Remarks: I 11 DATA FORM e ROUT P,9E WETLAND DE e ERPAINATMH �I Q-37 C CE !�!edEtno s W nazdon Rfizn ua G Project/Site: AvillaNelm Date: 8/25/2007 lnvestigator: Jones/Helm Stratum Indicator. County: Thurston Do normal circumstances exist at the site: YES Plot #D: # 2 is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation) ?: NO Community 0: Is the area a potential problem area ?: NO Transect ID: 11ECsETATION Stratum: T•tree, Sp-sapling, Sh- shrub, ihr -woody vine. H- here}) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Iloomiriant Plant Species Stratum Indicator. Agrostis capillaris H FAC Crepis setosa H FACU Leuanthemum vulgate H NI Avena fatua H NOL Spergulana rubra H FAC - Check all indicators that apply & explain belm,: Regional knowledge of plant communities X Wetland plant tist(nat'l or regional) X Physiological or reproductive adaptations Morphological adaptions Technical Literature X Wetland Plant Data Base Percent of Dominant Species that are 08L,FACW, or FAC(excluding FAC -) 40% RationalelRemarks. Heavily grazsd field Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? NO saMPns rsra Recorded data available? (If yes, describe in remarks) Field Observations: Depth of Surface Water. Depth to Free Water in Pit Depth to Saturated Soil: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundated _Saturated < 12' None Water Marks 16'+ Drift Lines 16'+ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns Check all that apply & explain below: Other: Stream, Lake or gage data. Aerial photographs- Secondary Indicators f2 reauiredl: Oxidized Root Channels X12' Water- Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data FAC - Neutral Test Other(explain in remarks) Rational/Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Present? NO SOILS Map Unit Name: #110 Span away Drainage Class: Somewhat excessively (series and phase) Gravelly sandy loam Confirmed Mapped Type? Yes Taxonomy (subgroup). Typic Melanoxerands Profile Desription: Depth (in.) Horizon Matrix I Color Mottle Color Mottle AbundancelContrast Texture 0.15" A 10YR 211 None _Concreations Gravelly sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosoi _Reduced Conditions _Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Histic Epipedon _Gleyed or Low Chrome Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ SAdic Odor _Concreations _Listed on National Hydric Soils List _Aquic Moisture Regine _High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _Other (explain in remarks) RationalelRemarks: Hydric Soils Present? NO WETLAND DETEiRM i NATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? NO Wetland Hydrology Present? NO Hydric Soils Present? NO RationalelRemarks Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland ?: NO DATA FORM - ROUTHE (9987 COE Wetlands DeflneaVon I'Aanua9) Project/Site: AvillaNelm Bate: 8125/2007 Investigator: Jones/Heim Agrostis capiilaris H County: Thurston Do normal circumstances exist at the site YES Plot 10: # 3 Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation) ?: NO Community ID: Is the area a potential problem area ?: NO Transect ID: VEGETATION Stratum: T -tree, 5p- sapling, Sh- shrub, Wv- vJoodyvine, H -hzrb] Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Agrostis capiilaris H FAC Plantago lanceolata H FAC Leuanthemum vulgare H NI Cichorium capillaris H NI Agrostis gigantea H FAC Gravelly ashy loam 6 -16" Check all indicators that apply 3 explain below: 10YR 311 None Regional knowledge of plant communities X Wetland plant list(nat'I or regional) X Physiological or reproductive adaptations Morphological adaptions Technical Literature X Welland Plant Data Base Percent of Dominant Species that are OSL,FACW, a FAC (excluding FAC -) 51% Rationale/Remarks: Heavily grazed field Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES HYDROLOGY — Record-A data available? Wetland Hydrology Indicators: (if yes, describe in remarks) Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators (2 required)_ Field Observations: Depth of Surface Water: Depth to Free Water in Pit: Depth to Saturated Soil: X Inundated X Saturated X12" SURFACE —Water Marks SURFACE —Drift Lines 116' + "+ — Sediment Deposits X Drainage Patterns Check all that apply & explain below Other: Stream, Lake or gage data Aerial photographs: — Oxidized Root Channels X12" _Water- Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data FAC - Neutral Test — Other(explain in remarks) Rational)Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Present? YES SOILS -- Map unit blame: #65 Mckenna Drainage Class: Poorly (series and phase) Gravelly ashy loam Confirmed Mapped Type? Yes Taxonomy (subgroup): Agandic Epiaquepts Profile Desription: _Organic Streaming in Sandy Soils Histic Epipedon X Gleyed or Low Chroma X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Matrix Mottle Mottle _Other (explain in remarks) Depth (in.) Horizon Color Color AbundancelContrast Texture 0-8" A 10YR 211 None Gravelly ashy loam 6 -16" 8w118w2 10YR 311 None Gravelly ashy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol X Reduced Conditions _Organic Streaming in Sandy Soils Histic Epipedon X Gleyed or Low Chroma X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Sulfidic Odor _Concreations —Listed on National Hydric Soils List X Aquic Moisture Regine _High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _Other (explain in remarks) Rationale/Remarks: Hydric Soils Present? YES WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES Wetland Hydrology Present? YES Hydric Soils Present? YES Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland ?: YES RationalelRemarks DATA 17URN - ROUT NE WETLAND DETER NVINI� TMN Q1987 COE Wletan is Deflinea lon ManuiO) ' Project /Site: AvillaJYelm Date: 8!2512007 