HomeMy WebLinkAboutUpdated Application DocumentsMaster Land Use Permit Application Page 1 of 4
PLANNING, COMMUNITY, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 547, Anacortes, WA 98221
Office Location: 904 6th Street, Anacortes WA 98821
Phone: (360) 299-1984
Master Land Use Permit Application
TYPE OF APPLICATION (check all that apply):
Administrative Interpretation
Annexation Request
Binding Site Plan (Preliminary)
Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA)
Comprehensive Plan/ Map
Amendment Request
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) per AMC
19.36
Conditional/Special Use Permit (CUP)
per AMC 17.70
Cottage Housing Development
Development Agreement
Essential Public Facility
Floodplain Development Permit
Home Occupation Permit
Long Subdivision (Preliminary)
Lot Certification
Minor Permit Revision
Plat Amendment /Modification
SEPA Environmental Review
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit
Shoreline Exemption
Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit
Shoreline Variance
Short Subdivision (Preliminary)
Site Plan Review – Type 1
Site Plan Review – Type 2
Stormwater Management Manual
Adjustments & Exceptions
Variance (Level 1)
Variance (Level 2)
Wireless Conditional Use Permit
(WCUP)
Wireless Service Facility (WSF)
Permit
Zoning Code/ Map Amendment
Request (Rezone)
PROJECT & SITE INFORMATION:
SITE ADDRESS: PROJECT NAME:
PARCEL NUMBER(S): SECTION, TOWNSHIP, & RANGE
LOT SQUARE FOOTAGE & ACREAGE: PROJECT VALUATION:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PRESENT ZONING:
PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY: CUT & FILL (CY) PROPOSED:
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE HELD?:
Yes, the City file # is________________ No
WATER SOURCE:
City of Anacortes Private Well Community Well
SEWAGE DISPOSAL:
City of Anacortes Septic
ROAD ACCESS:
City Road State Highway Private Road
x
x
8/10/20
(LBG)
(LBG)
Master Land Use Permit Application Page 2 of 4
CRITICAL AREAS OR BUFFERS ON SITE OR WITHIN 300 FEET:
Yes / Type ____________________________ No
WATER BODIES WITHIN 200 FEET:
Yes / Name:_____________________________ No
FLOODPLAIN:
Flood Zone: FIRM Panel # Date of Panel:
LOT COVERAGE AREA CALCULATIONS:
Existing Square Footage: Proposed Square Footage:
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA CALCULATIONS:
Existing Impervious Square Footage: New Impervious Surface:
DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPOSAL: Additional pages attached
PROPOSED WORK: __
_________
_________
_________
_________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: Multiple owners attached
NAME: MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY, STATE, ZIP: PHONE #:
FAX #: EMAIL ADDRESS:
APPLICANT INFORMATION: Same as property owner
NAME: MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY, STATE, ZIP: PHONE #:
FAX #: EMAIL ADDRESS:
CONTACT PERSON: Same as property owner Same as applicant
NAME: MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY, STATE, ZIP: PHONE #:
FAX #: EMAIL ADDRESS:
Master Land Use Permit Application Page 3 of 4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS & SIGNATURE
Read and initial each of the following statements prior to signing this application:
I understand that land use and/or planning permits do not authorize earth disturbing activities, the
removal of vegetation, or the construction of buildings. I understand that additional permits will be
required after my land use and/or planning permitting process is completed. I understand that no earth
disturbing activities (including the removal of vegetation) may take place until after my land use and/or
planning process is complete, and only after I have received additional permits such as Fill & Grade,
Building Permit, or Right-of-Way permit(s).
I understand that if critical areas (wetlands, streams, steep slopes, etc.) are found on or near my property
I am not authorized to impact these areas in any way and will be required to leave an undisturbed buffer
area around the critical area, as determined according the City’s critical areas regulations.
I understand that depending on the size and scope of my project, I may be required to provide
maintenance and/or performance bonds for items such as landscaping, critical areas, public roads and/or
public utilities that I construct or install.
I understand that I am solely responsible for providing complete and accurate information to the City. I
understand that if my application is missing information or if inaccurate materials are submitted, my
permits will be delayed. I understand that depending on how inaccurate and how incomplete my
application is or becomes, the Department may require an entirely new application be submitted. I
understand that when and if conditions change from that which my application originally represented, I
am responsible for letting the City staff person assigned to my project know.
I understand that I am applying for permits from the City of Anacortes only; and that additional permits
from other Federal, State, and Local agencies could be required. I understand that the City of Anacortes
cannot advise me of permits that are required from other agencies, and that I must contact these
agencies to make sure I comply with their requirements. These agencies include (but are not limited to):
Corps of Engineers, Department of Natural Resources, Department of Fish & Wildlife, Department of
Ecology, and Northwest Clean Air Agency.
I understand that I will be responsible for paying consultants that the City may deem necessary to review
certain aspects of my application. I understand that these consultant reviews could include special
inspections, traffic concurrency, critical areas, landscaping, stormwater, etc.
Signature required on next page.
By affixing my signature hereto, I certify that I am the owner, or am acting as the Owner's
authorized agent, and that the application and documents contained with this submittal are
complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and abilities. lf your title report lists a
company, partnership or other owners, you must submit evidence that you are authorized to sign
on behalf of the entity or others that are listed.
lf you are an authorized representative you must submit an Agent Authorization Form.
Please attach additional signature sheets if there is more than one owner.
Under penalty of periury, I certify that the information, statements, answers above regarding
the subject application(sl are true and correct to the best of my knowledte and belief.
Signature:Date:
printed Name: Leslie Eastwood, General Manager, Samish lndian Nation
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF SKAGIT
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that LA\li- A. EaolSo(is the
person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument,
and acknowledged it as the free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in this
instrument.
Given under my hand and official seal this d-1 day ot ,lu)rt ,20 7)
I{OTAT/ PIJBLrc
STAIEOFWASI-flNGTON
VMAN SUMMEBS
Lic. No. 90512
MyAppdntmcrr Eehgg
At,GtJST N/3
otary Public
NB
Master Land Use Permit Application
)
)ss.
Residins "t kul, l)A
My appointment exOires AUA. i"c +4
Page 4 of 4
PLANNING, COMMUNITY, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 547, Anacortes, WA 98221
Office Location: 904 6th Street, Anacortes WA 98821
Phone: (360) 299-1984
Cottage Housing Application Submittal Checklist
Updated September 12, 2019 Page 1 of 11
COTTAGE HOUSING SITE PLAN REVIEW
APPLICATION
S UBMITTAL R EQUIREMENTS Applicant Checklist Cottage Housing
Submittal Requirement Checklist
See pages 2-3 of this handout for information about each submittal item listed below.
See AMC 19.43.010.D Cottage Housing for specific use standards and AMC 19.30 Site
Plan Review for review and approval criteria. Office Use Only Master Land Use Permit Application
Agent Authorization Form
Project Narrative
Stormwater Site Plan
Site & Landscape Plans
Clearing & Grading Plans
Building Elevation Drawings
Environmental Checklist (SEPA)
Subdivision Guarantee
Recorded property boundary survey
Technical Reports
Critical Area Report
Traffic Impact Analysis
Parking Study
Required Number of Copies and Plan Size
3 paper copies of each item above
Plans must be minimum 11” x 17”, to scale, and legible
1 reduced size copy (maximum size 11” X 17”) of plans
Digital copy of the application and all submitted materials
(flash drive or to pced@cityofanacortes.org.)
Application Fee
See the Land Use Permit Fee
Schedule
8/10/20
Cottage Housing Application Submittal Checklist
Updated September 12, 2019 Page 4 of 11
P ROJECT N ARRATIVE R EQUIREMENTS
GENERAL INFORMATION
This form is intended to assist applicants in creating complete project narrative for site plan and
building design review. Please fill in each space with the requested information.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION – Required for all project types
A. If a neighborhood meeting was held, provide the date held, general items of discussion at the
meeting, and how the project proposal has been modified since the meeting, if applicable.
B. Proposed use of the Site per AMC Table 19.41.040 or 19.41.050 and any special use provisions that
apply. (see AMC 19.43 – 19.48)
C. Current use of the Site. Date of construction for any existing structures on site, and whether they
are to be removed or retained.
D. Description of the site’s physical characteristics, including special site features (such as wetlands,
water bodies, steep slopes, or other critical areas).
E. Current uses and special site features of surrounding properties.
F. Description of general design techniques you considered to implement low impact development
(see AMC 19.76.050(A) and (B)) in the design of your project site and proposed stormwater
facilities necessary for compliance with AMC 19.76 Stormwater.
G. Description of the proposed form and intensity of the proposed development (height, setbacks, lot
coverage, etc.). (See AMC 19.42.)
H. Identification of the site’s block frontage designation(s) and description of project conformance.
(see AMC 19.61)
I. Description of proposed parking for vehicles and bicycles, including provisions for guests, shared
parking. (see AMC 19.65)
J. Describe existing and proposed site access from public streets and any proposed street and/or
pedestrian improvements.
Cottage Housing Application Submittal Checklist
Updated September 12, 2019 Page 5 of 11
K. Estimated quantities and type of materials involved if any fill or excavation is proposed.
L. Number, type, and size of trees to be removed.
M. Description of existing site utilities and proposed utilities, including extensions, upgrades,
relocations, etc. (see AMC 19.52 Underground Utilities).
N. Explanation of any land to be dedicated to the City.
PAGE 1 OF 3
Design Review – Departure Application
The Unified Development Code provides for a number of specific departure opportunities to
development standards. The purpose is to provide applicants with the option of proposing alternative
design treatments provided such departures meet the “purpose” of the particular standard and any
additional departure criteria established for the particular departure opportunity.
Departure opportunities are only available only where specifically noted for specific standards within
AMC Title 19 Unified Development Code.
An applicant must complete this form and submit it as part of any development application where a
“departure” is proposed.
Associated Project Information
Project File Number
Project Name
Project Location
Applicant Name
Complete the form(s) on the other side of this sheet.
PLANNING, COMMUNITY, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 547, Anacortes, WA 98221
Office Location: 904 6th Street, Anacortes WA 98821
Phone: (360) 299-1984
Samish 34th Street Housing
Samish Indian Nation
2109 34th Street
8/10/20
PAGE 2 OF 3
Departure #1
Code citation:
Code requirement:
Proposed design departure:
Rationale explaining how the proposed departure meets the purpose(s) of the standard and other
applicable departure criteria.
Cut/Paste or attach graphics as needed to specifically identify the area of the departure(s) showing
code compliant and requested departure dimensions.
AMC 19.53.030.C
Internal shared-access drives which serve four or more units must include at least one sidewalk on one side of the drive.
Woonerf-style multi-modal limited speed roadway where pedestrians have priority
PAGE 3 OF 3
Add more sheets for additional departure requests, if applicable.
Departure #2
Code citation:
Code requirement:
Proposed design departure:
Rationale explaining how the proposed departure meets the purpose(s) of the standard and other
applicable departure criteria.
Cut/Paste or attach graphics as needed to specifically identify the area of the departure(s) showing
code compliant and requested departure dimensions.
10
0'-0"
F.F.
PER CIVIL
T.O.G.
8'-6"
T.O. PLATE
16'-8 1/2"
T.O. ROOF
16'-3"
T.O. ROOF
105105
0'-0"
F.F.
PER CIVIL
T.O.G.
8'-6"
T.O. PLATE
14'-11 1/4"
T.O. PLATE
10'-2 3/4"
T.O. ROOF
16'-8 1/2"
T.O. ROOF
0'-0"
F.F.
PER CIVIL
T.O.G.
8'-6"
T.O. PLATE
14'-11 1/4"
T.O. PLATE
16'-8 1/2"
T.O. ROOF
0'-0"
F.F.
PER CIVIL
T.O.G.
8'-6"
T.O. PLATE
16'-8 1/2"
T.O. ROOF
16'-3"
T.O. ROOF
13'-11 3/4"
T.O. ROOF
1FRONT ELEVATION
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
TWO BEDROOM
ELEVATIONS
A203SAMISH 34th ST HOUSING2109 34TH STREETANACORTES, WA 98221REVISION DATE
TRAVOIS DESIGN
310 W. 19TH TERRACE
KANSAS CITY, MO 64108
P 816.994.8970
F 816.994.8974
25% SET 6/19/2020
SHEET
T R A V O I S
ARCHITECTURE, PC
TM
2REAR ELEVATION
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
3SIDE ELEVATION
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4SIDE ELEVATION
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
8/10/20
0'-0"
F.F.
+/- 8'- 0"
T.O. WALL
+/- 17'- 0"
T.O. WALL
+/- 25'- 0"
T.O. ROOF
+/- 10'- 1"
T.O. ROOF
0'-0"
F.F.
+/- 8'- 0"
T.O. WALL
+/- 17'- 0"
T.O. WALL
+/- 25'- 0"
T.O. ROOF
+/- 11'- 4 1/2"
T.O. ROOF
0'-0"
F.F.
+/- 8'- 0"
T.O. WALL
+/- 17'- 0"
T.O. WALL
+/- 25'- 0"
T.O. ROOF
+/- 10'- 8"
T.O. ROOF
0'-0"
F.F.
+/- 8'- 0"
T.O. WALL
+/- 17'- 0"
T.O. WALL
+/- 25'- 0"
T.O. ROOF
+/- 10'- 8"
T.O. ROOF
+/- 25'- 0"
T.O. ROOF
1FRONT ELEVATION
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
A304SAMISH 34th ST HOUSING2109 34TH STREETANACORTES, WA 98221REVISION DATE
TRAVOIS DESIGN
310 W. 19TH TERRACE
KANSAS CITY, MO 64108
P 816.994.8970
F 816.994.8974
25% SET 6/19/2020
SHEET
T R A V O I S
ARCHITECTURE, PC
TM
2REAR ELEVATION
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
4SIDE ELEVATION
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3SIDE ELEVATION
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
COMMUNITY BUILDING
ELEVATIONS
OPTION A
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Purpose of checklist:
Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your
proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization
or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental
impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal.
Instructions for applicants: [help]
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please
answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult
with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or
"does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown.
You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate
answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-
making process.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of
time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal
or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your
answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant
adverse impact.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: [help]
For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable
parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please
completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or
site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead
agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements –that do not
contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal.
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)
City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 1 of 11
8/10/20
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
A. BACKGROUND [help]
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: [help]
2. Name of applicant: [help]
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: [help]
4. Date checklist prepared: [help]
5. Agency requesting checklist: [help]
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): [help]
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. [help]
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal. [help]
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. [help]
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
[help]
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. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project
description.) [help]
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
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)
City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 2 of 11
Samish 34th Street Housing
Samish Indian Nation
PO Box 271, Anacortes WA 98221; 360-293-6404; Leslie Eastwood, General Manager
July 30, 2020
City of Anacortes
None known.
City of Anacortes site plan approval; building permits.
14 cottages, each less than 1000 sf with an attached carport of up to 300 sf, and a community building with second-floor apartment
for an on-site manager, improvements to 34th Street with extension along central access road and roadways
serving each cluster of cottages, all on the 2-acre parcel
NEPA Environmental Assessment, Samish Indian Nation, October 18, 2019
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
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. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you
are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications
related to this checklist. [help]
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS [help]
1. Earth
a. General description of the site [help]
(circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other _____________
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? [help]
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
agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in
removing any of these soils. [help]
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe. [help]
e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of
any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. [help]
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
[help]
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? [help]
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: [help]
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)
City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 3 of 11
2-acre vacant parcel at 2109 34th Street (at the end of unbuilt 34th Street, east of D Ave)
5%; site is generally flat
Subsurface soils generally consisted of 12 to 30 inches loose, dark brown, organic, silty sand (topsoil), over approximately 1 to 2 feet
of medium dense to very dense, light brown to tan, silty sand with gravel (weathered glacial till). Subsurface soil underlying the
weathered glacial till consisted of hard, gray, sandy silt with gravel (glacial till) that extended to the full depth of all the explorations.
No
Source of fill is onsite.
Erosion unlikely due to low slope and erosion control measures.
40,196 sf
See Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction,
operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and
give approximate quantities if known. [help]
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe. [help]
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: [help]
3. Water
a. Surface Water: [help]
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including
year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe
type
and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. [help]
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described
waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. [help]
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. [help]
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. [help]
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
[help]
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. [help]
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)
City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 4 of 11
No emissions other than construction equipment exhaust during construction; normal vehicle exhaust.
No
N/A
One category IV wetland of approximately 962 sf on the parcel (1.9-acre seasonally saturated wetland extending
off-site to the south.
Yes; 40-ft average buffer will be observed and improved. See February 2015 AES critical areas report and July 2020
wetland buffer averaging letter.
None.
No.
No.
No.
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
b. Ground Water:
1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so,
give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities
withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. [help]
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or
other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the
following chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the
number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the
number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. [help]
c. Water runoff (including stormwater):
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. [help]
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. [help]
3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If
so, describe.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runof f water, and drainage
pattern impacts, if any:
4. Plants [help]
a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: [help]
____deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
____evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
____shrubs
____grass
____pasture
____crop or grain
____ Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops.
____ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)
City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 5 of 11
x
x
x
x
x
x
A rain garden is proposed for each cluster of four cottages. Additional stormwater will be diverted to a bioretention
cell in the NE corner of the property, with overflow to the east via existing piped city stormwater connection.
Offsite drainage will not be affected
No; SWPPP will prevent waste materials from entering waters.
No
None
Stormwater will be collected in on-site rain gardens and bioretention cell for the site; overflow will occur to the east
via existing pipe city stormwater connection.
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
____water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
____other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? [help]
c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. [help]
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any: [help]
e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site.
5. Animals
a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known
to be on or near the site. Examples include: [help]
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other ________
b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. [help]
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. [help]
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: [help]
e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site.
6. Energy and natural resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet
the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc. [help]
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties?
If so, generally describe. [help]
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)
City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 6 of 11
None known; see also detail in the NEPA Environmental Assessment
The category IV wetland adjacent to the development will be protected by a 40-ft average buffer, which will be enhanced.
Rain gardens planted throughout the site will support wildlife habitat.
None known.
All heating and cooling will be electric. No natural gas, propane, oil, wood, or on-site solar.
No. Structures are all single-story, with the exception of the two-story community building at the south end of the property.
No
Deer and some birds are known visitors to the site. See also detail in the NEPA Environmental Assessment
None known; any noxious weeds identified during construction will be removed.
Native vegetation rain gardens are proposed for each cluster of cottages; see
landscaping plan
None
Site will be cleared except for preservation of mature trees along east property line and wetland/buffer area.
See also landscaping/tree preservation sheets.
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
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: [help]
7. Environmental health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk
of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal?
If so, describe. [help]
1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses.
2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development
and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines
located within the project area and in the vicinity.
3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced
during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating
life of the project.
4) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)? [help]
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a
short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi-
cate what hours noise would come from the site. [help]
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: [help]
8. Land and shoreline use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current
land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. [help]
b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe.
How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)
City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 7 of 11
Project will fully comply with Washington State Energy Code requirements and include mini-split ductless heat pump systems,
and occupancy lighting controls.
None.
None.
None.
None.
N/A
No significant or unusual noise sources; see EA.
Normal construction noise during daylight hours.
We will likely construct privacy fence
prior to start of housing construction.
Residential uses nearby; project will be compatible
with those uses.
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated,
how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or
nonforest use? [help]
1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal
business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides,
tilling, and harvesting? If so, how:
c. Describe any structures on the site. [help]
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? [help]
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? [help]
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? [help]
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? [help]
h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify.
[help]
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? [help]
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? [help]
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: [help]
L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any: [help]
m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest
lands of long-term commercial significance, if any:
9. Housing
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)
City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 8 of 11
No.
The property was historically used as pasture, but not designated as ag land of long-term commercial
significance.
None.
None.
Residential low density R-2A
Residential low density 2
N/A
See 2015 Critical Areas Assessment and 2020-07-31 Wetland Buffer Averaging Letter for details.
14-30 residents, including onsite manager
None
N/A
N/A
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid-
dle, or low-income housing. [help]
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing. [help]
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: [help]
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? [help]
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? [help]
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: [help]
11. Light and glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur? [help]
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? [help]
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? [help]
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: [help]
12. Recreation
a. W hat designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? [help]
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. [help]
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: [help]
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)
City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 9 of 11
14 low-income or senior housing units plus one onsite manager unit
None
N/A
No
Project includes a small playground for the benefit of the residents on the south edge of the property.
N/A
Lighting will be that normally associated with residential development
No
All lighting will be International Dark Sky Association compliant.
The community building will be 25 ft tall; cottages will be approximately 16 ft 8 in. Exterior siding will be principally fiber cement.
Ground-level views of the pasture/wetland to the south will be obstructed.
Privacy fencing will be provided around the exterior property lines except for split-rail fencing around the wetland area.
Street lighting and other typical residential lighting may have some minimal impact.
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
13. Historic and cultural preservation
a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years
old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or
near the site? If so, specifically describe. [help]
b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation?
This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts,
or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies
conducted at the site to identify such resources. [help]
c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources
on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of
archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc.
[help]
d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance
to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required.
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and
describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. [help]
b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally
describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? [help]
c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal
have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? [help]
d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian,
bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe
(indicate whether public or private). [help]
e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe. [help]
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)
City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 10 of 11
No
No; see archaeological review performed as part of EA
Consultation with city, DAHP, and neighboring tribes; see EA for details
N/A
The property is adjacent to D Ave and will improve the connection via the unbuilt 34th Street.
The site is not served by public transit, but the Samish Indian Nation is preparing a feasibility study to
evaluate standing up our own transit system for serving the development.
No spaces would be eliminated; 26 off-street spaces plus 14 carports will be created
No; see March 2020 traffic impact analysis
No
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal?
If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would
be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation
models were used to make these estimates? [help]
g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and
forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: [help]
15. Public services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection,
police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. [help]
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. [help]
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: [help]
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. [help]
C. SIGNATURE [HELP]
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury under laws of the State of Washington that the above
answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying
on them to make a decision.
Signature: ___________________________________________________
Name of signee __________________________________________________
Position and Agency/Organization ____________________________________
Date Submitted: _____________
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)
City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 11 of 11
51; see March 2020 traffic impact analysis
No
None proposed; see March 2020 traffic impact analysis
No
N/A
All services are available at the property line except sewer, which will be extended from 32nd Street;
no natural gas service or septic system is proposed
Electricity, water, sewer, refuse, fiber, cable TV, telephone will all be undergrounded on the site.
Sewer will be extended to 32nd Street via easement over the church property. Stormwater overflow
will be connected to existing pipe in existing drainage easement to the east.
Leslie Eastwood
General Manager, Samish Indian Nation
8/7/2020
GTC #20-050
Gibson Traffic Consultants
2813 Rockefeller Avenue
Suite B
Everett, WA 98201
425.339.8266
Samish Housing Development
Traffic Impact Analysis
Jurisdiction: City of Anacortes
March 2020
8/10/20
Samish Housing Development Traffic Impact Analysis
Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. March 2020
info@gibsontraffic.com i GTC #20-050
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1
2. SCOPING AND METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................... 1
2.1 Trip Generation ................................................................................................................ 1
2.2 Intersection level of Service Analysis .............................................................................. 1
3. SURROUNDING ROADWAYS ............................................................................................ 3
4. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION ....................................................................... 4
4.1 Trip Generation ................................................................................................................ 4
4.2 Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................... 4
5. INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS .......................................................... 4
5.1 Turning Movement Volumes ........................................................................................... 5
5.2 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Summary ............................................................ 5
6. MITIGATION FEES ............................................................................................................. 10
7. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................... 10
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Site Vicinity Map ............................................................................................................ 2
Figure 2: Development Trip Distribution – PM Peak-Hour ........................................................... 6
Figure 3: 2020 Existing Turning Movements ................................................................................. 7
Figure 4: 2026 Baseline Turning Movements ................................................................................ 8
Figure 5: 2026 Future with Development Turning Movements ..................................................... 9
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Level of Service Criteria for Intersections ........................................................................ 3
Table 2: Trip Generation Summary ................................................................................................ 4
Table 3: Intersection Level of Service Summary ........................................................................... 5
ATTACHMENTS
Trip Generation Data ..................................................................................................................... A
Count Data and Turning Movement Calculations .......................................................................... B
Intersection Level of Service Calculations ..................................................................................... C
Samish Housing Development Traffic Impact Analysis
Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. March 2020
info@gibsontraffic.com 1 GTC #20-050
1. INTRODUCTION
Gibson Traffic Consultants (GTC) has been retained to provide a traffic impact analysis for the
Samish Housing Development. The proposed development is located west of D Avenue at Vista
Lane/34th Street in the City of Anacortes. A site vicinity map is included in Figure 1. The
development is proposed to include 14 multifamily low-rise housing units with half of the units
being market-rate and half of the units being affordable housing. All of the units are anticipated to
access the surrounding street system via the intersection of D Avenue at Vista Lane/34th Street.
This report summarizes the trip generation, trip distribution and intersection analysis for the
intersection of D Avenue at Vista Lane/34th Street. This report also addresses comments from the
City of Anacortes staff regarding the initial traffic impact analysis from February 2020. The year
2026 has been used for the future analysis as the City of Anacortes has adopted a 6-year
concurrency period. Brad Lincoln, responsible for this report, is a licensed professional engineer
(Civil) in the State of Washington and member of the Washington State section of ITE.
2. SCOPING AND METHODOLOGY
The 14-unit Samish Housing Development is anticipated to generate less than 10 PM peak-hour
trips, which falls under the Level I guidelines for a traffic study. However, the scope of the analysis
for this report is based on a Level II traffic study since the initial traffic impact analysis was
performed for a Level II study.
2.1 Trip Generation
The trip generation for the Samish Housing Development has been calculated using data published
in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017).
City of Anacortes staff has identified that cottage units, which are smaller in size, are most similar
to multifamily low-rise units. Data for ITE Land Use Code 220, Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise),
has been used for the trip generation calculations.
2.2 Intersection level of Service Analysis
Intersection level of service analysis has been performed for the intersection of D Avenue at Vista
Lane/34th Street since this intersection essentially serves as the site access. The development will
not generate 10 PM peak-hour trips and a typical Level I study would not require analysis of off-
site intersections. The intersection analysis has been performed for the 2020 existing, 2026
baseline, and 2026 future with development conditions.
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
CITY OF ANACORTES
G IBSON T RAFFIC C ONSULTANTS
SAMISH HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT
14 UNITS
GTC #20-050
N
03/16/20
SITED AVEVISTA LN
32ND ST
H AVEF AVE36TH ST
DOWN JONES WAY37TH ST
34TH ST
LEGEND
SITE VICINITY
MAPDEVLOPMENT SITE
FIGURE 1
Samish Housing Development Traffic Impact Analysis
Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. March 2020
info@gibsontraffic.com 3 GTC #20-050
Traffic congestion on roadways is generally measured in terms of level of service at critical
intersections. In accordance with the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition, roadway facilities and
intersections are rated between LOS A and LOS F, with LOS A being free flow and LOS F being
forced flow or over-capacity conditions. The level of service at signalized intersections and all-
way stop-controlled intersections are based on the average stopped delay for all entering vehicles.
The level of service at two-way stop-controlled intersections is based on stopped delay times for
the approach with the highest delay. Geometric characteristics and conflicting traffic movements
are taken into consideration when determining level of service values. A summary of the level of
service criteria has been included in Table 1.
Table 1: Level of Service Criteria for Intersections
Level of 1
Service
Expected
Delay
Intersection Control Delay
(Seconds per Vehicle)
Unsignalized
Intersections
Signalized
Intersections
A Little/No Delay <10 <10
B Short Delays >10 and <15 >10 and <20
C Average Delays >15 and <25 >20 and <35
D Long Delays >25 and <35 >35 and <55
E Very Long Delays >35 and <50 >55 and <80
F Extreme Delays2 >50 >80
The acceptable level of service for intersections within the City of Anacortes is LOS C.
3. SURROUNDING ROADWAYS
D Avenue is a minor arterial roadway that provides north-south connectivity in the site vicinity.
The roadway has a posted speed limit of 30 mph with one lane in each direction. The intersection
of D Avenue at Vista Lane/34th Street is a two-way stop-controlled intersection with stop-control
on the Vista Lane/34th Street approaches. There are 7-8 ft paved shoulders along D Avenue.
1 Source: Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition.
LOS A: Free-flow traffic conditions, with minimal delay to stopped vehicles (no vehicle is delayed longer than
one cycle at signalized intersection).
LOS B: Generally stable traffic flow conditions.
LOS C: Occasional back-ups may develop, but delay to vehicles is short term and still tolerable.
LOS D: During short periods of the peak hour, delays to approaching vehicles may be substantial but are tolerable
during times of less demand (i.e. vehicles delayed one cycle or less at signal).
LOS E: Intersections operate at or near capacity, with long queues developing on all approaches and long delays.
LOS F: Jammed conditions on all approaches with excessively long delays and vehicles unable to move at times.
2 When demand volume exceeds the capacity of the lane, extreme delays will be encountered with queuing which may cause
severe congestion affecting other traffic movements in the intersection.
Samish Housing Development Traffic Impact Analysis
Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. March 2020
info@gibsontraffic.com 4 GTC #20-050
4. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION
4.1 Trip Generation
Trip generation calculations are based on data published by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) in Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition and the supplement published in
February 2020. The average trip generation rates for ITE Land Use Code 220, Multifamily
Housing (Low-Rise), have been utilized for the trip generation calculations. The trip generation of
the 14 housing units of the Samish Housing Development is summarized in Table 2.
Table 2: Trip Generation Summary
14 New
Housing Units
Average Daily Trips PM Peak-Hour Trips
Inbound Outbound Total Inbound Outbound Total
Generation Rate 7.32 trips per unit 0.56 trips per unit
Splits 50% 50% 100% 63% 37% 100%
Trips 51 51 102 5 3 8
The Samish Housing Development is anticipated to generate 102 average daily trips with 8 PM
peak-hour trips. The trip generation data is included in the attachments.
4.2 Trip Distribution
The trip distribution and assignment of the trips generated by the development are based on the
existing counts at the intersection of D Avenue at Vista Lane/34th Street and comments from the
City of Anacortes staff. The count data shows 55% of the vehicles travel to and from the north and
45% of the vehicles traveling to and from the south. City of Anacortes staff recommended that the
trip distribution should be closer to 80% to and from the north and 20% to and from the north. The
trip distribution recommended by the City of Anacortes staff has been utilized for this report. A
detailed trip distribution for the daily and PM peak-hour trips are shown in Figure 2.
5. INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
The intersection level of service analysis has been performed using the Synchro 10 software and
the HCM methodology. The analysis of the study intersection utilizes the existing channelization,
peak-hour factors and heavy-vehicle factors. The 2026 baseline and 2026 future with development
level of service analysis have been performed using the same parameters. The year 2026 has been
used for the future analysis as the City of Anacortes has adopted a 6-year concurrency period.
Samish Housing Development Traffic Impact Analysis
Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. March 2020
info@gibsontraffic.com 5 GTC #20-050
5.1 Turning Movement Volumes
The existing count at the study intersection was collected by Traffic Data Gathering (TDG) in
February 2020. The existing turning movement volumes at the study intersections are shown in
Figure 3 and the count data is included in the attachments. The 2026 baseline turning movements
have been calculated by applying a 3% annually compounding growth rate to the existing turning
movements. This is consistent with other developments in the City of Anacortes. The 2026
baseline turning movements at the study intersections are shown in Figure 4. The 2026 future with
development turning movements have been calculated by adding the trips generated by the
development to the 2026 baseline turning movements. The 2026 future with development turning
movements are shown in Figure 5. The turning movement calculations are included in the
attachments.
5.2 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Summary
The level of service analysis for the 2020 existing, 2026 baseline and 2026 future with
development conditions is summarized in Table 3. The approach with the highest delay has been
identified in the level of service summary.