Investigator: Jones/Helm County: Pierce Oo normal circumstances exist at the site: YES Plot ID: 44 1 is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situatian)7 NO Community ID: Is the area a potential problem area?: NO Transeci ID: VEGETATION Stratum: T -tree, Sp- sapling, Sh• shrub, tft-woody vine, H•herb) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator (Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Agrostis capiilans H FAC Crepis setosa H FACU Leuanthemum vulgare H NI Texture 0 -6. A A roslis gigantea H FAG Gravelly sandy loam 6 -10, A Check all indicators that apply & explain below: None Regional knowledge of plant communities X Wetland plant list(nat'I or regional) X Physiological or reproductive adaptations 10YR 313 Morphological adaptions Technical Literature x Wetland Plant Data Base Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL,FACW, or FAC(excluding FAC -) 59% Rationale/Remarks : Heavily grazed field Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES HYDROLOGY - �- Recorded data available? Wetland Hydrology Indicators: (1f yes, describe in remarks) Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators (2 required): Field Observaticns: Depth of Surface Water: Depth to Free Water in Pit Depth to Saturated Soil: _ Inundated Saturated X12' None Water Marks 1611+ ,Drift Lines 16 "+ — Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns Check all that apply & explain below: Other: Stream, Lake or gage data. Aerial photographs: _Oxidized Root Channels X12" Water - Stained Leaves _Local Soil Survey Data _FAC- Neutral Test — Other(expiain in remarks) RationallRemarks: Wetland Hydrology Present? NO SOILS Map Unit ;name: #110 Spanaway Drainage Class: Somewhat excessively (series and phase) Gravelly sandy loam Confirmed flapped Type? Yes Taxonomy (subgroup) Typic 10elanoxerands Profile Desription: Reduced Conditions _Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Histic Epipedon ,Gleyed Matrix Mottle Mottle Depth (in -) Horizon Color Color Abundance /Contrast Texture 0 -6. A 10YR 212 None Gravelly sandy loam 6 -10, A 1CYR 312 None Is this Sampling Point !Within a Wetland ?: NO Gravelly sandy loam 10 -16' 10YR 313 None Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Reduced Conditions _Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Histic Epipedon ,Gleyed or Low Chrome Listed on Local Hydric Soils List w Sulfidic Odor ,Concreations _Listed on National Hydric Soils List _Aquic Moisture Regine —High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Solt: _Other (explain in remarks) RationalelRemarks: Hydric Soils Present? NO V+IETLLA *ID DETERMINATIOM Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? NO Wetland Hydrology Present? NO Hydric Soils Present? NO Is this Sampling Point !Within a Wetland ?: NO RationalelRemarks: Name of wetland (if known): + &w0,. r1J Location: SEC: 'll VNSHP: JRNGE: 2e(attach m2P with outline of wetland to rating forth) Person(s) Rating Wetland: I,�ke C liation: Date of site visit: j;- �� tin . � l �� �■� �� Ei. :� i Caategazy besed on FUNCITUP s pro-Aded by wedind m IV ' Category I = Score x74 Category II = Score 51-69 Category III = Score 30-50 Category IV = Score < 30 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOTAL score for functions C -Itegerry bored on SPECLA-L CAC ERIS ICS Off rvefla®d I KA Doem moat Apply Find (Category (ebeeje tte - N6gihest" cctegnry+ from alb®ve) Check the CPPVGPX'ate ayPe mmd CIMO Of 71mt9 =d Mma mted. t� I t- IVO2- aW Itatn Form � - west+em Washingwn �a I I s August 2004 Dos the wet2and big Mted meVzhny off the ciltewis POej®c -v" If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. To coOa fete the next Rgrl o the 49ta sheet-you will need to determine the H r o eomo hoc Class of the wed and beip Z rated The hydrogeomotphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be &termined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed ianstmctions on classifying wetlands. Wetland ][sating Form -- western Washington 2 August. 2004 ClassMeateort of Vegetated Welllands Tor Western wfls�[Qg an Wetland Name: � lei�� ��>rtz � Date- 1. AWhe water levels in the wetland usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during hoods)? O F - go to 2 YES — the wetland class is TidsO Mage ' If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual lode flow below 0.5 ppt (karts per thousand)? YES — Freshwater Tida9 Fringe NO — Sa9tweler Tidal Fringe (Estuarri ne) If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the towns for Riverine ' wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estm arisae wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal ]Fringe in the I- lydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). 2. I�,the- topography within the wetland flat and precipitation is only source (>90 %) of water to it. NC� ! go to 3 YES — The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for 1Depa-essi0fmn8 wetlands. 