Table 3: Intersection Level of Service Summary
Intersection
2020 Existing
Conditions
2026 Baseline
Conditions
2026 Future with
Development Conditions
Approach LOS Delay Approach LOS Delay Approach LOS Delay
1. D Avenue at
Vista Lane/
34th Street
Eastbound B 11.5 sec Eastbound B 12.5 sec Eastbound B 12.7 sec
The level of service analysis shows that the Samish Housing Development is not anticipated to
significantly affect the operations of the intersection of D Avenue at Vista Lane/34th Street. The
intersection currently operates at LOS B and is anticipated to remain at LOS B with the
development. The intersection level of service analysis calculations are included in the
attachments.
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
CITY OF ANACORTES
G IBSON T RAFFIC C ONSULTANTS
SAMISH HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT
14 UNITS
GTC #20-050
N
03/16/20
SITED AVEVISTA LN
32ND ST
H AVEF AVE36TH ST
DOWN JONES WAY37TH ST
34TH ST
LEGEND
NEW DAILY TRAFFIC
NEW PM PEAK-HOUR TRIPS
TRIP DISTRIBUTION %
FIGURE 2
DEVELOPMENT
TRIP DISTRIBUTION
PM PEAK-HOURXX
AWDTPMPEAK
80 824
2
20 201
1
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
CITY OF ANACORTES
G IBSON T RAFFIC C ONSULTANTS
SAMISH HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT
14 UNITS
GTC #20-050
N
03/16/20
PEAK-HOUR
TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES
LEGEND
SITED AVEVISTA LN
32ND ST
H AVEF AVE36TH ST
DOWN JONES WAY37TH ST
XXX
34TH ST
2020 EXISTING
TURNING MOVEMENTS
FIGURE 3121632
0
0
116913
0
1
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
CITY OF ANACORTES
G IBSON T RAFFIC C ONSULTANTS
SAMISH HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT
14 UNITS
GTC #20-050
N
03/16/20
PEAK-HOUR
TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES
LEGEND
SITED AVEVISTA LN
32ND ST
H AVEF AVE36TH ST
DOWN JONES WAY37TH ST
XXX
34TH ST
2026 BASELINE
TURNING MOVEMENTS
FIGURE 4125842
0
0
120214
0
1
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
CITY OF ANACORTES
G IBSON T RAFFIC C ONSULTANTS
SAMISH HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT
14 UNITS
GTC #20-050
N
03/16/20
PEAK-HOUR
TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES
LEGEND
SITED AVEVISTA LN
32ND ST
H AVEF AVE36TH ST
DOWN JONES WAY37TH ST
XXX
34TH ST
2026 FUTURE
WITH DEVELOPMENT
TURNING MOVEMENTS
FIGURE 5525844
0
1
220214
0
1
Samish Housing Development Traffic Impact Analysis
Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. March 2020
info@gibsontraffic.com 10 GTC #20-050
6. MITIGATION FEES
The City of Anacortes has a citywide mitigation traffic impact fee program, which generates
funding for transportation capacity improvement projects. The mitigation fee rate is currently
$1,604.10 per multifamily low-rise unit. Additionally, Anacortes Municipal Code (AMC) 3.93.060
allows for an 80% reduction in fees for affordable housing units. It is anticipated that 7 of the units
will meet the criteria for affordable housing and the 80% reduction in fees has therefore been
applied to half of the units. The traffic mitigation fees for each of the unit types (market rate and
affordable) with the 80% reduction for affordable housing units, is summarized below:
Market Rate Units (7 units) - $11,228.70 ($1,604.10 per unit)
Affordable Units (7 units) - $2,245.74 ($320.82 per unit)
The total traffic mitigation fees for the Samish Housing Development, including the 80% reduction
for the affordable housing units, is $13,474.44.
7. CONCLUSIONS
The Samish Housing Development is anticipated to generate 102 daily trips with 8 PM peak-hour
trips. The access to the site will be via the intersection of D Avenue at Vista Lane/34th Street. The
intersection currently operates at LOS B and is anticipated to remain at LOS B with the
development. The total traffic mitigation fees for the development will be $13,474.44 with the
80% reduction for 7 affordable housing units per AMC 3.93.060.
A
Trip Generation Data
A - 1
A - 2
B
Count Data and Turning Movement Calculations
HV
NB 0.0%
397 WB 0.0%
397 EB 25.0%
INTRS.3.0%
PHF = Peak Hour Factor
HV = Heavy Vehicle
COUNTED BY:DATE OF COUNT:
REDUCTION DATE:TIME OF COUNT:
4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR:4:15 PM
IN
PEAK HOUR VOLUME
1
217
0
3 216
Peds = 04
3
0
5:15 PM
Tue. 2/4/20
Peds = 0
PHF
0.92
0.50
0
0
TO
2
2
2
0.78171
174
169
Anacortes, WA
D Avenue @ Vista Ln/34th Street
0.50OUT
0.86Peds = 0
Tue. 2/4/20
TDG
4:00 PM - 6:00 PM
TURNING MOVEMENTS DIAGRAM
Vista Lane
4
INTERSECTION SBD Avenue1
1
220
34th Street
Peds = 01
0
0
0
D Avenue5.0%
0
0
0
0
BicyclesBicyclesBicycles
U-TurnU-Turn
Bicycles U-TurnU-Turn
B - 1
1 D Ave at Vista Ln
Synchro ID: 1
Existing Trips 220 394 174
Average Weekday 3 216 1 3 169 2
PM Peak Hour
3 D Avenue 2
Year: 2/4/2020 4 0 0 2
1 0
Data Source:TDG 8 Vista Lane 397 34th Street 4
North
3 1
4 0 0 2
1 D Avenue 1
1 216 0 1 169 1
217 388 171
Baseline Trips 263 471 208
Average Weekday 4 258 1 4 202 2
PM Peak Hour
4 D Avenue 2
Year:2026 5 0 02
Growth Rate =3.0%1 0
Years of Growth = 6 10 Vista Lane 474 34th Street 4
North
Total Growth = 1.1941 4 1
500 2
1 D Avenue 1
1 258 0 1 202 1
259 463 204
Development Trips 462
Average Weekday 004 002
PM Peak Hour
0 D Avenue 2
0 0 0 3
0 1
0 Vista Lane 8 34th Street 8
North
0 4
0 0 0 5
0 D Avenue 1
001 001
121
Future w Dev. Trips 267 477 210
Average Weekday 4 258 5 4 202 4
PM Peak Hour
4 D Avenue 4
5 0 05
1 1
10 Vista Lane 482 34th Street 12
North
4 5
500 7
1 D Avenue 2
1 258 1 1 202 2
260 465 205
B - 2
C
Intersection Level of Service Calculations
HCM 6th TWSC
1: D Avenue & Vista Lane/34th Street Samish Housing Development
2020 Existing Conditions PM Peak-Hour
Gibson Traffic Consultants [BJL 20-050]
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 010021169112163
Future Vol, veh/h 3 010021169112163
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 3 010021197112513
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 456 455 253 455 456 198 254 0 0 198 0 0
Stage 1 255 255 - 200 200 -------
Stage 2 201 200 - 255 256 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - 4.13 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - 2.227 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 513 500 783 514 499 841 1305 - - 1369 - -
Stage 1 747 695 - 800 734 -------
Stage 2 799 734 - 747 694 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 511 499 783 512 498 841 1305 - - 1369 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 511 499 - 512 498 -------
Stage 1 746 694 - 799 733 -------
Stage 2 796 733 - 745 693 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.5 9.3 0 0
HCM LOS B A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)1305 - - 560 841 1369 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - - 0.008 0.003 0.001 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 0 - 11.5 9.3 7.6 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -BAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0 0 0 - -
C - 1
HCM 6th TWSC
1: D Avenue & Vista Lane/34th Street Samish Housing Development
2026 Baseline Conditions PM Peak-Hour
Gibson Traffic Consultants [BJL 20-050]
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 010021202112584
Future Vol, veh/h 4 010021202112584
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 5 010021235113005
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 544 543 303 543 545 236 305 0 0 236 0 0
Stage 1 305 305 - 238 238 -------
Stage 2 239 238 - 305 307 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - 4.13 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - 2.227 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 448 445 734 449 444 801 1250 - - 1325 - -
Stage 1 702 660 - 763 706 -------
Stage 2 762 706 - 702 659 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 446 444 734 448 443 801 1250 - - 1325 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 446 444 - 448 443 -------
Stage 1 701 659 - 762 705 -------
Stage 2 759 705 - 700 658 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.5 9.5 0 0
HCM LOS B A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)1250 - - 484 801 1325 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - - 0.012 0.003 0.001 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 0 - 12.5 9.5 7.7 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -BAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0 0 0 - -
C - 2
HCM 6th TWSC
1: D Avenue & Vista Lane/34th Street Samish Housing Development
2026 Future Conditions with Development PM Peak-Hour
Gibson Traffic Consultants [BJL 20-050]
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 011041202252584
Future Vol, veh/h 4 011041202252584
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 5 011051235263005
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 556 554 303 553 555 236 305 0 0 237 0 0
Stage 1 315 315 - 238 238 -------
Stage 2 241 239 - 315 317 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - 4.13 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - 2.227 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 440 439 734 442 439 801 1250 - - 1324 - -
Stage 1 694 654 - 763 706 -------
Stage 2 760 706 - 694 652 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 436 436 734 439 436 801 1250 - - 1324 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 436 436 - 439 436 -------
Stage 1 693 651 - 762 705 -------
Stage 2 755 705 - 689 649 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.7 10.3 0 0.1
HCM LOS B B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)1250 - - 475 688 1324 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - - 0.012 0.008 0.004 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 0 - 12.7 10.3 7.7 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -BBAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0 0 0 - -
C - 3
PRELIMINARY ONLYSAMISH INDIAN NATIONKnow what'sTWO WORKING DAYS BEFOREYOU DIG CALL:811WWW.BLUESTAKES.ORGPLANS FOR PROJECT34TH STREET HOUSINGLOCATED IN : S25 T35N R1E WILLAMETTE MERIDIANSKAGIT COUNTY, WASHINGTON STATE95% SUBMITTAL8/10/20
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
3301330933063083311330130233063302PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLYNO PARKING
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLYDETAIL:WA-04SCNAATORE TCIYFO
DETAIL:WA-05SCNAATORE TC
I
YFO
PRELIMINARY ONLYDETAIL:WA-08SCNAATORE TCIYFO
DETAIL:WA-09SCNAATORE TC
I
YFO
PRELIMINARY ONLYST-01DETAIL:RNACAOETS CTIYFODETAIL: S-02
PRELIMINARY ONLYDETAIL:WA-01SCNAATORE TCIYFO
PIPE SUPPORT: WEIGHTS-DIMENSIONS (INCHES)DETAIL:WA-10SCNAATORE TC
I
YFO
PRELIMINARY ONLYMANHOLE TYPE 1SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEETDRAWN BY: LISA CYFORD
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLYAA
PRELIMINARY ONLYST-06DETAIL:SCNAATORE TCIYFO
DETAIL:ST-028. THE UTILITY SHOWN IS A SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE. UTILITY CASINGS LIKE WATER VALVES, MONUMENTS, GAS VALVES, ETC. WILLFOLLOW THE SAME PROCEDURE AND GUIDELINES.
PRELIMINARY ONLYST-04DETAIL:SCNAATORE TCIYFO
DETAIL:ST-05SCNAATORE TC
I
YFO
PRELIMINARY ONLYSHEET 1 OF 1 SHEETCEMENT CONCRETE CURBS111111116/11/14STANDARD PLAN F-10.12-03WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PRELIMINARY ONLYCURB RAMP4"(TYP.)SIDEWALKGRADE BREAKGRADE BREAKLANDINGCURB RAMP4' - 0" MIN.SEE CONTRACT PLANS3/8" EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) ~SEE STANDARD PLAN F-30.10(ALONG INSIDE RADIUS AT BACK OF WALKWAY)** 15' - 0" MAX. (TYP.)SEE NOTE 7 15' - 0" MAX. (TYP.)SEE NOTE 7***1 TYPE PARALLEL A PAY LIMIT"CEMENT CONCRETE CURB RAMP TYPEPARALLEL A" PAY LIMIT ~ SEE NOTE 6SIDEWALKGRADE BREAKLANDINGSEE CONTRACT PLANSGRADE BREAKPEDESTRIAN CURB ~SEE NOTE 94' - 0" MIN.4 "
(T Y P .)***(ALONG INSIDE RADIUS AT BACK OF WALKWAY)15' - 0" MAX. (TYP.)SEE NOTE 71CURB RAMP3/8" (IN) EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) ~SEE STANDARD PLAN F-30.10 TYPE PARALLEL B PAY LIMIT"CEMENT CONCRETE CURB RAMP TYPEPARALLEL B" PAY LIMIT ~ SEE NOTE 6LANDINGSEE CONTRACT PLANS4"
(TYP.)TOP OFROADWAYCOUNTER SLOPE5.0% MAX.VARIES
GRADE BREAKDETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE ~SEE STANDARD PLAN F-45.10CEMENT CONCRETEPEDESTRIANCURB ~ SEE NOTE 94' - 0" MIN.*DEPRESSED CURB AND GUTTER ~SEE STANDARD PLAN F-10.12AND NOTE 61CONTRACTION JOINT (TYP.) ~ SEESTANDARD PLAN F-30.1FOR CURB RAMP LENGTHS GREATER THAN 8' - 0"PROVIDECONTRACTION JOINT EQUALLY SPACED 4' - 0" MIN. OC.LANDINGCURB RAMPFACE OF CURB`CURB RAMPCURB RAMPFACE OF CURBSIDEWALKSIDEWALKCURB AND GUTTERCROSSWALK3" R. TYPE PARALLEL B4' - 0" MIN. ~SEE CONTRACT PLANSDETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE ~SEE STANDARD PLAN F-45.10PEDESTRIAN CURB ~SEE NOTE 9DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE ~SEE STANDARD PLAN F-45.10PEDESTRIAN CURB ~SEE NOTE 94' - 0" MIN. ~SEE CONTRACT PLANS***DEPRESSED CURB AND GUTTERDEPRESSED CURB AND GUTTER 4' - 0" MIN. ~SEE CONTRACT PLANS 4' - 0" MIN. ~SEE CONTRACT PLANSCURB AND GUTTER 3/8" (IN) EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) ~ SEESTANDARD PLAN F-30.10 3/8" EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) ~ SEESTANDARD PLAN F-30.10LANDING`CROSSWALK TYPE PARALLEL A
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLY
PRELIMINARY ONLYSHEET 1 OF 1 SHEETWSHOULDER12' MIN.GUIDE OR DIRECTIONAL SIGN WITHSECONDARY SIGN INSTALLATION ONEXPRESSWAYS AND FREEWAYSSIGN INSTALLATIONIN CURB SECTIONSIGN INSTALLATIONBEHIND TRAFFIC BARRIERMULTIPLE SIGN POST INSTALLATIONIN DITCH SECTIONSIGN INSTALLATIONIN DITCH SECTIONMULTIPLE SIGN POST INSTALLATIONIN FILL SECTIONSIGN INSTALLATIONON STEEP FILL SLOPESSIGN INSTALLATIONIN FILL SECTIONSIGN6'MIN.SLOPE BREAKV(7' MIN.)V(7' MIN.)SHOULDERWSLOPE BREAKSIGNSHOULDERSLOPE BREAKWV(7' MIN.)SIGN6'MIN.12' MIN.SLOPE BREAKSHOULDER12' MIN.V(8' MIN.)V(5' MIN.)MAJOR SIGN0" MIN.3" MAX.WV(7' MIN.)EDGE OFTRAVELEDWAYEDGE OFTRAVELEDWAYEDGE OFTRAVELEDWAYEDGE OFTRAVELEDWAYSIGNEDGE OFTRAVELEDWAYCURBW2'MIN.V(7' MIN.)SIGN3'MIN.WTRAFFIC BARRIEREDGE OFTRAVELEDWAYSIGN WITH SUPPLEMENTALPLAQUE INSTALLATIONIN FILL SECTIONV(7' MIN.)SLOPE BREAKSHOULDERPRIMARYSIGN6'MIN.12' MIN.W0" MIN.3" MAX.SUPPLEMENTALPLAQUEEDGE OFTRAVELEDWAYEDGE OFTRAVELEDWAYSLOPE BREAKSHOULDER12' MIN.W4'MIN.V(7' MIN.)SIGNSHOULDER12' MIN.WEDGE OFTRAVELEDWAYSLOPE BREAK4'MIN.V(7' MIN.)`DITCHDITCHSIGN1.BACKSLOPE6' MIN.Refer to the Sign Specification Sheet of theContract for the 'V' and 'W' distances.The minimum vertical distance from thebottom of the sign to the ground shall notbe less than 7' (ft) for signs located withinthe Design Clear Zone.V(5' MIN.)12' MIN.6'MIN.6H : 1V SLOPEOR FLATTERFILL SLOPESSTEEPERTHAN 6H : 1V2.BACKSLOPESECONDARY SIGN7' MIN.3' MIN.GROUND-MOUNTEDSIGN PLACEMENT7' MIN.HINGE ORNOTCH POINT113' (FT) MIN. FROM ANY POINT ALONG BOTTOMEDGE OF SIGN PANEL TO THE GROUND6/23/15WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PRELIMINARY ONLYSHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET1.2.~~3' - 0"3' - 6"
4" MAX.TOP OFSIGN POSTTOP OF SIGNSIGN POST 2"VARIESVARIES
FINISHEDGROUNDLINE3' - 6"
3' - 0"
1"COMMERCIAL CONCRETE 9"STABILIZER FINCLEAN-OUT BAR4"MAX. 9"COMPACTED NATIVEBACKFILL MATERIAL12"DIAM.COMPACTED NATIVEBACKFILL MATERIAL3' - 6"3' - 0"SIGN POSTBOLT STOPFOR SIGN POSTANCHORLEG ANGLESTABILIZER FINWEDGESIGN POSTSIGN POSTLOWER SIGNPOST SUPPORTCLEAN OUTBARLOWER SIGNPOST SUPPORT~~BOLT STOPFOR SIGN POST~~ANCHORLEG ANGLEBOLT STOPFOR SIGN POST9"DIAM.12"DIAM.SEE STD. PLAN G-20.10
3.FINISHEDGROUNDLINETOP OF LOWERSQUARE TUBEFINISHEDGROUNDLINEFINISHEDGROUNDLINEBOTTOMOF SIGNSIGN PANELSIGN PANELBOTTOMOF SIGNHEX BOLT WITH NUTAND WASHER (TYP.)BOLT STOPFOR SIGN POST"H1" ~ POST HEIGHT"H1" ~ POST HEIGHT
"H1" ~ POST HEIGHT
"H1" POST HEIGHT SIGN POST ~ 2" (IN)OR 2 1/4" (IN) SQUARE, 12-GAGE STEEL TUBESIGN POST ~ 2 1/4" (IN)SQUARE, 12-GAGESTEEL TUBELOWER SIGN POSTSUPPORT ~ 2 1/2" (IN)SQUARE, 12-GAGE STEEL TUBESIGN BRACE, WHENREQUIRED ~ SEESTD. PLAN G-50.10(SEE NOTE 2)
(SEE NOTE 2)
(SEE NOTE 2) SIGN POST ~ 2 1/2" (IN)SQUARE, 12-GAGESTEEL TUBE (SEENOTE 3)(SEE NOTE 2)
SEE STD. PLAN G-20.107' - 0" MIN.SEE STD. PLAN G-20.107' - 0" MIN.