3. Does the wetland meet both of the following criteria? .The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8 ha) are permanently inundated (ponded or flooded); At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m)? N — go to 4 AYES — The wetland class is Uke-fringe nge (Lacu3trine Fringe) 4. oes the wetland meet nol of the following criteria? The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), The ester flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a Swale without distinct banks. The water leaves the wetland ivitbout beiaBg impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocla( depressions are usually <3ft diameter and less than ]foot deep). N go to 5 YES — The wetland class is Slope 5. Is the wetland in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river? The flooding should occur at least once every two years, on the average, to answer `yes. " The wetland can contain depressions that are filled with water when the fiver is not flooding. NO - go to 6 'rYES a wetland class is Ravesine '• Wetland Rating Form - westem Washing= II 11 August 2004 6. Is the wetland in a topographic depression in which eater ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland NO —go to 7 YES — The wetland class is tl epTwsaem &B 7. Is the wetland located in a very flat aria vv7ith no obvious deprmion and -no Stream or rider running through it and providing water. The wetland seems to be maintained by high groundwater is the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obviates natural outlet. NO — go to 8 YES — The wetland class is ®epjrerslca 9 8. Your wetland seems to be difficult to classify. For e�m mple, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. betimes we find characteristics of several different hydrogeomorphic classes within one wetland boundary. Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several l" GM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland being rated. If the area of the second class is less than 10% classify the wetland using the f'm class. If you are tenable atilt to determine which of the alcove criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as lDep s6oaW for the rating. Iwetland Rating Form - westrn Washington u August 2004 R :hreraaae and Fireshl minter Tadal Fringe Wetlands Feints WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS - Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality I. Dc% the wetland have the v improve eater quaty? (seep. 52) * R I.1 Area of surface depressions within the riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: Depressions cover X3/4 area of wetland points = 8 Depressions cover > 1/2 area of ►Netland points = 4 Depressions present but cover < 112 area of wetland points = 2 No depressions presmt oints'*i 0., R 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland: Forest or shrub > 213 the area of the wetland points = 8 Forest or shrub > 113 area of the wetland points = 5 Ungrazed, emergent plants > 213 area of wetland points = 5 Ungrazed emergent plants > 113 area of wetland points = 3 F2nn shrub, and mgmzed emergent < 113 area of wetland rots = b R Add the points in the boxes above j IR 20 Bees tine -v've* and have the 22portaldt �mee qur -? ee� 3j �t an A -uswer YES if you Imow or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in stream s, lakes or groin =rater downgr2dient from the wetland? Note which of the followml g coraMons provide the sources of pollutants. - Crazing in the wetland or within 1 Soft — Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland —Tilled fields or orchards within 150 feet of wetland A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, rmidetatial areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear -cut logging f Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft ofwedand The river or streaan linked to the wetland bin a contributing basin where human activities have raised levels of sediment, toxic compounds or nutrients in the river water above standards for water quality multiplier �laer YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is >I L J. ®�11 - WOW QunROty Functions Multiply the score from R i by R 2 Add score to table gig '0. 1 commeEts Wat1and hating Form -- western Washington % 3 a I %Y AilUIl A IAA l Aa J. 19yC 1u41L1VA1L1 L7 d August 2004 Wetland Rating FoEm - westem Washinzsn 8 August 2004 Riverine and Freshwater Tidal Fringe Aredands HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that wetland functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion R 3. ®aes the evedand have the ta�t6� to reduce flooding and erosion? points see A 54 • R 3.1 Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the overage width of the wetland perpendicular to the direction of the flow and the width of the strewn or river channel (distance between banks). Calculate the ratio: ( width of wedrand)1( width of stream). If the ratio is more than 20 points = g If the ratio is between 10 – 20 points – S y If the ratio is 5- <10 points = 4-1 If the ratio is 1- <5 prince 2; If the ratio is < 1 points • R 3.2 Characteristics of vegetation that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris as ` forest or shrub ". Choose the points appropriate for the best description. Forest or shrub for X113 area OR Emergent plants > 2/3 area points = 7 /Forest or shrub for > I/I0 area OR Emergent plants > 1/3 area points = 4- Vegetation does not mw above criteria points t�.t3 - Add the points in the boxes above f= R R 4. Dca:; t1he Cvei�laod hove the ollpQYtuni to ]reduce f000fng amd eroaloim? (see A 57) Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream Property and upaatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. /vote which of the following conditions apply. — There are human structures and activities downstream (roads, buildings, bridges, farms) that can be damaged by flooding. — There are natural resources downstream (e.g. salmon redds) that can be multiplier damaged by flooding Other (Ara r ver NO if the major source of water to the wetdand is controlled by a reservoir or the wetland is tidal fringe . on$ the sides of a dilme) YES multiplier is .2 D multiplier is 1 R TOTAL - Hy &01095c ii'nueflons Multiply the score from R 3 by R 4 .Add score to trble 0 ,71 P6 1 Ca.-M ema Wetland Rating FoEm - westem Washinzsn 8 August 2004 7eese 6yagos ors cpply to cva`!'ad- of Points HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat H fl, DOW the'reftmdl bffi 'ye the m to proAde 1haNtat for many 9pecues? H l.1 Vegetation structure (Zee p. 72) Check the types of vegetation classes present (as deferred by Cowardin) ithe class covers more than 10% of the area of the wetland or % acre. Aquatic bed ­'Emergent plants Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) Forested (areas where trees have X30% cover) --Forested areas have 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, stab - canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, �- rnoWgaound- cover) Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. Ifyou have: 4 types or more points = 4 3 types points = 2 2 types points = H 1.2. H eriods (sew � 73) l e irnts 0 Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland The water regime has to cover more than 10/6 of the wetland or '!. acre to count. (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods) �.Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present points = 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present point &I-0 Saturated only Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake. ange wzeksad = 2 poi-gts — Raes1a'watz ? MPI wegand = 2 pc' imb H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (see,. 7S) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 fe. (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species, kk Do not include Eurasian klalfail, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrafe, Canadian 1 Thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 List species below if you want to: 5 - 19 species points =d:1 < 5 species points = 0 Wend Rating Form - vvestcm WashinZm 13 August 2004 IN H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seems 76) Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between types of vegetation (described in H 1. 1), or vegetation types and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mud#lats) is high, medium, low, or none. 0 Alone = D points Low = 1 point Moderate 2 i' NOTE and ( [riparian braided channels) lligh = 3 points If you have four or more vegetation types or three vegetation types )en water the rating is always "hi H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (sexes 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number afpoints you put into the next column. Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft Ion;). Standing snags (diameter at the bottom > 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation ' extends at least 3.3 ft (1m) over a stream for at least 33 ft (I Om) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muslaat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present ' At least % acre of thin - stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg - laying by amphibians) ' Invasive plants coder less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants H 1, 70TAL Score - potential for providing habitat .odd the scores in the column above � wedand Rating Form — western Wmhington 14 August 20{!4 H 2. flDoes ate wetrlamdl have the ofpportL:Mflty to PToA le ilaN T ffoir many species: H 2.1 Buffers (see p. 80) Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of ewedand. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wedlrand is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed " — 100 rn (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buf'Per. (M1ntively n3dlstanrbed aRso means me-gs ag) paimb = 5 100 rn (3 30 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 501/b circumference. poiab = 4 — 50 rn (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water X95% circumference. ]POWS = 4 ---- 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% ckcumfereuce, . Mats = 3 — 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for > 50° /u circumference. ?d1MtD = 3 U buffeir does not meet any of the croterin -above — No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80ft) of wetland > 95% circumference. Fight to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. jpolnts = 2 — No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK- Pcimts = 2 — ]Heavy grog in buffer. fpahats -- Vegetated buffers are Ora wide (6.6fft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Pointe = 0. — Buffer does not meet any of the criteria alcove. H 2.2 Corridors and Cmnections (seems 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetl,a d part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES = 4 pelts (go to H 2.3) SIC -= go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at Yeast 25 acres in size? OR a Lake- ffrnmge wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? ACES = 2 pointo (;o to H 2.3) 'NO H 2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 mi (8kcn) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a large field or pasture (a40 acres) OR within I mi of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES= I point NO lfl Points Weiland Rating Form — micatern Wasbmgten 1 S August 2004 H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other prion1y habitats Iisted by VVDFW fsee p. 82) Which of the following priority habitats are within 3 30f (100m) of the wetland? (see text for a more detailed description of these priority habitats) PjpaAna: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. Aspen SMads: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.8 ha (2 acres). CUffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. OM- gtrovAh forests: (Old -grwAh west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi - layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or > 204 years of age. Pviiature fmrests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100 %; crown cover may be less that 100 %; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of Iarge downed material is generally less than that found in old- growth; 80 - 200 years old west of the Cascade crest. TlPrzMea: Relatively undisturbed areas (as indicated by dominance of native plants) where grasses and/or forts form the natural climax plant community. Vn2m. Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and nine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. Cmveo: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages Oceg®m wb to Oalu Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component of the stand is 25 %. Usbz m NaTmmo Open Sparse: A priority species resides within or is adjacent to the open space and uses it for breeding and/or regular feeding; and/or the open space functions as a corridor connecting other prior ity habitats, especially those that would otherwise be isolated; and/or the open space is an isolated remnant of natural habitat larger than 4 ha (10 acres) and is surrounded by urban development. Est:nary/Estua ry4i ke: Deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands, usually semi - enclosed by land but with open, partly obstructed or sporadic access to the open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff from the land. The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the open ocean by evaporation. Along some low- energy coastlines there is appreciable dilution of sea water. Estuarine habitat extends upstream and landward to where ocean- derived salts measure less than 0.5ppt. during the period of average annual low flow. Includes both estuaries and lagoons. Maraime/Estua rame Shorelines: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones of beaches, and may also include the backshore and adjacent components of the terrestrial landscape (e.g., cliffs, snags, mature trees, dunes, meadows) that are important to shoreline associated fish and wildlife and t hat contribute to shoreline function (e.g., sand/rock/log recruitment, nutrient contribution, erosion control). If wetland has 3 oir more priority habitats = 4 points if wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points ] If wetland has A priority habitat = I point No habitatsA 0 t Its Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 16 August 2004 H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 Other wetlands within '/z mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed {light grazing between wetlands OIL, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development, points = 5 The wetland is Lake - fringe on a lake with little distueoance and there are 3 other lake - fringe wetlands within %z mile points = 5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within '/z mile, BUT the connections between th are disturbed points F The wetland is Lake- fringe on a lake wkh disturbance and there are 3 other lake - fringe wetland within 1/2 mile points = 3 Where is at least 1 wetland within 'A mile. points = 2 There are no wetlands within %z mile. points — 0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores in the column above T'oW- Score for I9 abkmt IFa neflons — add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on n. I IWetland Rating Form - westem Washington ftil August 2004 CATEGOR 1ATIGIN ]BASED ON SPE CU L �HA-LjAC7ERH3TTCS Wetland Rating Form - vrestern Waahisgcn 18 August 2GO4 Please t�� tt��t� l���a� r c � e &fie +Peel s d sedbed below vr&4 cl7 de e*e appropicee ammsin made caecgor: Wetland Type cntegory Check off any critepl�a that apply to the wetland Circle the appropriate Category when Me qppMriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 )Estuarine ;Tedaads (seep. 26) ' Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? -- The dominant water regime is tidal, — Vegetated, and — With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES= Go to SC 1.1 NO ' SC 1. I Is the wetland within a National WilMfe-lUfuge, National Park, National ]Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, CnL 9 Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332 -30 -151? ' YES = Cate I NO go to SC I.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the ' following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category II CML 9 — The wetland is relatively undisturbed {has no diking, ditching, filling, CQt, In cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover ' more than 101 /6 of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (MI). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a ' UZI Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. — At least % of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of ' shrub, forest, or un- grazed or un -mowed grassland. -- The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Wetland Rating Form - vrestern Waahisgcn 18 August 2GO4 SC 2.0 N22W-@E Slexitn9e lmNetlands (FeeA U) — Natural Heritage wetlands have b--ern identified by the Washington Natural Heritage prograra/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state 'Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen out Most sates before you need to contact WNI-LPIDNR) 51TIR information frogs Appendix D _ of accessed from 1xJNHp1DNR web site YES — contact WNBPIDNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 3.2 NO SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant sir= ss YES = Category I �0 SC 3.0 Mops (see fir. ,77) Roes the wetland (or part of the Wetland) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the Trey below to ideratifY if the wetland is a bog. 1,fyou ,jPZWL7,r y,,S yogj wig buff wed to rate the wetland bgsed an ft f negeons. L Does the wetland have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either pears nr mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field F kew to identify organic soils)? Yes - go to Q. 3 go to Q. 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are Iess than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a I or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 IN Is not a bog for purpose of rating 3. lees the wetland have more than 7� %.•cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in "fable 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in le 3)? Yes – Is a bog for purpose of rating ❑ go to Q. 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent ormosses in the utnderstory You Wray substitute that criterion by measuring the phi of the water that seeps into a hole drag at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 3. Is the wetland forested (> 303 ° /a coven ►with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen,, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, Vrff I any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a signifient component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of the total shrublherbaceous cover)? 4. YES = Category I (`�Q� Is not a bog for purpose of rating V cdmd Ratin; pom -- west= Washington 19 Augua 2004 C &L I CSL D IF S(C 4,0 Fareated Wetlaa& (see p, 90) Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? If you answer yes you MY still need to mate the wedcand based on its f mcdons. — 00d -grrovmb feTsm s: (vaest of Cascade cr,.st) Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi- layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age DR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland. forests. Two- hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OW' so old - growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. -- P&- twe forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 - 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 1000 /o; decay, decadence, numbem of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old - growth. YES = Category I { NO ? Ca H S(C 5.0 Wed2nds gim CaaaW Lagoons (seems 91) Does the wetland matt all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? --- The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banns, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks — The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be meas6 ed near the bottom) YES = Go to SC 5.1 NO not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets all of the following three conditions? — The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). — At least 3/. of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un- grazed or un -mowed grassland. Ctita g — The wetland is larger than 111 d acre (43 50 squ& -c feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat H I "" Wetland Rating Form - westem Wmhingwn MP 20 Aug= 2004 SC 6.0limterdulmd Weirvads 93) Is the wetland west of the 1 839 Iine (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or'LtiT]BUO)? - -t YES - go to SC 6-1 r' NO not an interdunal wetland for rating z. fyou a nswr ye.9 yaa wile x611 weed to mae Me we3dend ksed ®fi its In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: o long Beach Peninsula- lands west of SR 103 o Grayland- Westport- lands west of SR 105 © Ocean Shores- Copaiis- lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES w Category 11 NO - go to SC 6.2 CnL IIE SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between. 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III CMte M Cafgory of wedges, based on spwlal C'hsraccl!�rlsdc—o Choose the "highest' rating we- dand fulls into several categovaes. and record an P. 1. ' If you answered NO foe all - e3ater "Not Applicable" on p. i Wetlard Rating Form - western wastAngton 21 August 2004 rIJ tr I 0 pn, , 4k dr 3 40 -fly fl 47. Ir. F-11Y. it o O Fr 0 b OF : Forest Pro, Inc. Greg Jones 204 Senn Rd Chehalis WA 98532 Office / Fax 360 -262 -9226 Mobile: 520 -0479 Home: 360-262-3806 E -mail: _g-cjones@localaccess.com * OUAURCATIONS 0 Forest Practice Applications /Forest Stewardship Plans/SEPA Checklists, JARPA'S. t Forest harvesting: Timber Cruising and Appraisals. Harvesting unit identification and layout including wetlands. Harvest systems and roads. a Road location, layout, and road maintenance assessments. Culvert sizing and profiles. Fish passage design. • Logging Systems Analysis and Profiles. a GPS Traversing and Mapping with Real time field corrected Trimble GEO XT Global Positioning System. t Log Quality Assurance (maximizing return to log and return to stump values in the manufacturing and sorting of logs at the stump and on the landing ). ♦ Data Management - Computer Skills — Excel, Word, Traverse PC (Mapping), Spreadsheets. a Certified Wetland Delineator s Forest management; silvicultural site preparation, regeneration, vegetation control, pre - commercial thinning, commercial thinning, fertilization, forest road maintenance, soils, forest sampling, and appraisals. ♦ WORK HISTORY Wetlands for Lewis, Thurston, Cowlitz, Pierce Counties ' Schinnell Surveying The Timber Exchange The Campbell Group, LLC, Portland, OR ' Rayonier Timberlands, Hoquiam WA Weyerhaeuser Company, Longview. Raymond & Vail IP Pacific Timberlands, Inc Afognak Native Corporation, Afognak, Alaska L Tacoma City Light Washington State Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Forest Resources, Inc. ♦ EDUCATION Olympic Resource Management Merrill & Ring The Herbrand Co. Pacific Rim Real Estate Group Shipp Construction, Inc. B & M Logging, Inc. Menasha Corp. Green Crow Butler Surveying Chehalis Valley Logging Mason Engineering ♦ Bachelor of Science, Forest Management, University of Washington, 1975. t Associate of Arts, Forest Technology, Centralia College, 1971. • Certified Wetland Delineator (The US Army Corp Of Engineers "9987 Guidelines", Technical Report Y- 87 -1), Certified "Advanced Wetlands Soils and Hydrology for Delineators" P. S. U. , Certified Wetland, Mitigation, Construction & Installation "I ON � - ei l R-3 W