7' - 0" MIN.
SEE STD. PLAN G-20.10
7' - 0" MIN.SIGNPOSTLOWER SIGN POSTSUPPORT ~ 3" (IN),7-GAGE, HOT-DIP GALV.,HEAVY-DUTY ANCHOR4.5.TOP OFLOWERSQUARETUBEFLANGED SHOULDER BOLTWITH NUT AND WASHERS ~2 REQUIRED (TYP.)1"~~SIGN POSTSIGN PANEL3/8" (IN) HEXHEAD NUT3/8" (IN) DIAM. ×3 1/2" (IN) LONGHEX HEAD BOLTDimensions for the parts used to assemble the base con-nections are intentionally not shown. Base connections arepatented, manufactured products that are in compliance withNCHRP 350 crash test criteria. The base connection detailsare shown on this plan only to illustrate how the parts areassembled.For "H1", refer to the Sign Specification Sheet in the Contract.A 2" (in) post with a 2 1/4" (in) PSST anchor or a2 1/4" (in) post with a 2 1/2" (in) PSST anchor maybe substituted. See Contract Plans.NYLON WASHER7/16" (IN) INSIDE DIAMETER (I.D.)STEEL FLAT WASHER7/16" (IN) I.D.STEEL LOCKWASHER2", 2 1/4"BURIEDDEPTH2' - 6"3' - 0"SIGN POST ~ 2" (IN), 2 1/4" (IN), OR 2 1/2" (IN)SQUARE, 12-GAGESTEEL TUBESTEEL SIGN SUPPORTTYPES ST-1 - ST-4INSTALLATION DETAILSSEE TABLE2 1/2"Perforated square steel post shall meet the requirements ofStandard Specification, Section 9-06.Use only base connection manufacturer supplied hardwarethat meets the requirements ofStandard Specification,Sections 9-06 and9-28.6/11/14WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PRELIMINARY ONLY
1 7/8"METHOD OF FASTENINGSTRETCHER BAR TO POSTTENSION WIREPULL POSTTYPE 3TYPE 4CHAIN LINK FENCETYPES 3 AND 4SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS1.2.3.FABRICPOSTTENSION WIRETENSION WIREHOG RINGS (TYP.) ~SPACED @ 24" (IN) MAX.TENSION WIREPOSTNOM. SIZE(SCH. 40)I.D.PIPEROLL FORMEDSECTIONWEIGHT(lb/ft)YZFABRIC LOOP ~2 SIDESFENCE LINETIE WIRE(TYP.)LINE POST ~ SPACED@ 10' (FT) MAX.BRACEPOSTTENSIONWIRETIE WIRE(TYP.)TENSION WIREKNUCKLED SELVAGE(TYP.)CONCRETE POSTBASE (TYP.)CHAIN LINKFENCE FABRICTENSION WIRETIE WIRES (TYP.) ~SPACED @ 14" (IN) MAX.PULL POST ~ SPACED@ 1000' (FT) MAX.TENSION WIRETENSION WIREBRACE POSTHOG RINGS (TYP.) ~SPACED @ 24" (IN) MAX.TENSION WIREPULL POSTTENSION WIRECONCRETE POSTBASE (TYP.)TIE WIRE(TYP.)TENSION WIRELINE POST ~ SPACED@ 10' (FT) MAX.BRACEPOSTTENSION WIREKNUCKLEDSELVAGE (TYP.)TIE WIRE(TYP.)TENSION WIREPULL POST ~ SPACED@ 500' (FT) MAX.KNUCKLED SELVAGE(TYP.)TENSION WIRETENSION WIRECHAIN LINKFENCE FABRICTIE WIRES (TYP.) ~SPACED @ 14" (IN) MAX.HOG RINGS (TYP.) ~SPACED @ 24" (IN) MAX.BRACE POSTAll concrete post bases shall be 10" (in)minimum diameter.Along the top and bottom, using HogRings, fasten the Chain Link FenceFabric to the Tension Wire within thelimits of the first full fabric weave.Details are illustrative and shall notlimit hardware design or post selectionof any particular fence type.4.END OR CORNER POSTEND OR CORNER POSTSTRETCHERBAR (TYP.)STRETCHERBAR (TYP.)STRETCHERBARSTRETCHER BAR (TYP.)STRETCHER BAR (TYP.)FABRIC BAND (TYP.)FABRIC BAND (TYP.)FABRIC BAND WITHCARRIAGE BOLT ANDNUT ~ SPACED 15" (IN)MAX.FABRIC BAND (TYP.)FABRIC BAND (TYP.)Fencing shall be used for security andboundary delineation only.TWISTED SELVAGE(TYP.)7/14/15WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Cottage Housing Application Submittal Checklist
Updated September 12, 2019 Page 6 of 11
S ITE P LAN R EQUIREMENTS
1.GENERAL INFORMATION
This form is intended to assist applicants in creating complete, code compliant site plans. Please check
the plans you wish to submit to make sure they contain each of the listed items. To the right of the
Requirements column is space for you to list the sheet number of the plan set where the listed
information is shown.
Site Plans must be drawn by a State of Washington licensed architect, engineer, surveyor, or other
specifically approved by the Director.Minimum Plan Size: 18” x 24” and drawn in an engineering scale. Plans must be legible.
2.INFORMATION REQUIRED ON ALL SITE PLANS
COMPLETE? REQUIREMENTS PAGE #
ON
YOUR
PLANS
Cover sheet must contain all of the following:
☐ Title Block:
☐ Project name, if applicable.
☐ Applicant and contact name, address, phone, email.
☐ Section, township, range
☐ Site Information Block:
☐ Site address, legal description and tax parcel number.
☐ Zoning designation. (see Official Zoning Map)
☐ Use classification. (per AMC Tables 19.42.040 or 19.42.050, and IRC/IBC)
☐ Density & dimensional calculations.
☐ Total site area (acreage & square footage)
☐ Gross site area (gross acreage) (see 19.12.010.G)
☐ Total number of residential units proposed and density calculations.
(see AMC 19.42.100 & 19.43.010.D.3.b)
☐ Range of unit types (# of bedrooms) and floor area of proposed units
(from lowest to highest).
☐ Range of heights and number of stories of purposed structures (from
lowest to highest).
☐ Lot coverage calculations. (see AMC Table 19.42.020 and 19.42.110)
☐ Maximum impervious surface area allowed for the lot as determined by
the calculations in the stormwater report for the project.
☐ Sheet Index & Legend
☐ Date plans were prepared and/or revised
☐ Vicinity map
☐ Name, address, phone number of Applicant, Owner, Engineer, & Surveyor
(include signature and seal)
Scale and North Arrow
8/10/20
Cottage Housing Application Submittal Checklist
Updated September 12, 2019 Page 7 of 11
Property features:
Property lines. Location, identification, and dimensions of all property
lines and easements. All easements shown on the title report, Record of
Survey, or plat must be dimensioned and shown.
Critical areas. Location and dimensions of existing critical areas
(wetlands, streams, steep slopes) and their associated buffers.
Other hydrologic features. Show seeps, springs, closed depression areas,
and drainage swales.
Shorelines. Location of Ordinary High Water Mark and shoreline
jurisdiction limits (if adjacent to a shoreline).
Topography and grading. Existing and proposed contours and site
elevations (i.e. finished grades) at 5-foot minimum increments. The
horizontal and vertical control datum must be clearly shown.
Structures:
Buildings. Location, dimensions and size of all existing and proposed
buildings and other structures. Label garages, minimum weather
protection (covered porch or recessed entry), and porches. (see AMC
19.43.010.D)
Other structures. Location of existing and proposed retaining walls,
rockeries, and fences.
Setbacks. Location, identification, and dimensions of all structure
setbacks from property lines, internal pedestrian paths, and internal
access lanes. (see AMC 19.42 and AMC 19.43.010.D)
Separation. Show required separation distances between cottages.
Projections. Show proposed projections into required setbacks, including
dimensions. (see AMC 19.44.140)
Adjacent property. Show buildings and features (within 30’ minimum)
including basic landscaping/trees, building foot prints, and uses.
Lighting and signs. Show existing and proposed freestanding lighting and
sign structures.
Utilities & Easements
Utilities. Location and dimensions of existing and proposed stormwater,
sanitary sewer, potable water, and fiber lines/facilities. All wells and
septic systems located on or near the project site must also be identified.
Easements. Show the location of all existing and proposed public and
private easements.
Fire hydrants. Location of all existing and proposed fire hydrants within
300 feet of the boundary of the project site.
Service Areas & Mechanical Equipment
Service areas. Location of proposed service areas (loading locks, trash
dumpsters, compactors, recycling areas, electrical panels and mechanical
equipment areas) and proposed screening. (see AMC 19.62.070)
Service utilities. Location of proposed utility meters, electrical conduit
and other service utility apparatus and proposed screening.
Group mailbox location for residential development.
Cottage Housing Application Submittal Checklist
Updated September 12, 2019 Page 8 of 11
Stormwater
Erosion Control. Proposed Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control
Measures, if not shown on other plans.
Permanent BMPs. Show location of existing and proposed permanent
stormwater management BMPs and required setbacks from adjacent
structures, utilities, property lines.
Access and Circulation
Streets/ROWs. Location, identification, and dimensions of all existing and
proposed on-site and adjacent streets and alleys, including the location
and dimensions of all existing and proposed curbs, gutters, sidewalks,
median islands, and street trees.
Site circulation. Location and dimensions of shared-access drives,
including inside corner turning radii, and required emergency apparatus
turnaround areas. Include proposed materials. (see AMC 19.53.050)
Pedestrian access. Show proposed internal pedestrian circulation,
including sidewalks, pedestrian paths, crosswalks (including proposed
widths and materials) and pedestrian lighting. (see AMC 19.43.010.D and
19.53.050)
Vehicular access. Show existing and proposed vehicular access to the
site, including the size and location of driveways and curb cuts. Include
distance between nearby street and alley intersections and adjacent /off-
site driveways.
Parking
Off-street parking. Show existing and proposed vehicle parking spaces
and drive aisles, including surface material and dimensions, and location
of wheel stops if applicable. Label ADA-compliant and compact spaces.
Parking Calculations. The following tables, with project specific
information filled in, must be placed on the site plan, as applicable:
Guest Parking Calculations (Example):
Type of Use from
AMC 19.64.030(B)
Parking Ratio
Required
# of Units # of Parking
spaces
Required
Cottage housing 1 per 4 units 10 3 required
Off-Street Vehicle Parking Calculations (Example):
Type of Use from
AMC 19.64.040
Parking Ratio
Required
# units # of Parking
Stalls Required
Cottage housing 1.5 per unit 10 15 required
Open Space
Common open space. Show location, dimensions, square footage and
design of each common open space area proposed to meet minimum
common open space standards. (see AMC 19.43.010.D.3.i)
Private open space. Show location, dimensions, square footage, and
design of each private open space area proposed to meet minimum
private open space standards. (see AMC 19.43.010.D.3.k)
Cottage Housing Application Submittal Checklist
Updated September 12, 2019 Page 9 of 11
Design. Provide design details regarding materials and surfacing, seating
types, landscaping elements, and other amenities and features intended
to enhance the character of the space and encourage its use.
Common Open Space Calculations. The following table, with project
specific information filled in, must be placed on the site plan, as
applicable. (see AMC 19.43.010.D.3.i)
Common Open Space Calculations (Example):
# units ratio Common open space required/provided
10 400 sq. ft.
per unit
4,000 sq. ft. common open space required
5,000 sq. ft. provided
Landscaping
Site Boundaries. Show boundaries and dimensions of site.
Streets & Utilities. Location of existing and proposed streets, curbs,
utility lines, sidewalks.
Buildings and parking areas. Location of buildings and structures, parking
lots, driveways, loading areas, outdoor mechanical equipment, signs,
refuse enclosures, overhead utilities, water meter location, grassy swales,
parking lot lighting, and any plants or trees that are to remain on the site.
New and retained vegetation. Show the location and design of landscape
areas to be preserved and planted, and a plant list to include the location,
number, size and type of plant material by botanical and common name.
Landscape buffers and screening. Show location, type, dimensions and
total area of each required landscape buffer area per Table 19.65.070(A)
and parking /access lane screening (see AMC 19.43.010.D.3.l).
Irrigation. Location of irrigation system if a permanent or temporary
system is proposed.
Tree preservation. Show the location of existing trees to be retained,
tree unit credit calculations, new trees to planted, and tree protection
measures to be implemented in conformance with AMC 16.50, when
applicable.
Planting details and standards. Include planting material and installation
standards. (see AMC 19.65.050)
LID BMP maintenance. Provide a maintenance plan for any infiltration-
based stormwater best management practices (BMPs) built as part of the
landscaping design, including the specifications and maintenance
procedures of any soil amendments.
The name, address, and phone number of the person preparing the plans.
Vegetation protection measures. Indicate tree and plant protection
measures to be implemented during construction.
Clear-vision triangle. Show the required clear-vision triangle per AMC
19.69.070 along intersections of streets, alleys, and driveways.
Cottage Housing Application Submittal Checklist
Updated September 12, 2019 Page 10 of 11
Landscaping Calculations. The following table, with project specific information
filled in, must be placed on the site plan:
Required Landscaping
Calculations
For Example
Gross Site Area 50,000 sq. ft.
% of site area to be landscaped (per
AMC Tables 19.42.020).
20% - Residential zones
10,000 sq. ft. required
15,000 sq. ft. provided
TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT QTY
ACER CIRCINATUM VINE MAPLE 10 GAL 4
ALNUS RUBRA RED ALDER 5 GAL 2
CRATAEGUS DOUGLASII BLACK HAWTHORN 5 GAL 3
FRANGULA PURSHIANA CASCARA BUCKTHORN 5 GAL 6
PINUS CONTORTA V. CONTORTA SHORE PINE 5 GAL 3
PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII DOUGLAS FIR 10 GAL 6
SHRUBS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT QTY
AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY 5 GAL 30
CORNUS SERICEA RED TWIG DOGWOOD 2 GAL 3
CORNUS SERICEA `FLAVIRAMEA`YELLOW TWIG DOGWOOD 2 GAL 8
GAULTHERIA SHALLON SALAL 1 GAL 6
HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR OCEANSPRAY 3 GAL 4
LONICERA INVOLUCRATA BLACK TWINBERRY 3 GAL 5
MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM TALL OREGON GRAPE 3 GAL 17
MALUS FUSCA PACIFIC CRABAPPLE 5 GAL 3
MYRICA CALIFORNICA PACIFIC WAX MYRTLE 5 GAL 5
RIBES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANT 3 GAL 3
SAMBUCUS CAERULEA BLUE ELDERBERRY 5 GAL 5
SPIRAEA DENSIFLORA SUBALPINE SPIRAEA 1 GAL 104
SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNOWBERRY 3 GAL 28
VACCINIUM OVATUM EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY 5 GAL 13
GROUNDCOVERS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT QTY
ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA-URSI KINNIKINNICK 1 GAL 174
ARMERIA MARITIMA SEA PINK 1 GAL 26
CAMASSIA QUAMASH COMMON CAMAS 1 GAL 17
CORNUS SERICEA `KELSEYI`DWARF REDTWIG DOGWOOD 2 GAL 67
FRAGARIA CHILOENSIS BEACH STRAWBERRY 4"POT 80
IRIS TENAX OREGON IRIS 1 GAL 66
JUNCUS ACUMINATUS TAPERED RUSH 4"POT 35
JUNCUS TENUIS SLENDER RUSH 4"POT 22
MAHONIA NERVOSA LOW OREGON GRAPE 1 GAL 96
POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM SWORD FERN 1 GAL 38
SEDUM OREGANUM OREGON STONECROP 4"POT 39
SOLIDAGO CANADENSIS `BABY GOLD`GOLDENROD 1 GAL 6
SYMPHYOTRICHUM SUBSPICATUM DOUGLAS ASTER 1 GAL 11
INERT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION QTY
(NO SYMBOL)SHREDDED BARK MULCH 35,391 SF
A
C
I
JA
JT
M
S
SC
NOTE TO CONTRACTOR:
LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. HAS ENDEAVORED TO PROVIDE ACCURATE UTILITY INFORMATION BASED ON THE MOST
CURRENT DATA AVAILABLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN
OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS WITH RESPECT TO LINE AND GRADE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. USE OF THE
INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS INSTRUMENT FOR OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS INTENDED
AND FOR OTHER THAN THE CLIENT FOR WHOM IT WAS PREPARED IS FORBIDDEN UNLESS EXPRESSLY PERMITTED IN
WRITING IN ADVANCE TO LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC., AND LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY TO
ANY USE OF THIS INFORMATION WITHOUT THEIR WRITTEN CONSENT.DESCRIPTIONBYDATEDATE
SHEET NUMBER
OF
CHECKED
DRAWN
DESIGNEDREV
PROJECT NO.34TH STREET HOUSINGANACORTES, WASECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 35 NORTH, RANGE 1 EASTJLM
6
AMK, AB
JVM
205213
07.24.2020
N:\projects\2020\205213 Samish Tribe Cottage Development (1.DES)\40-Design\41-CAD\1-Sheet Files\205213_LS00.dwg akizior Jul 24, 2020 - 1:01pm LANDSCAPE COVER1
GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES
GENERAL INFORMATION:
1.PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE INSTALLED AND
MAINTAINED BY A QUALIFIED AND EXPERIENCED
LANDSCAPE INSTALLER.
2.INSTALL ALL PLANT MATERIAL IN ACCORDANCE
WITH ALL LOCAL CODES AND ORDINANCES.
COORDINATE WITH THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE
TO OBTAIN ANY REQUIRED PERMITS NECESSARY TO
COMPLETE WORK. ALL WORKMANSHIP AND
MATERIALS SHALL BE GUARANTEED BY THE
CONTRACTOR FOR A PERIOD OF ONE (1) CALENDAR
YEAR.
3.PLANT ESTABLISHMENT BY THE CONTRACTOR
SHALL BE FOR 90 DAYS, BEGINNING ON START DATE
OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPING.
MAINTENANCE SHALL CONSIST OF MAINTAINING ALL
WORK INSTALLED UNDER CONTRACT AND
MONITORING THE TEMPORARY WATERING SYSTEM.
AFTER 90 DAYS THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY
THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE FOR A SITE
INSPECTION. UPON ACCEPTANCE OF PLANTS AND
MAINTENANCE, THE OWNER ASSUMES
MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES. PROJECT
WARRANTY REMAINS IN EFFECT FOR 1 YEAR FROM
DATE OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION ACCEPTANCE.
4.PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK,
DETERMINE LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND
UTILITIES THROUGH 'WASHINGTON 811' OR OTHER
METHOD AND PERFORM WORK IN A MANNER WHICH
WILL AVOID POSSIBLE DAMAGE. HAND EXCAVATE,
AS REQUIRED. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DAMAGES CAUSED AS A
RESULT OF HIS WORK.
5.ALL AREAS DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION
SHALL BE REPAIRED TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITION
WHEN NO LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS ARE SHOWN
ON THE PLANS. VERIFY TREATMENT WITH THE
OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO
IMPLEMENTATION.
FINISH GRADE / LANDSCAPE PREPARATION:
6.SITE GRADING NECESSITATED BY THE WORK AS IT
PROGRESSES AND NOT SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT
ON THE PLANS WILL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL
WORK.
7.CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT SUBGRADES
PREPARED BY OTHERS PRIOR TO COMMENCING
WITH CONTRACTED LANDSCAPING OR IRRIGATION
ACTIVITIES. ADVISE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE OF
DISCREPANCIES WITH DRAWINGS OR TECHNICAL
SPECIFICATIONS. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE
LEFT FREE OF CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AND/OR
TOXIC MATERIAL AND SUBGRADED TO A LEVEL TO
PERMIT LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION. TRENCHES
OR OTHER FILLED EXCAVATIONS SHALL BE
COMPACTED PRIOR TO LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION.
8.ALL TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ROADS AND
COMPACTED AREAS DEVELOPED THAT ARE WITHIN
THE LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE SCARIFIED AND
LOOSENED THEN WATER-SETTLED TO A DEPTH OF
12" PRIOR TO BEGINNING LANDSCAPE AND
IRRIGATION WORK.
9.ALL SUBGRADE SURFACES SHALL BE RAKED OR
GROOMED UNIFORMLY TO CONFORM TO THE
TYPICAL SECTIONS OF PROPOSED GRADES PRIOR
TO THE PLACEMENT OF SHREDDED BARK MULCH.
SUBGRADE SURFACES SHALL BE REASONABLY
SMOOTH, COMPACTED, AND FREE OF IRREGULAR
DRAINAGE INCONSISTENCIES (SUBGRADE FORM
SHALL MATCH FINISH GRADE FORMS). THE
LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE
FOR THE FINISH GRADE AND SHALL BEAR FINAL
RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROPER SURFACE DRAINAGE
OF PLANTED AREAS. FINISH GRADES SHALL MATCH
ENGINEER'S PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
10.FINISH GRADE FOR PLANTED AREAS SHALL BE PER
THE DETAILS WITH SMOOTH EVEN LINES AT EDGES
OF STRUCTURES.
11.FINISH GRADE IF NOT SPECIFIED ON THE PROJECT'S
GRADING PLANS SHALL SLOPE AT A 2% GRADE
AWAY FROM CURBS, WALKS, AND WALLS FOR
MINIMUM OF 10 FEET.
PLANTING:
12.ALL PLANT MATERIAL AND SPECIFICATIONS SHALL
CONFORM TO THE AMERICAN STANDARDS FOR
NURSERY STOCK UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. THE
OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE RESERVES THE RIGHT
TO REFUSE PLANT MATERIAL NOT MATCHING THE
STANDARD FOR SIZE, HEALTH, AND FORM.
13.DO NOT MAKE SUBSTITUTIONS; IF SPECIFIED
LANDSCAPE MATERIAL IS NON-OBTAINABLE, SUBMIT
PROOF OF NON-AVAILABILITY FROM AT LEAST FIVE
SUPPLIERS TO OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE,
TOGETHER WITH A PROPOSAL FOR SUBSTITUTION
OF EQUIVALENT MATERIAL FOR ACCEPTANCE.
14.LAYOUT INDIVIDUAL TREE AND PLANT LOCATIONS
AND AREAS FOR MULTIPLE PLANTINGS, STAKE
LOCATIONS AND OUTLINE AREAS AND SECURE
OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE ACCEPTANCE BEFORE
START OF PLANTING WORK. MAKE MINOR
ADJUSTMENTS AS MAY BE DIRECTED.
15.PLANT QUANTITIES LISTED IN THE LANDSCAPE
SCHEDULE ARE FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE
CONTRACTOR. IN THE CASE OF ANY
DISCREPANCIES, PLANS SHALL OVERRIDE THE
LANDSCAPE AND BID SCHEDULE QUANTITIES.
CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY QUANTITIES SHOWN
ON THE PLANS AND BASE THEIR BID ACCORDINGLY.
16.EXCAVATE PLANTING PITS, AS SHOWN ON THE
DRAWINGS AND SCHEDULES. LOOSEN HARD
SUBSOIL IN BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION. TEST
DRAINAGE OF TREE, SHRUB AND PLANT PITS BY
FILLING WITH WATER TWICE IN SUCCESSION.
CONDITIONS PERMITTING THE RETENTION OF
WATER IN PLANTING PITS FOR MORE THAN
TWENTY-FOUR (24) HOURS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE OWNER'S
REPRESENTATIVE.
17.IF ROCK, UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION,
ADVERSE DRAINAGE CONDITIONS, OR OTHER
OBSTRUCTIONS ARE ENCOUNTERED IN EXCAVATION
FOR PLANTING OF TREES, SHRUBS, OR PLANTS
NOTIFY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. NEW
LOCATIONS MAY BE DETERMINED, OR
INSTRUCTIONS MAY BE ISSUED TO DIRECT
REMOVAL OF OBSTRUCTION. PROCEED WITH WORK
ONLY AFTER APPROVAL OF OWNER'S
REPRESENTATIVE.
18.ALL PLANT BACKFILL MIXES SHALL BE AMENDED AS
DESCRIBED ON THE LANDSCAPE DRAWING DETAILS,
UNLESS SUPERCEDED BY SPECIFIC SOIL TESTING
AND OR LANDSCAPE SPECIFICATIONS. BACKFILL
MIX SHALL BE PLACED IN 6" LIFTS AND TAMPED INTO
PLACE TO OBTAIN COMPACTION. NO
TRANSPLANTING SHALL BE DONE WHEN SOIL IS
EXCESSIVELY WET.
19.ALL SHRUBS SHALL HAVE A FULL HEAD THAT
COVERS THE CAN DIAMETER (CAN FULL) AND A
MINIMUM OF THREE STEMS/BRANCHES.
20.PLANT BACKFILL MIX SHALL CONFORM TO
LANDSCAPE DETAIL NOTES, UNLESS OTHERWISE
SPECIFIED.
21.ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL RECEIVE TWO (2)
INCHES OF SHREDDED BARK MULCH (UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED). APPLY PRE-EMERGENT
HERBICIDE AS DIRECTED BY THE MANUFACTURER
PRIOR TO INSTALLING MULCH.
IRRIGATION:
22.CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE A TEMPORARY
IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO SERVE THE
NEWLY-INSTALLED LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS. THE
IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL PROVIDE SUFFICIENT
WATER TO ENSURE THAT THE PLANT MATERIALS
WILL SURVIVE INSTALLATION, AND ONCE
ESTABLISHED, WILL SURVIVE WITHOUT WATERING
OTHER THAN NATURAL RAINFALL.
LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2109 34TH STREET ANACORTES, WA
ZONING: R4A
USE CLASSIFICATION: RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY
REQUIRED LANDSCAPING CALCULATIONS
GROSS SITE AREA: 2.067 ACRES (90,037 SF)
WETLAND BUFFER AREA: 0.24 ACRES (10,251 SF)
NET SITE AREA: 1.83 ACRES (79,786 SF)
% OF SITE AREA TO BE LANDSCAPED
= 20% (RESIDENTIAL ZONES)
15,958 SQ.FT. REQUIRED
35,391 SQ.FT. PROVIDED = 44%
PLANS PREPARED
BY
JUDY MIELKE, PLA
APPROVED BY:
PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLANS
THIS DOCUMENT IS PRELIMINARY
IN NATURE AND IS NOT A FINAL,
SIGNED AND SEALED DOCUMENT
DESIGN ENGINEER DATE
8/10/20
M
M
M
M
M M
M
M M
M
M
M
M
M M
M
M
A
A
A
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
C
C
C C
C
C
C
C
JA
JA
JA JA JA
JA
JA
JA
JA
JA JA
JA
JA
JT
JT
JT
JT
JT
JT
JT JT
I
I
I
S
S
S
S
SS
S S
S
S
S
S
S
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
MM
A A
A
A
A
I
I
I
I
I
IM
M M
I
I
I
TREES BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
ACER CIRCINATUM
VINE MAPLE
ALNUS RUBRA
RED ALDER
CRATAEGUS DOUGLASII
BLACK HAWTHORN
FRANGULA PURSHIANA
CASCARA BUCKTHORN
PINUS CONTORTA V. CONTORTA
SHORE PINE
PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII
DOUGLAS FIR
SHRUBS BOTANICAL COMMON NAME
AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY
CORNUS SERICEA RED TWIG DOGWOOD
CORNUS SERICEA `FLAVIRAMEA`YELLOW TWIG DOGWOOD
GAULTHERIA SHALLON SALAL
HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR OCEANSPRAY
LONICERA INVOLUCRATA BLACK TWINBERRY
MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM TALL OREGON GRAPE
MALUS FUSCA PACIFIC CRABAPPLE
MYRICA CALIFORNICA PACIFIC WAX MYRTLE
RIBES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANT
SAMBUCUS CAERULEA BLUE ELDERBERRY
SPIRAEA DENSIFLORA SUBALPINE SPIRAEA
SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNOWBERRY
VACCINIUM OVATUM EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY
A
C
I
JA
JT
M
S
SC
GROUNDCOVERS
BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA-URSI
KINNIKINNICK
ARMERIA MARITIMA
SEA PINK
CAMASSIA QUAMASH
COMMON CAMAS
CORNUS SERICEA `KELSEYI`
DWARF REDTWIG DOGWOOD
FRAGARIA CHILOENSIS
BEACH STRAWBERRY
IRIS TENAX
OREGON IRIS
JUNCUS ACUMINATUS
TAPERED RUSH
BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
JUNCUS TENUIS
SLENDER RUSH
MAHONIA NERVOSA
LOW OREGON GRAPE
POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM
SWORD FERN
SEDUM OREGANUM
OREGON STONECROP
SOLIDAGO CANADENSIS 'BABY GOLD'
GOLDENROD
SYMPHYOTRICHUM SUBSPICATUM
DOUGLAS ASTER
INERT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
(NO SYMBOL) SHREDDED BARK
MULCH LANDSCAPE PLAN - AREA 1NOTE TO CONTRACTOR:
LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. HAS ENDEAVORED TO PROVIDE ACCURATE UTILITY INFORMATION BASED ON THE MOST
CURRENT DATA AVAILABLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN
OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS WITH RESPECT TO LINE AND GRADE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. USE OF THE
INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS INSTRUMENT FOR OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS INTENDED
AND FOR OTHER THAN THE CLIENT FOR WHOM IT WAS PREPARED IS FORBIDDEN UNLESS EXPRESSLY PERMITTED IN
WRITING IN ADVANCE TO LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC., AND LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY TO
ANY USE OF THIS INFORMATION WITHOUT THEIR WRITTEN CONSENT.DESCRIPTIONBYDATEDATE
SHEET NUMBER
OF
CHECKED
DRAWN
DESIGNEDREV
PROJECT NO.