aq, .2 lei ei l R-3 W aq, M. c� c a� w 1a c�i 1 1 1 1 Apj� �I � Can all to Whom thr5p TA rtteri .4hall rnntr,(6'reeting: (7he Regrntn of the 1niurriitq an rernmiuenbtttiun of the 1Aatiuer!jitg Yurulty nub btu virtue of the Authoritg uefitd in (7hem btu Wam have thi-q Ong n6mittrb Gregarg Neil Tones to thr Oppree of 19arh,clor of 5ritenrr in �IIrmt gesourtes flnb hone gvttnteb ttll the Rights, Priuittge-i ttnk fjnnars thereto pertainiitu C�iucn t euftte, in the Mute of 1pttshi0ot on, Ihig fan rieetit11 Dag of Anne, (One Tho114336'Kine AnnAM UHA 'mog- fiue, in the (one *nArA W fifteenth tecir of the ljniueroit�' evh'ihi �tp- SOU 09' PurBidrn# of fitr Nand of Rmilli 11rnn J District 12 al his Tertifiez Ehat ( Sug-urg Neg Ju1~res has SatisfartoritR ram-Pteteb a Course of Stubs prescribeb bLj the Toltegg anb is hereh� aluarbeb the Degree of �ssuriafr 'tit Trr4uiral ( lrfs Oiben at Tentralia, in the Zstute Of —ma shingtiln, 3=u 11, 1971. ............ --.. -- - -------- ...... Tkiir'man. -iourb of Cl rusitto ((Wo( . --..Z=J . X19215-0 I q FOREST PRO, INC. 2003 -2007 WETLAND JOBS JOB #'S NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 2003 3 -26 STURDEVANT WETLAND LEWIS 3 -27 KEITH LYONS WETLAND LEWIS 3 -32 RON TRAVERS WETLAND MITIGATION LEWIS 3 -34 TOBY BELCHER WETLAND LEWIS 3-42 HAWES WETLAND DELINEATION LEWIS 3 -57 ROSTER WETLAND LEWIS 3 -60 HAWES WETLAND MITIGATION LEWIS 3 -64 BILLMAN WETLAND LEWIS 3 -69 CHURCH OF GOD WETLAND LEWIS 3 -70 BRENT WENTZEL WETLAND LEWIS 3 -77 WALLACE WETLAND LEWIS 3 -95 CARLSON WETLAND LEWIS 3 -79 CURFMAN WETLAND LEWIS 3 -85 HAGEN WETLAND LEWIS 3 -93 HAWES WETLAND LEWIS 3 -96 PEDERSON WETLAND LEWIS 2004 497 B & D DEVELOPMENT WETLAND LEWIS 4 -71 BAYNE- ANDERSON WETLAND LEWIS 4-109 BRENEMAN (FWD 7 -73 ROBINSON) WETLAND LEWiS 4 -54 DAVIS WETLAND LEWIS 4 -108 FRYE WETLAND LEWIS 4 -113 HAWES WETLAND LEWIS 4 -50 HOLGATE WETLAND LEWIS 4 -43 JOE LURF WETLAND LEWIS 4 -25 KATHY GRAHAM WETLAND LEWIS 4 -101 KELLY WETLAND LEWIS 4 -4 LOBDELL WETLAND LEWIS 4 -79 PRIGGER (NO ACTION) WETLAND LEWIS 4 -5 REED WETLAND LEWIS 4 -85 REESE (NO ACTION) WETLAND LEWIS 432 RON MOSS WETLAND LEWIS 4 -8 RON OTEARY 123RD WETLAND THURSTON 4 -13 RON O'LEARY 173RD WETLAND THURSTON 4 -29 RON TRAVERS WTLAND MITIGATION LEWIS 4 -2 ZENKNER WETLAND LEWIS 2005 5 -9 MERYHEW LEWIS 5 -29 REESE (4 -85) LEWIS 5 -33 KRICKICONWELL LEWIS 5 -25 RYAN LEWIS 5 -36 TRAVERS LEWIS 5 -38 BETTS LEWIS 5 -42 SCHWARTZ LEWIS 5-50 O'LEARY THURSTON 5 -51 O'LEARY THURSTON 5 -59 O'LEARY THURSTON Imb +alm. JOB VS NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 5 -65 CHURCH LEWIS 5 -67 RARE EARTH LEWIS 5 -74 ANDERSON KENNICOTT HILL LEWIS 5 -77 MORRISON LEWIS 5-82 COHO ESTATES COWLITZ 5 -85 SCOTT MILLER LEWIS 5 -86 DENTON, .JEFF LEWIS 5 -90 HERBRAND PIERCE 5 -94 HARRIS LEWIS 5 -96 ROSS LEWIS 5 -97 JERRY LEWIS 5 -98 SELF LEWIS 5 -99 SELF LEWIS 5 -100 WALLACE LEWIS 5 -102 NEUERT LEWIS 5 -106 SCHAFER CHEHALIS VALLEY DR LEWIS 5 -116 CHAMBERS LEWIS 5 -117 WEIBOLD LEWIS 5 -118 B & D LEWIS 5 -122 SMITH LEWIS 5-123 WALLACE LEWIS 5 -125 ALPHA TO OMEGA CONSTRUCTION LEWIS 5 -126 PURIS LEWIS 5 -127 SCHWARTZ LEWIS 5 -130 FLUGEL LEWIS 5 -131 LOVAN LEWIS 5 -134 MARPLE LEWIS 5 -135 PETTIT LEWIS 5 -142 HAWES LEWIS 5 -143 RASKEL LEWIS 5 -144 BLEVINS COWLITZ 5-145 MEADE LEWIS 5 -146 KRISTEN LEWIS 5 -147 SCOVILLE LEWIS 5 -149 WALPOLE LEWIS 5 -150 MADILL LEWIS 5 -151 EVANS LEWIS 5 -152 B & M LEWIS 5 -153 B & M LEWIS 5-154 DENTON, JEFF LEWIS 5 -156 MCCORMICK LEWIS 5-157 RANDALL LEWIS 5 -160 BATCHELOR LEWIS 5-171 POULOS LEWIS 5 -172 O'BRIEN LEWIS 5 -173 HORNER LEWIS 5 -174 WILLIAMS LEWIS 5 -175 LONG LEWIS 5 -176 HAN JACKSON HWY LEWIS 5 -177 HORNER JACKSON HWY/508 AREA LEWIS 5 -179 SMITH TUCKER RD LEWIS 5 -182 ISTEELE I HWY 207 CENTRALIA LEWIS JOB WS NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 5 -183 WOOD OFF HWY 12 ETHEL LEWIS 5 -184 GREENWOOD MEMORIAL GARDENS CENTRALIA 5 -186 PACIFIC RIM REAL ESTATE PACIFIC 5 -187 PACIFIC RIM REAL ESTATE PACIFIC 5 -195 LEDORZE BUNKER CREEK RD LEWIS 5 -197 HARRIS RUSH RD LEWIS 5 -199 MCNARY HWY 5081GUERRIER RD LEWIS 5 -202 BLEVINS COHO ESTATES COWLITZ 5 -205 SHAFER CHEHALIS VALLEY DR LEWIS 5 -206 BABARE MOSSYROCK LEWIS 5 -208 DODIE NORTH FORK RD LEWIS 2006 5 O'CONNOR WETLANDS LEWIS 12 ADAMS WETLANDS LEWIS 13 DOWNEY WETLANDS LEWIS 14 BEANS WETLANDS LEWIS 19 STEVENS WETLANDS LEWIS 20 DANIELSON WETLANDS LEWIS 21 WALKER WETLANDS LEWIS 22 SHELTON WETLAND ASSESSMENT LEWIS 23 ALPHA TO OMEGA WETLAND CREATION LEWIS 26 STONE WETLANDS LEWIS 27 POLLOCK WETLANDS LEWIS 29 PETLOCK WETLANDS LEWIS 30 JENSEN WETLANDS LEWIS 37 EITEL WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 38 HERBRAND WETLAND DELINEATION PIERCE 39 RIEHS WETLAND DELINEATION LEWIS 44 SORENSON WETLAND DELINEATION LEWIS 51 RYAN WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 53 MAKILING WETLAND REVIEW COWLITZ 55 COOPER WETLAND DELINEATION LEWIS fit PRESTON WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 65 BARNES WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 71 JONES WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 72 ALLEGRE WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 79 WALLACE WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 83 B & M COAL CREEK FILL LEWIS 84 BLEVINS WETLAND IDENT COWLITZ 90 PACIFIC RIM (6 -221) WETLAND BOUNDARIES PIERCE 93 DUEY WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 94 HILL SITE REVIEW LEWIS 95 ALLENDER WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 97 LONG, DAV0 WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 103 B & D (6 -147) ARMSTONG WL DELINEATION LEWIS 104 PETTkT SALSBURY WL DELINEATION LEWIS 106 JENNINGS WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 107 LANTAU WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 111 THOMPSON WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 113 BASZLER WETLAND DELINIATION LEWIS 115 BRIDGES WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 121 KNODEL WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS JOB VS NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 122 HORNER WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 126 B & D (6 -147) ANDERSON MIT SITE LEWIS 130 SUBJECK WETLAND DELINIATION LEWIS 131 OBERG WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 135 MCNARY WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 137 SMITH WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 138 T SMITH WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 140 MELIUS WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 141 STINSON WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 142 LONG, TONY WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 143 LONG, JIM WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 144 KUGLE WETLAND DELINIATION LEWIS 145 PROPERTIES PLUS KYSER WETLAND LEWIS 147 B & D ARMSTRONG FILL LEWIS 151 RISNER WETLAND LEWIS 152 MCNAUGHT WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 153 GREEN WETLANDIFPA LEWIS 156 IWASSON WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 164 MARKHAM WETLAND IDENT NAPAVINE 168 CONWELL WETLAND LEWIS 173 WALKER WETLAND LEWIS 174 FRANKS WETLAND LEWIS 177 MATHEWS WETLAND LEWIS 183 SHELTON WETLAND LEWIS 184 PAVONE WETLAND LEWIS 185 PROPERTIES PLUS WETLAND -BRULE LEWIS 188 BARR WETLAND LEWIS 191 WICHERT WETLAND LEWIS 193 RITCHEY WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 201 ANDERSON WETLAND LEWIS 202 HERBRAND WETLAND PIERCE 204 REBMAN WETLAND LEWIS 205 REITZE (6 -211) WETLAND LEWIS 208 FORD WETLAND LEWIS 210 POLLOCK WETLAND LEWIS 211 KEAHEY (6 -205) WETLAND LEWIS 212 PROPERTIES PLUS WETLAND LEWIS 213 STURDEVANT PEELLWETLAND LEWIS 215 BRUMFIELQ WETLAND REVIEW FOR LC FILI LEWIS 217 ROSS SOMMERVILLE RD WL LEWIS 218 ALLMAN HENRIOT RD WL LEWIS 219 FRUZZETTI HENRIOT RD WL LEWIS 221 PACIFIC RIM (6 -90) WETLAND PIERCE CO PIERCE 223 STEPHEN WL- PIERCE CO PIERCE 227 PETTIT MITIGATION SITE LEWIS 230 DENISON WETLAND SALKUM LEWIS 231 SHELTON WETLAND BUNKER CREEK LEWIS 235 BOWER BOLDUC RD WL LEWIS 237 ARY WINLOCK WETLAND LEWIS 238 WHEELER NORTH FORK WETLAND LEWIS 240 WILLIAMS SMOKEY VALLEY RD WETLAND LEWIS 242 WILLOWS WL REVIEW JACKSON HWY LEWIS JOB #'S NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 245 KINDELL WL DOTY LEWIS 246 REMUND WL BOISTFORT LEWIS 248 HINSHAW WL MOSSYROCK LEWIS 250 IPRUDENT NW MAYTOWN WL THURSTON 255 B & D GENERAL MIDDLE FORK WETLAND LEWIS 256 B & D GENERAL NAPAVINE WETLAND LEWIS 257 PRUDENT NW THURSTON WL THURSTON 258 BUREN WL LARMON RD LEWIS 259 ALEXANDER JACKSON HWY WETLAND LEWIS 261 VANSTEERTEGEN LUCAS CR WL LEWIS 262 KIMBREL LINCOLN CR WL LEWIS 264 BARNES PEELL MCDONALD WETLAND LEWIS 265 SAYLER WETLAND LEWIS 267 JOHNSTON BOONE RD WL LEWIS 272 RADKE WETLANDS LEWIS 279 SWANSON REVIEW WETLAND PIERCE 284 PRINCE WETLAND REVIEW LEWIS 285 LARSON (FWD TO 7 -6) CENTRALIA WL CENTRALIA 286 DREBRICK TILLEY RD WL THURSTON 2007 1 DREBICK PARCEL #2 WETLAND THURSTON 2 GRAY LINCOLN CR WETLAND LEWIS 3 GRAY MATTISON RD WETLAND LEWIS 8 HERBRAND BLAINE KITSAP 10 DREBICK TILLEY RD WETLAND 3 THURSTON 17 KATTENBRAKER RICE RD WL LEWIS 18 FRUZZETTI HENRIOT RD WL LEWIS 20 SELF -THE BREWER CO. YARD BIRD WL LEWIS 27 WALKER JEFFRIES RD WL LEWIS 31 SHELDON BUNKER CR WL LEWIS 34 LARSON KALAMA WL DELINEATION COWLITZ 37 PACIFIC RIM PIERCE WL PIERCE 38 CHAPMAN ANDERSON HILL RD WL LEWIS 39 DOSTICK (FWD) WALKER - JEFFRIES RD WL LEWIS 43 HAWES(FWD) JACKSON HWY WL LEWIS 44 PRUDENT NW THURSTON WL THURSTON 47 BLEVINS COHO WL- COWLITZ COWLITZ 48 POULOS (FWD 7 -78) JACKSON HWY S WL LEWIS 49 KLEE ANDERSON HILL RD WL LEWIS 50 JC MINI RANCH LN WL LEWIS 54 BARNES (FWD 6 -264) PEELL MCDONALD WL LEWIS 61 BENNIGHT ADNA WL LEWIS 63 BLEVINS COHO WL COWLITZ 64 HENDERSON BOONE RD WL LEWIS 65 WEB JOIST BOREVEC RD WL LEWIS 67 RADTKE WOODARD RD NAPAVINE WL LEWIS 68 ROSS 184TH AVE WL THURSTON 70 HENDERSON BOONE RD WL LEWIS 74 REISCH HANAFORD WL LEWIS 75 LARSON, CRAIG THOMPSON CREEK WL THURSTON 77 GRONSETH WETLAND VON WORMER CENTRALIA 78 POULOS TUCKER RD MIT SITE LEWIS JOB VS NAME DESCRIPTION COUNTY 83 VIlK TURNER RD WL THURSTON 88 DICKINSON EVANS RD WL & BRIDGE LEWIS 97 WHITE KOONTZ RD WL LEWIS 98 MASON ENGINEERING RIBELIN RD WL LEWIS 99 STUDER BRADY WL GRAYS HARBOR 105 B & M (6-83) COAL CR FILL CHEHALIS 106 PETTIT FILL/MIT LEWIS 108 CONROY WETLAND LEWIS 123 MASON ENGINEERING JACKSON HWY MIT SITE LEWIS 127 MDK CONSTRUCTION WETLAND LEWIS 128 GUDAZ WETLAND LEWIS 131 PROPERTIES NW WETLAND DELINEATION PIERCE 133 BLEVINS SOLO WETLAND COWLITZ 134 BERGER WETLAND LEWIS 136 INDUSTRIAL PARK WETLAND MITIGATION LEWIS 138 WTM- STALEY WL THURSTON 141 RIPP WINLOCK VADER RD WL LEWIS 153 COOPER OYLER RD WL LEWIS 154 MAHAN WL THURSTON 157 HAVORSEN WL MOSSYROCK LEWIS 158 OLIVER, JULIE N FORK WL LEWIS 159 BOSTICK JEFFRIES RD WL LEWIS 163 REBECCA WL REVIEW LEWIS 165 HOLLENBACK PEELL WL LEWIS 170 TRULSON WL LEWIS 172 NEILSON WL DELINEATION LEWIS 173 KLEE WL REVIEW LEWIS 177 STEEN WL LEWIS 180 HORNER 13LOSL WL DELINEATION CENTRALIA 181 BERTUCCI WL LEWIS 182 LARSON, CRAIG WL DELINEATION THURSTON 183 KLUMPER WL WINLOCK 184 AVILLA WL YELM 195 HORNER AVERY RD WL LEWIS 242 HAWES[ FWD 7 -43] JACKSON HWY LEWIS 203 DREBfCK TILLEY RD THURSTON 205 WARREN WETLAND DELINEATION LEWIS 207 CHEHALIS VALLEY REALTY WETLAND LEWIS 209 KIENHOLZ CRITICAL AREA REVIEW LEWIS 210 HALVORSEN OYLER RD WL LEWIS 211 ABSTON RECONIWETLAND THURSTON 214 ROE - AIRPORT WL LEWIS 215 HALVORSEN JACKSON HWY WL LEWIS 217 KUGLE WETLAND LEWIS 223 ESPOSITO WETLAND LEWIS 225 GASTFIELD WETLAND LEWIS 226 PETRASSO WETLAND LEWIS 229 HERBRAND WL LEWIS 231 GARMAN WL LEWIS