LANDSCAPE LEGEND
KEY MAP
34TH ST 34TH STREET HOUSINGANACORTES, WASECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 35 NORTH, RANGE 1 EASTJLM
6
NTS
AMK, AB
JVM
205213
07.24.2020
N:\projects\2020\205213 Samish Tribe Cottage Development (1.DES)\40-Design\41-CAD\1-Sheet Files\205213_LS01.dwg akizior Jul 24, 2020 - 1:01pm 'D' AVENORTH AREA 1
2MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 3 / AREA 2MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 4 / AREA 3
3 4 T H S T R E E T
BIORETENTION CELL, NW
CARPORT
COTTAGECOTTAGE
COTTAGECOTTAGE
CARPORT
CARPORTCARPORT
CHAIN LINK FENCE (TYP.)
PROPERTY LINE (TYP.)
SHED
(OFFSITE)
SHED
(OFFSITE)
CLEAR-VISION
TRIANGLE (TYP.)
CLEAR VISION
TRIANGLE (TYP.)269.19'334.18 '
NORTH
0
SCALE:
feet102030
1" = 10'
CHAIN LINK FENCE
SHREDDED BARK MULCH
IN ALL PLANTING AREAS
M
M
M M
M
MMM
M
M
M
M
M
M
I
I
I
I
I
I
JA
JA
JA
JAJA
JA
JA
JA
JA
JT
JT
JT
JT JT
JT
JT
JT
JAJA
JA
C
C
C
C
C
C
A
A A
A
A
I
I I II
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A
A A
A
M
M
M
M
M
I
I
I
M
M M
A A A
A A
A A
A
A
TREES BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
ACER CIRCINATUM
VINE MAPLE
ALNUS RUBRA
RED ALDER
CRATAEGUS DOUGLASII
BLACK HAWTHORN
FRANGULA PURSHIANA
CASCARA BUCKTHORN
PINUS CONTORTA V. CONTORTA
SHORE PINE
PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII
DOUGLAS FIR
SHRUBS BOTANICAL COMMON NAME
AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY
CORNUS SERICEA RED TWIG DOGWOOD
CORNUS SERICEA `FLAVIRAMEA`YELLOW TWIG DOGWOOD
GAULTHERIA SHALLON SALAL
HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR OCEANSPRAY
LONICERA INVOLUCRATA BLACK TWINBERRY
MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM TALL OREGON GRAPE
MALUS FUSCA PACIFIC CRABAPPLE
MYRICA CALIFORNICA PACIFIC WAX MYRTLE
RIBES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANT
SAMBUCUS CAERULEA BLUE ELDERBERRY
SPIRAEA DENSIFLORA SUBALPINE SPIRAEA
SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNOWBERRY
VACCINIUM OVATUM EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY
A
C
I
JA
JT
M
S
SC
GROUNDCOVERS
BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA-URSI
KINNIKINNICK
ARMERIA MARITIMA
SEA PINK
CAMASSIA QUAMASH
COMMON CAMAS
CORNUS SERICEA `KELSEYI`
DWARF REDTWIG DOGWOOD
FRAGARIA CHILOENSIS
BEACH STRAWBERRY
IRIS TENAX
OREGON IRIS
JUNCUS ACUMINATUS
TAPERED RUSH
BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
JUNCUS TENUIS
SLENDER RUSH
MAHONIA NERVOSA
LOW OREGON GRAPE
POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM
SWORD FERN
SEDUM OREGANUM
OREGON STONECROP
SOLIDAGO CANADENSIS 'BABY GOLD'
GOLDENROD
SYMPHYOTRICHUM SUBSPICATUM
DOUGLAS ASTER
INERT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
(NO SYMBOL) SHREDDED BARK
MULCH
NOTE TO CONTRACTOR:
LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. HAS ENDEAVORED TO PROVIDE ACCURATE UTILITY INFORMATION BASED ON THE MOST
CURRENT DATA AVAILABLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN
OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS WITH RESPECT TO LINE AND GRADE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. USE OF THE
INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS INSTRUMENT FOR OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS INTENDED
AND FOR OTHER THAN THE CLIENT FOR WHOM IT WAS PREPARED IS FORBIDDEN UNLESS EXPRESSLY PERMITTED IN
WRITING IN ADVANCE TO LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC., AND LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY TO
ANY USE OF THIS INFORMATION WITHOUT THEIR WRITTEN CONSENT.DESCRIPTIONBYDATEDATE
SHEET NUMBER
OF
CHECKED
DRAWN
DESIGNEDREV
PROJECT NO.
LANDSCAPE LEGEND
KEY MAP
34TH ST 34TH STREET HOUSINGANACORTES, WASECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 35 NORTH, RANGE 1 EASTJLM
6
NTS
AMK, AB
JVM
205213
07.24.2020
N:\projects\2020\205213 Samish Tribe Cottage Development (1.DES)\40-Design\41-CAD\1-Sheet Files\205213_LS02.dwg akizior Jul 24, 2020 - 1:02pm 'D' AVENORTH LANDSCAPE PLAN - AREA 2AREA 2
3MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 2 / AREA 1MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 5 / AREA 4
3 4 T H S T R E E T
BIORETENTION CELL, NC BIORETENTION CELL, NE
COTTAGE
CARPORT
COTTAGE
COTTAGE COTTAGE
CARPORT
CARPORT
CARPORT
PROPERTY LINE (TYP.)
CHAIN LINK FENCE (TYP.)
CLEAR VISION
TRIANGLE (TYP.)
334.18'269.37'NORTH
0
SCALE:
feet102030
1" = 10'
SHREDDED BACK MULCH
IN ALL PLANTING AREAS
FIRE HYDRANT (SEE CIVIL PLANS)
M
M M
M
M M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
MM
JA
JA JA
JA JA
JA
JA
JA
JA
JA
JT
JTJTJT
JT
JT
I
I
I I
SC
SC SC
SC
SCSC
C
CC
S
S
SS
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S S
S S
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
M
M
M
TREES BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
ACER CIRCINATUM
VINE MAPLE
ALNUS RUBRA
RED ALDER
CRATAEGUS DOUGLASII
BLACK HAWTHORN
FRANGULA PURSHIANA
CASCARA BUCKTHORN
PINUS CONTORTA V. CONTORTA
SHORE PINE
PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII
DOUGLAS FIR
SHRUBS BOTANICAL COMMON NAME
AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY
CORNUS SERICEA RED TWIG DOGWOOD
CORNUS SERICEA `FLAVIRAMEA`YELLOW TWIG DOGWOOD
GAULTHERIA SHALLON SALAL
HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR OCEANSPRAY
LONICERA INVOLUCRATA BLACK TWINBERRY
MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM TALL OREGON GRAPE
MALUS FUSCA PACIFIC CRABAPPLE
MYRICA CALIFORNICA PACIFIC WAX MYRTLE
RIBES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANT
SAMBUCUS CAERULEA BLUE ELDERBERRY
SPIRAEA DENSIFLORA SUBALPINE SPIRAEA
SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNOWBERRY
VACCINIUM OVATUM EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY
A
C
I
JA
JT
M
S
SC
GROUNDCOVERS
BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA-URSI
KINNIKINNICK
ARMERIA MARITIMA
SEA PINK
CAMASSIA QUAMASH
COMMON CAMAS
CORNUS SERICEA `KELSEYI`
DWARF REDTWIG DOGWOOD
FRAGARIA CHILOENSIS
BEACH STRAWBERRY
IRIS TENAX
OREGON IRIS
JUNCUS ACUMINATUS
TAPERED RUSH
BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
JUNCUS TENUIS
SLENDER RUSH
MAHONIA NERVOSA
LOW OREGON GRAPE
POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM
SWORD FERN
SEDUM OREGANUM
OREGON STONECROP
SOLIDAGO CANADENSIS 'BABY GOLD'
GOLDENROD
SYMPHYOTRICHUM SUBSPICATUM
DOUGLAS ASTER
INERT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
(NO SYMBOL) SHREDDED BARK
MULCH
NOTE TO CONTRACTOR:
LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. HAS ENDEAVORED TO PROVIDE ACCURATE UTILITY INFORMATION BASED ON THE MOST
CURRENT DATA AVAILABLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN
OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS WITH RESPECT TO LINE AND GRADE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. USE OF THE
INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS INSTRUMENT FOR OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS INTENDED
AND FOR OTHER THAN THE CLIENT FOR WHOM IT WAS PREPARED IS FORBIDDEN UNLESS EXPRESSLY PERMITTED IN
WRITING IN ADVANCE TO LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC., AND LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY TO
ANY USE OF THIS INFORMATION WITHOUT THEIR WRITTEN CONSENT.DESCRIPTIONBYDATEDATE
SHEET NUMBER
OF
CHECKED
DRAWN
DESIGNEDREV
PROJECT NO.
LANDSCAPE LEGEND
KEY MAP
34TH ST 34TH STREET HOUSINGANACORTES, WASECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 35 NORTH, RANGE 1 EASTJLM
6
NTS
AMK, AB
JVM
205213
07.24.2020
N:\projects\2020\205213 Samish Tribe Cottage Development (1.DES)\40-Design\41-CAD\1-Sheet Files\205213_LS03.dwg akizior Jul 24, 2020 - 1:02pm 'D' AVENORTH LANDSCAPE PLAN - AREA 3AREA 3
4MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 5 / AREA 4MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 2 / AREA 1
3 4 T H S T R E E T
WETLAND
SPLIT RAIL FENCE
BIORETENTION CELL, SW
COTTAGE
COTTAGE
COTTAGE COTTAGE
CARPORTCARPORT
CARPORT
CARPORT
PROPERTY LINE (TYP.)
CHAIN LINK FENCE
CLEAR VISION
TRIANGLE (TYP.)
CLEAR VISION
TRIANGLE (TYP.)
WETLAND
BUFFER269.19 '334.55'
NORTH
0
SCALE:
feet102030
1" = 10'
SHREDDED BARK MULCH IN
ALL PLANTING AREAS
MMMMMMM
MM
M
MM
M
M
M
TREES BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
ACER CIRCINATUM
VINE MAPLE
ALNUS RUBRA
RED ALDER
CRATAEGUS DOUGLASII
BLACK HAWTHORN
FRANGULA PURSHIANA
CASCARA BUCKTHORN
PINUS CONTORTA V. CONTORTA
SHORE PINE
PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII
DOUGLAS FIR
SHRUBS BOTANICAL COMMON NAME
AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY
CORNUS SERICEA RED TWIG DOGWOOD
CORNUS SERICEA `FLAVIRAMEA`YELLOW TWIG DOGWOOD
GAULTHERIA SHALLON SALAL
HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR OCEANSPRAY
LONICERA INVOLUCRATA BLACK TWINBERRY
MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM TALL OREGON GRAPE
MALUS FUSCA PACIFIC CRABAPPLE
MYRICA CALIFORNICA PACIFIC WAX MYRTLE
RIBES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANT
SAMBUCUS CAERULEA BLUE ELDERBERRY
SPIRAEA DENSIFLORA SUBALPINE SPIRAEA
SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNOWBERRY
VACCINIUM OVATUM EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY
A
C
I
JA
JT
M
S
SC
GROUNDCOVERS
BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA-URSI
KINNIKINNICK
ARMERIA MARITIMA
SEA PINK
CAMASSIA QUAMASH
COMMON CAMAS
CORNUS SERICEA `KELSEYI`
DWARF REDTWIG DOGWOOD
FRAGARIA CHILOENSIS
BEACH STRAWBERRY
IRIS TENAX
OREGON IRIS
JUNCUS ACUMINATUS
TAPERED RUSH
BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
JUNCUS TENUIS
SLENDER RUSH
MAHONIA NERVOSA
LOW OREGON GRAPE
POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM
SWORD FERN
SEDUM OREGANUM
OREGON STONECROP
SOLIDAGO CANADENSIS 'BABY GOLD'
GOLDENROD
SYMPHYOTRICHUM SUBSPICATUM
DOUGLAS ASTER
INERT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
(NO SYMBOL) SHREDDED BARK
MULCH
NOTE TO CONTRACTOR:
LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. HAS ENDEAVORED TO PROVIDE ACCURATE UTILITY INFORMATION BASED ON THE MOST
CURRENT DATA AVAILABLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN
OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS WITH RESPECT TO LINE AND GRADE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. USE OF THE
INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS INSTRUMENT FOR OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS INTENDED
AND FOR OTHER THAN THE CLIENT FOR WHOM IT WAS PREPARED IS FORBIDDEN UNLESS EXPRESSLY PERMITTED IN
WRITING IN ADVANCE TO LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC., AND LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY TO
ANY USE OF THIS INFORMATION WITHOUT THEIR WRITTEN CONSENT.DESCRIPTIONBYDATEDATE
SHEET NUMBER
OF
CHECKED
DRAWN
DESIGNEDREV
PROJECT NO.
LANDSCAPE LEGEND
KEY MAP
34TH ST 34TH STREET HOUSINGANACORTES, WASECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 35 NORTH, RANGE 1 EASTJLM
6
NTS
AMK, AB
JVM
205213
07.24.2020
N:\projects\2020\205213 Samish Tribe Cottage Development (1.DES)\40-Design\41-CAD\1-Sheet Files\205213_LS04.dwg akizior Jul 24, 2020 - 1:02pm 'D' AVELANDSCAPE PLAN - AREA 4AREA 4
5MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 4 / AREA 3MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 3 / AREA 2
3 4 T H S T R E E T
WETLAND
EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN
PROTECT IN PLACE, TYP. -
SEE DETAIL 3 / SHEET 6
SPLIT RAIL FENCE
COTTAGECOTTAGE
CARPORTCARPORT
GROUP MAILBOXES
(2) 6-YARD DUMPSTERS
COMMUNITY CENTER
PLAYGROUND - SEE
DETAIL 5 / SHEET 6
ADA PARKING STALL
NORTH
0
SCALE:
feet102030
1" = 10'
NORTH269.37'334.55'
WETLAND BUFFER
SHREDDED BARK MULCH IN
ALL PLANTING AREASFIRE HYDRANT (SEE CIVIL PLANS)
CLEAR VISION TRIANGLE (TYP.)
NOTE TO CONTRACTOR:
LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. HAS ENDEAVORED TO PROVIDE ACCURATE UTILITY INFORMATION BASED ON THE MOST
CURRENT DATA AVAILABLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN
OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS WITH RESPECT TO LINE AND GRADE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. USE OF THE
INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS INSTRUMENT FOR OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS INTENDED
AND FOR OTHER THAN THE CLIENT FOR WHOM IT WAS PREPARED IS FORBIDDEN UNLESS EXPRESSLY PERMITTED IN
WRITING IN ADVANCE TO LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC., AND LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN INC. SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY TO
ANY USE OF THIS INFORMATION WITHOUT THEIR WRITTEN CONSENT.DESCRIPTIONBYDATEDATE
SHEET NUMBER
OF
CHECKED
DRAWN
DESIGNEDREV
PROJECT NO.34TH STREET HOUSINGANACORTES, WASECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 35 NORTH, RANGE 1 EASTJLM
6
AMK, AB
JVM
205213
07.24.2020
N:\projects\2020\205213 Samish Tribe Cottage Development (1.DES)\40-Design\41-CAD\1-Sheet Files\205213_LS05.dwg akizior Jul 24, 2020 - 1:02pm LANDSCAPE DETAILS6
SCALE: N.T.S.
CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING
WEBBING AT 1/3 HEIGHT
OF TREE
12" GREATER
THAN
ROOTBALL DIA.
ROOT CROWN 2" ABOVE
EXISTING GRADE
2" MULCH DEPTH
FINISH GRADE
UNDISTURBED EX SOIL OR EX SOIL COMPACTED TO
85% MAX DRY DENSITY, VERIFY POSITIVE DRAINAGE
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
SUBGRADE
NO SOIL BUILDUP OVER
ROOT FLARE
(2) 2" DIA WOOD DOWELED TREE STAKES
W/CHAMFERED TOP AND 6" CONICAL POINT
BOTTOM, KEEP CLEAR OF ROOTBALL
6"
BACKFILL W/ 2/3 EXCAVATED SOIL AND 1/3 ORGANIC MATERIAL,
WHEN HOLE IS HALF FILLED THOROUGHLY WATER SETTLE, THEN
ADD REMAINING SOIL AND WATER SETTLE A SECOND TIME
TREE TRUNK
ROOT BALL
TREE STAKE
LOOP DIAMETER SHALL BE 6"-8" GREATER THAN
TREE TRUNK DIAMETER; SECURE LOOP WITH
OVERHAND SLIPKNOT, PULLED AGAINST A
SECOND OVERHAND KNOT, TIED ON THE
WEBBED FABRIC TAPE
1/2" - 1" WIDE WEBBED FABRIC TAPE (ARBOR TIE
OR APPROVED EQUAL), SECURE TO TREE STAKE /
#2 PENNY COMMON NAIL (ONE PER STAKE)
1:1 SLOPE ON SIDES OF PLANTING HOLE
5'-0"
STAKE
HEIGHT PLAN
PREPARED BACKFILL MIX
SET ROOTBALL ON NATIVE UNDISTURBED SOIL OR SUBGRADE.
SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANT PIT
2X WIDTH OF
ROOTBALL
NOTES:
1.PREPARED BACKFILL MIX:
·1 PART ORGANIC MATERIAL,
·2 PARTS EXCAVATED SOIL
UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED
2.SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANT PIT WHEN GLAZED SMOOTH OR OVERLY COMPACTED.
3.PLACE PLANT ACCORDING TO BEST ORIENTATION.
4.SCORE ROOTBALL WITH VERTICAL CUTS (1/2" DEEP). A MINIMUM OF 6 LOCATIONS AROUND ROOTBALL.
5.SET TOP OF ROOTBALL FLUSH OR 1" ABOVE ESTABLISHED SOIL GRADE.
6.WATER SETTLE AND TAMP BACKFILL MATERIAL TO REMOVE AIR POCKETS.
SHRUB PIT
UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL OR SUBGRADE
2" MULCH DEPTH
SCALE: N.T.S.
SHRUB / GROUNDCOVER PLANTING
1 2
4
SCALE: N.T.S.
DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING
WEBBING AT 1/3 HEIGHT
OF TREE
12" GREATER
THAN
ROOTBALL DIA.
ROOT CROWN 2" ABOVE
EXISTING GRADE
2" MULCH DEPTH
FINISH GRADE
UNDISTURBED EX SOIL OR EX SOIL COMPACTED TO
85% MAX DRY DENSITY, VERIFY POSITIVE DRAINAGE
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
SUBGRADE
NO SOIL BUILDUP OVER
ROOT FLARE
(2) 2" DIA WOOD DOWELED TREE STAKES
W/CHAMFERED TOP AND 6" CONICAL POINT
BOTTOM, KEEP CLEAR OF ROOTBALL
6"
BACKFILL W/ 2/3 EXCAVATED SOIL AND 1/3 ORGANIC MATERIAL,
WHEN HOLE IS HALF FILLED THOROUGHLY WATER SETTLE, THEN
ADD REMAINING SOIL AND WATER SETTLE A SECOND TIME
TREE TRUNK
ROOT BALL
TREE STAKE
LOOP DIAMETER SHALL BE 6"-8" GREATER THAN
TREE TRUNK DIAMETER; SECURE LOOP WITH
OVERHAND SLIPKNOT, PULLED AGAINST A
SECOND OVERHAND KNOT, TIED ON THE
WEBBED FABRIC TAPE
1/2" - 1" WIDE WEBBED FABRIC TAPE (ARBOR TIE
OR APPROVED EQUAL), SECURE TO TREE STAKE /
#2 PENNY COMMON NAIL (ONE PER STAKE)
1:1 SLOPE ON SIDES OF PLANTING HOLE
5'-0"
STAKE
HEIGHT PLAN
SCALE: N.T.S.
TREE PROTECTION FENCE
PLACE SIGNS:
EVERY 50' ATTACHED TO FENCING
KEEP OUT
TREE PROTECTION
AREA
NOTE:
NO MATERIALS SHALL BE
STORED WITHIN THE TREE
PROTECTION AREAS
ROOT PROTECTION
VARIES PER TREE SIZE-EXTENDS
FROM DRIPLINE TO DRIPLINE
(2) STRAND GOLD
ROPE
T-BAR POSTS PLACED
AT 30' O.C. SPACING
MAXIMUM AND ALL
ANGLE POINTS
TRUNK PROTECTION
REQUIRED IF WHEELED
CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT INVOLVED
WITHIN 20' OR LESS.
BRANCH
PROTECTION -
PROTECT LOWER
BRANCHES
OF TREE CANOPY.
PROVIDE
CONSTRUCTION
FENCING OR
EQUAL AT
DRIPLINE (MIN.)
3
SCALE: N.T.S.
PLAYGROUND - PLAN VIEW
NOTE:
PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE
INSTALLED PER SPECIFICATIONS
PROVIDED BY MANUFACTURER
(LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES INC.).
CONTACT: JOHN LARSON
PLAYCREATION INC.
2014 SW 152ND STREET, SUITE 1
BURIEN, WA 98166
206-932-6366
RUSHWINDER SLIDE BY
LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES INC.
27'-1"16'-0"20'-0"30'-0"
FALL ZONE REQURIED
LIMIT OF AREA AVAILABLE
FOR PLAYGROUND
COLORS AVAILABLE
RUSHWINDER SLIDE - ILLUSRATION
5
8/10/20
8/10/20
HORIZONTAL DATUM
NAD 83/91 4601 NORTH US FEET
VERTI CAL DATUM
NAVD 88, DERIVED FROM GPS OBSERVATION
4601 WA NORTH ZONE.
EQUIPMENT USES
LEICA 1201 ROBOTIC TOTAL STATION
CS-15 DATA COLLECTOR, GS14
GPS RECEIVER.
REFERENCE SURVEY IS
RECORD OF SURVEY #201006180017(R)
RECORD OF SURVEY #201312130068
RECORD OF SURVEY #201501200206
RECORD OF SURVEY #201611290017
PLAT OF STONE RIDGE 3 #201201170064
RECORD OF SURVEY #201005050054
HORIZON HEIGHTS DIV. NO. IV, 199605300104
5AS I SEAR I NG :
NO ° O2'41 "W(R) NO I ° 16'' I 1 "E(..)
FOUND MONUMENTS OF RECORD ON D AVENUE
SHOWN HEREON, PER RECORD OF SURVEY
#201006180017, TRANSLATED AND ROTATED
TO HDGA GPS NETWORK STATE PLANE US FEET.
0
GRAPHIC SCALE
30
60
1"= 30'
90
32ND S REET
SD
CS 2511 RIM = 250.0q'
IE 8" PVC E, IE = 246.75'+/-
IE 4" PVC, A IE = 247.55'+/-
55MH 2518 RIM = 250.261'
IE8" PVC 5,E
G.O.G. 245.615'
,t
- M
— SD
H.
POWER
TRANSFORMER -
ON CONCRETE
°I.
S88 *28'46"E (C) 99.99 (C) 100 (P)
•
SO1 °30'42"W (C)
52.05' (P)
69
®J
A=22.99' (C)
R=475.00 (P)
A= 2 *46'25" (C)
S88 °28 b "E C) 99.44 ' (P)
SO8 °37'09"W (C)
34.47' (C) 34.49' (P)
AJ
2
cn
cn
cn
rr•
so —
CU
Q
cn
,. 4
•
U
C
C5 2257 RIM = 2461.67'
IE 8" PVC N, IE = 246.52'+/-
IE 12" CONC. 5, IE = 246.2q'+/-
S86 °25 ' 11 "E (C) 6.70 ' (P) (M)
A
GS 2212 RIM = 2461.41'
IE 12" CONC. N, IE = 246.16'+/-
IE 12" CONC. E, YV, IE = 244.86'+/-
-6'o
C5 2287 RIM = 250.16'
IE 8" PVC A IE = 246.81'+/-
IE 12" PVC 5 IE = 246.7q'+/-
IE 6" PVC, E IE = 246.7q'+/-
05 1002 RIM = 251.68'
IE 8" PVC N, IE = 248.54'+/-
IE 12" CONC. E IE = 248.54'+/-
IE 5" PVC, NA, 5W IE = 2461.5'+/-
05 10061 RIM = 251.67'
IE 12" GONG N, A, IE = 248.1I'+/-
55MH 2185 RIM = 252.22'
IE8"PVGN,5
G.O.G. 245.08'
SURVEY NOTES
=0 =10\
THIS SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED WITHOUT
THE BENEFIT OF A CURRENT TITLE REPORT
AND THEREFORE DOES NOT PURPORT TO
SHOW ALL EASEMENTS OR RESTRICTIONS
OF RECORD, IF ANY.
TOPOG
O SE 1/4 O _ \i 1/4
SKA I T COUNTY, iASH I NOTON
ENCROACHMENT NOTE:
EXISTING ENCROACHMENTS HAVE BEEN SHOWN PURSUANT TO
RCW 58.17.255 AND SHALL BE DISCLOSED IN THE TITLE
REPORT PREPARED BY THE TITLE INSURER AND ISSUED AFTER
THE FILING OF THIS PLAT.
EXISTING POSSESSION, I.E., FENCES AND OCCUPATION MAY HAVE
RIGHTS. DO NOT REMOVE THEM WITHOUT THE OWNER'S CONSENT
OR LEGAL COUNSEL.
THE ENCROACHMENTS SHOWN BY THIS SURVEY MAY BE INDICATION
OF UNWRITTEN RIGHTS BY EITHER A PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT OR
HOSTILE RELATIONS. NO ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO VERIFY IF AN UNWRITTEN
RIGHT HAS BEEN EXTINGUISHED FROM ANY PORTION OF THE WRITTEN
TITLE SHOWN BY THIS SURVEY. ANY CLAIMANT SHOULD CONSULT AN
ATTORNEY CONCERNING THE BURDEN OF PROOF REQUIRED TO PERFECT
AN UNWRITTEN RIGHT AND OBTAIN A WRITTEN TITLE.
PENCE NOTE:
FENCE LINES SHOWN ON THIS SURVEY WERE FIELD
LOCATED AT VISABLE ANGLE POINTS IN THE CENTER OF
THE FENCE. THE ACTUAL OCCUPATION OF THE FENCE
OR SUPPORTING POSTS ARE NOT ASSURED BEYOND
THE ACTUAL WIDTH OF THE FENCE STRUCTURE. ONLY
THE ABOVE GROUND PORTIONS OF THE FENCE WERE
LOCATED.
PROCEDURE/NARRATIVE
A FIELD TRAVERSE USING A LIECA 1201 TOTAL ROBOTIC STATION,
SUPPLEMENTED WITH FIELD NOTES WAS PERFORMED. ESTABLISHING
THE ANGULAR DISTANCE BETWEEN THE MONUMENTS, PROPERTY LINES
AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES AS SHOWN HEREON, THE RESULTING
DATA MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE STANDARDS FOR LAND BOUNDARY
SURVEYS AS SET FORTH IN WAC 332-130-090.
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND FEATURES DEPICTED
HEREON ARE BASED ON FIELD OBSERVATION, MARKINGS,
DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND/OR AVAILABLE DOCUMENTS
ONLY. THE TRUE LOCATION, NATURE AND/OR EXISTENCE
OF BELOW GROUND FEATURES DETECTED OR UNDETECTED
SHOULD BE VERIFIED.
EXISTING FEATURES SHOWN HEREON ARE AS OF
MAY 2018 AND JUNE 2019.
ALL DISTANCES ARE IN US FEET.
ONLY ABOVE GROUND VISIBLE UTILITIES WERE
LOCATED THIS SURVEY. ALL UTILITIES SHOULD
BE VERIFIED PRIOR TO ANY DESIGN OR
CONSTRUCTION.
THE BOUNDARY CORNERS AND LINES DEPICTED ON
THIS MAP REPRESENT DEED LINES ONLY. THEY DO
NOT PURPORT TO SHOW OWNERSHIP LINES THAT MAY
OTHERWISE BE DETERMINED BY A COURT OF LAW.
RIGHT OF WAY WAS CALCULATED USING RECORD
OF SURVEY # 201006180017.
TOPOGRAPHY NOTE
ELEVATIONS AND CONTOURS SHOWN HEREON
ARE DERIVED BY ACTUAL FIELD LOCATES.
CONTOUR INTERVAL = 2 FEET
,i,
,i,
,i,
1
LECENO
(P) PLAT OF HORIZON HEIGHTS DIV. IV
(M) MEASURED INFORMATION
(R) RECORD INFORMATION, ROS #201006180017
(C) CALCULATED INFORMATION
G.O.G. CENTER OF CHANNEL
9 MONUMENT AS NOTED
O REBAR AS NOTED
C) HEDGE ROW
o MAIL BOX
® SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE(SSMH)
Q STOP SIGN
EE CATCH BASIN AS NOTED
FIRE HYDRANT
o STREET SIGN
WATER VALVE
❑M WATER METER
❑E POWER METER
POWER POLE
® POWER HANDHOLE
4 CULVERT AS NOTED
CARSONITE UNDERGROUND GAS MARKER
sr STORM DRAIN MANHOLE(SDMH)
CLEAN OUT
❑r TELEPHONE PEDISTAL
# LIGHT POLE
POWER TRANSFORMER
MONUMENT LINE
RIGHT OF WAY LINE
FOG LINE
EDGE OF PAVEMENT
EDGE OF GRAVEL
VERTICAL CONCRETE CURB
i if Ii if ii if FENCE LINE
,i,
vo
SD
ss
- P
- sT
w
a
44
yA
SD
ss
P
T —
CONCRETE
GREEN PAINT
GREEN PAINT
RED PAINT
ORANGE PAINT
YELLOW PAINT
BLUE PAINT
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
THIS MAP CORRECTLY REPRESENTS A SURVEY MADE BY ME OR UNDER MY
DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SURVEY
RECORDING ACT AT THE REQUEST OF REDPLAINS PROFESSIONAL, INC.
THIS 2ND DAY OF JULY
„
,� �_ j� �—
-�a ���- � -,
2019.
CERTIFICATE NO. L.S.34145
PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR G. PHIL SARGENT
7
A (,_) _,O22 (3 O) (2',1-k;1)83
to
a
0
0
0
A
R.GALLION
DRAWN BY
7/9/2019
DATE
1559
PROJECT NUMBER
b jLJj s= 2
OF 2
\ /
8/10/20
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 METHODS 1
2.1 CLIMATIC CONDITIONS 2
2.2 WETLAND DELINEATION CRITERIA/PARAMETERS 3
2.3 COWARDIN CLASSIFICATION 4
3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SITE CONDITIONS 4
3.1 UPLAND FOREST 11
3.2 UPLAND SCRUB -SHRUB 12
3.3 FALLOW OPEN PASTURE AND REMNANT ORCHARD 14
3.4 PALUSTRINE SCRUB -SHRUB WETLAND 15
4.0 WETLAND CLASSIFICATONS & FUNCTIONS 16
5.0 REGULATORY SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS 18
5.1. CITY OF ANACORTES 19
5.2. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY JURISDICITONS 19
6.0 DISCLAIMER 19
7.0 LITERATURE REVIEWED 20
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. 2009 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH 5
FIGURE 2. 2012 AERIAL PHOTOGRPAH 6
FIGURE 3. CITY OF ANACORTES WETLAND, ZONING AND PARCEL MAP 7
FIGURE 4. DELINEATION SITE PLAN WITH SAMPLE PLOTS 9
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1. ANALYSIS OF WETLAND PARAMETERS AT SAMPLE PLOTS 8
APPENDIX A: PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX B: DATASHEETS
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK — 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This technical report summarizes the results of a Wetlands Site Assessment conducted by
Advanced Environmental Solutions (AES) on Parcel # P32217, approximately 2.0-acres,
located at 2109 34th Street within the City of Anacortes, Washington. The property,
formerly developed with a single-family residence that has since been demolished,
consists of a mix of open pasture and forestland.
Property Owner:
Mr. Billy D. Click
24179 Old Day Creek Road
Sedro-Woolley, WA 98284
(360) 856-4704
2.0 METHODS
Ms. Tina Mirabile, PWS, of AES conducted site visits on November 20, December 10 in
2014 and on February 3, 2015 in order to document the existing environmental site
conditions. Data on the existing vegetation, soils, hydrology and associated wildlife
habitats were recorded. Photographs depicting the existing conditions at the time of the
site visits are included in Appendix A.
2.1 CLIMATIC CONDITIONS
The Soil Survey of Skagit County Area, Washington indicates that the growing season for
the Mount Vernon area extends from March 14 through November 11 (USDA SCS,
1989). The site investigation was conducted in the winter, outside of the growing season.
Prior to the initiation of the site investigation, below freezing (32 degrees Fahrenheit)
low temperatures were recorded for four consecutive days on November 13 — 16, 2014
(Weather Underground, 2015). Freezing temperatures were additionally recorded on
November 29, 30 and December 1,2, 30 and 31 in 2014. With the exception of New
Year's Day (January 1), no daily below freezing low temperatures were however
recorded in 2015 prior to the February 3rd site visit.
The City of Anacortes receives, on average, 26.76 inches of precipitation annually
(Western Regional Climate Center, 2014). The driest months of the year are typically
April, May, June, July, August, and September when less than two inches of precipitation
is received each month. Typically more than three inches of monthly precipitation is
received in November, December and January. Precipitation received in October 2014,
the month prior to the investigation, exceeded the monthly average by 1.65 inches. A
total of 4.41 inches of precipitation was recorded. The monthly average for precipitation
in October is 2.76 inches (Weather Underground, 2015).
The first day of the site investigation, November 20, 2014, was conducted during rainy
and windy weather conditions with an average daily temperature of 49 degrees
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK — 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
1
Fahrenheit. Precipitation received for the day totaled 0.04 inches and wind speeds of 12
mph with gusts up to 20 mph were recorded (Weather Underground, 2015). No
precipitation was received in thel0 days prior to the site visit. Monthly precipitation
received prior to site visit in November totaled 1.05 inches. Total precipitation (3.64
inches) recorded in November was slightly below the monthly average (WRCC, 2015).
A storm preceded the site visit conducted on December 10, 2014. High winds and more
than an inch of daily precipitation were recorded for both December 9 and 10th (Weather
Underground, 2015). Above average daily temperatures, in the low 50s (degrees
Fahrenheit), were recorded. Precipitation recorded in December 2014 and January 2015
exceeded their respective monthly averages.
The average temperature on February 3, 2015, the last day of the field investigation, was
recorded as 47 degrees Fahrenheit (Weather Underground, 2015). Precipitation for the
day totaled 0.03 inches. Daily precipitation for the three days prior to the site visit was
recorded as 0.04 inches, 0.05 inches and 0.13 inches respectively.
2.2 WETLAND DELINEATION CRITERIA/PARAMETERS
Wetland identification and delineation was based on protocols outlined in Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western
Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (U.S. Armv Corps of Engineers {Corps] 2010).
This manual is a supplement to the 1987 Corps of Engineers Delineation Manual
(U.S. Armv Corps of Engineers 1987). Although the Washington State Identification
and Delineation Manual (Washington Department of Ecology 1997) is referenced in
Section 17.70.320 (Wetland Designation) of Anacortes Municipal Code, it is no longer
valid and therefore was not used.
The wetland delineation methodology requires evidence that at least one positive wetland
indicator must be found for each of following three parameters to make a positive
wetland determination:
1) Vegetation — the land supports predominantly hydrophytic vegetation (macrophytes
that are able to grow in water or on a substrate that is at least periodically deficient in
oxygen).
The presence of hydrophytic vegetation is determined using a wetland indicator
status of species encountered. A list of plants able to tolerate saturated soil
conditions was originally prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS;
Reed 1988), with updated regional lists available from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps, 2012). Vascular plants are classified according to their affinity for
wetland areas, and thus their probability of being found in a wetland. There are five
wetland indicator status ratings, as defined below:
• Obligate Wetland (OBL): Under natural conditions, plants occur almost
exclusively in wetlands (estimated probability >99 percent).
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK — 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
• Facultative Wetland (FACW): Plants usually occur in wetlands
(estimated probability 67 to 99 percent), but are occasionally found in
non -wetlands.
• Facultative (FAC): Plants are equally likely to occur in wetlands and
non -wetlands (estimated probability 34 to 66 percent).
• Facultative Upland (FACU): Plants usually occur in non -wetlands
(estimated probability 67 to 99 percent), but are occasionally found in
wetlands (estimated probability 1 to 33 percent).
• Obligate Upland (UPL): Plants may occur in wetlands in another region,
but under natural conditions almost always occur in non -wetlands in the
region specified (estimated probability >99 percent).
Hydrophytic plants are those rated as FACW or wetter. Wetland and upland
vegetation communities are determined on the basis of their dominant plant species,
rather than any one particular indicator species.
2) Soils — the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil, or soils possess
characteristics associated with reducing soil conditions.
Hydric soils are flooded, ponded, or saturated long enough during the growing
season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil profile (Soil
Conservation Service 1991). Anaerobic conditions are created when flooding,
ponding, or saturation is of sufficient duration to eliminate oxygen from the
environment. These soils usually support hydrophytic vegetation. The National
Technical Committee on Hydric Soils developed criteria for hydric soils and
published a list of the Nation's hydric soil types (NRCS 2012). Because they are
saturated during the growing season, hydric soils usually develop certain
morphological features and soil colorations that can be observed in the field. Low
chroma colors of 2 of less, using a Musell color system, include black, various
shades of gray, and darker shades of brown and red which are often diagnostic of
hydric soils (Munsell Color, 2009). Mineral soils that are alternately saturated and
oxidized (aerated) during the year usually display redox features in the part of the
soil that is seasonally wet. Redox features appear as spots or blotches of contrasting
colors or shades of colors interspersed with the dominant (matrix) color. Soils that
are predominantly brown or yellow with few gray redox features may be saturated
for shorter periods and generally are not hydric. Mineral soils that are never
saturated are usually brightly colored displaying matrix chromas of 3 or greater
without redox features.
3) Hydrology — The area is inundated either permanently or periodically at a mean
water depth of less than 6.9 feet, or the soil is saturated to the surface at some time
during the growing season of the prevalent vegetation.
Of the three technical criteria for wetland identification, wetland hydrology is often
the least exact and most difficult to characterize, primarily because of annual,
seasonal, and daily fluctuations in water level. An area has wetland hydrology when
saturated within the rooting zone (usually within 12 inches of the surface) for at least
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK - 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
5 percent of the growing season. The growing season is defined as the portion of the
year when the soil temperature 19.7 inches below the soil surface is greater than
biological zero (41 degrees Fahrenheit [°F]). This period is usually approximated by
the number of frost -free days for an area.
When primary indicators of wetland hydrology (visual observation of
inundation/saturated soils within 12 inches of the surface) are not present, at least
two secondary indicators must be positive in order to infer positive wetland
hydrology. Other field indicators used as evidence of wetland hydrology include
ordinary high water marks, drift lines, drainage patterns, watermarks, sediment
deposition, vegetation morphology (e.g., adventitious roots), and presence of algae
or moss.
An area is not considered a regulatory wetland if indicators for any one of the three
parameters are not observed under normal environmental conditions. Wetland delineation
datasheets are included in Appendix B.
2. 3 COWARDIN CLASSIFICATION
Wetlands are additionally classified using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
wetland hierarchical classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979). This system classifies
wetlands into systems based according to hydrologic, geomorphologic, chemical, and
biological factors. The physical form of the dominant plant community type and the
substrate usually identifies classes of wetlands. Wetlands delineated for this project are in
the Palustrine primary wetland system. Palustrine systems are shallow ponds and wet
areas, including all non -tidal wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents,
emergent mosses, or lichens. Palustrine classes pertinent to the project vicinity include
Forested, (PFO), Scrub -Shrub (PSS) and Emergent (PEM).
3.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
Past disturbances associated with former single-family residential use and demolition,
vegetation clearing, grazing, mowing, fire, excavation and fill have altered portions of the
site's natural habitat and hydrology. Aerial photographs taken in 2009 and 2013 depict
site changes associated with the removal of prior developed structures. (Figures 1 and 2)
(Skagit County, 2015). A septic system and drainfield serviced the prior residence.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory does not
indicate any wetlands as present on or within the immediate vicinity of the subject
property (USFWS, 2015). No streams are indicated as being present within the vicinity
of the property on the Washington Department of Natural Resources Water Typing map
(WDNR, 2015). The City of Anacortes' Planning Department GIS information however
indicates the northern tip of a mapped wetland extending on the subject property's
southern boundary from the adjacent property to the south (Figure 3).
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK - 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
4
Advanced Environmental Solutions
CLICK - 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
Febniaiy 6. 2015 Accessed www.skagitcounty.net
Ugmi
Cooky Boi odaly Hydro Labels - - 1QUfeet meows
C1lyNames Regional Labels
Road Labels — 5oo foot contours Figure 1. Aerial Photo (2009)
1:1.128
0 00076 0.010 003 xi
1 1 ,
0 0015 OA3 sae km
feSAsleq rink A Gel eel Na =abet= rain! mom roma as ealrj
=em ee_ mpinimmIra so ayeleta aelea a HEM egsar_7min gnat
ei Nam Wm II li pme! .ape Om 110ist sme■ ran age a as la le puffer
kfflieef¢fga♦ktlateta elRiYeepedm cam le s got am MOieEL
oppiomuni
Advanced Environmental Solutions
CLICK - 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
February g, 2015 Hccessea www.sxagitcounty.net
Figure 2. Aerial Photo (2012)
1:1,128
0 0.0075 0.015 0,03 MI
•/ 1 1
0 0,016 0.03 0.06 4m
Date AcateNoy 41YrnlnpiPlIGIBdetewas crude dfromiodidepobllonwrd'endul.t
nip sources, Mop (selves hws been.qured to 'chiles biN•flt rglNntlm. WMI. greet
owe wee token In the prawn, mope Dan different eouron rarely are ae to the precise
looetIonofgeaQephlofeaten Yip diem' pencils on be a gnatee33DIset.
2300
2301
22188 3118
2214 no
32ND ST
2219'2211 2207
2300 2220
2301
3204
2120
2110 2117
3220 3219
2208
33RD ST
2219 2211 2209,2201
2304 2218 2208 2204
V1STALN
2219 2217 2209 2205
2216 2212
2220
3402
2204 2202
35TH CT
2118
2118
2102 2018 2014 2012
2115
2113. 2111
2118 2116 2114
2112
2107
2119 2117 2109
2115 2113
O 3315 2116
34TH ST
3401
3415
2015
2008
3204 1203
3218 LL 3217
3304
3303
1820
3202
3216
3302
2111 33109 3308
336
Z-R2
Click
Parcel P32217
3320 3317
34(ri
3408
. .3414
3418
3502
2205 2201 3508
3503 351.1
2215
2301 2213 2211 3511
2217
3.15
2220 2206 3602
37TH CT 2207 3021
Z-R4A
3603
351.1
3520
3502
3808
-41 2
3401
3409
3415
3419
3318
3301
3311
1806 1804 1802
1901
3211
324
3308
3312
33 9 3318
3402 3403
3406
3408
3
330
331
331
3402
3407 340
3408
3410 3409 3412
1920 191E 1912 1908190211820
WHIP
34
0
1919 1915 1911 1907 1901 1819 1717 1815
41‘ 21. FGB`
Figure 3. Wetlands, Zoning and Parcel Map
City of
Anacortes
weTM Wit,
o '
Planning Dept.
•:w»
w
•:I.
;,��wy�11[ i e.w
Rav .r4
r e,uan 2014 0 4..
ereet.,,._.w.,. a -.v....._w--..SR.,».,....-.,...,,. ._s_v. ,....w» .».ar»r....r�,.....w..»�-,..ems.,, »,..
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK — 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
7
A total of 16 sample plots (SP) were investigated by AES during the field investigation.
Table 1 provides an analysis of wetland parameters at each of the sample plots. The
locations of the sample plots are indicated on Figure 4, which includes an overlay
configuration of nine potential residential lots, as provided by the owner for
redevelopment consideration.
Table 1. Analysis of Wetland Parameters at Sample Plots- Click Parcel P32217
Date of Sample Meets Wetland Parameter (Yes/No) Summary
Site Visit Plot Vegetation Soils Hydrology
SP1 Yes No Inferred by Upland
Secondary Scrub -Shrub
SP2 No Yes Indicators Upland
Forest
SP3 No No No Upland
November Forest
20, 2014 SP4 Yes No Yes Upland
scrub -shrub
SP5 Yes No No Upland
pasture
SP6 No Yes No Upland
Scrub -Shrub
SP7 Yes No No Disturbed
pasture/Fill
December SP8 Yes No - Yes Disturbed
10, 2014 Disturbed Pasture
February SP9 (17) Yes No Yes Pasture
3, 2015
SP10 Yes No — Yes Disturbed
Disturbed pasture
SP11 Yes No Yes Upland
Scrub -Shrub
December SP12 No No Yes Upland
10, 2014 Forest
SP13 Yes No Yes Clearing in
Upland
Forest
SP14 Yes Yes Yes PSS Wetland
SP15 Yes No No Transitional
plot from
PSS wetland
to upland —
edge of fill
SP16 No Yes No Upland
Forest
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK — 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
8
''arcel P33230
01 S 34nd
!Street
.
1
\
On -site f
seasona
Catego
Pss
wetil
,lam sf)
th
pears to
associated
with City of
Anacortes
mapped
PEM
wetland
area off -site
to the
south.
Standard
protective
buffer width
•
is 40' buffer.
Scale:
s
0
•
90'
34Th STREET, AWACORIFS, A
270'
• {a•
Disturbed SP8
Pisre/
OOclaard
r i
I 7_
tP'la__-.prior-9FRS
Footrint
apt
Edge o fill
co
Alt
wsp16
,.:P14 1
Upland%S�6 Shrub
S`F 31.Fdrest/ cc y 'a cs 1
0I ,- PARCEL,
,.: 4,}.f P32217
SP
Z :res)
Uplandorest•
FalloQ
Pasture/
Orchard
110
SP4 11
Upiarid
Scrub-
SP12 --
fag
Double fence line on southernproperty boundary
•
w
w
0
:i38'
North
LEGEND
Existing blackberry
encroachment
Observed surface
water flows, ditches
fold aldWES
#dS
The sizes and shapes of depicted critical areas are estinates. A
professional survey would be required for exact dimensions. The
wetland delineation was limited to the subject parcel P32217. Indicators
of potential hydrological connectivity to off -site areas are based on visual
observations and have not been verified by a formal delineation or
assessment.
Advanced Environmental 5olutions (360) 202-6839
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK - 2109 34T" STREET, ANACORTES
The Soil Survey of Skagit County Area (USDA 1989) identifies Coveland gravelly loam
(Soil Unit 35) as mapped on swales and hills with zero to three percent slopes on the
subject property (USDA, 1989). This very deep, somewhat poorly drained soil is not
listed as hydric on Skagit County Area Hydric List (Soil Conservation Service [SCS],
1989). Small areas of non-hydric Catla gravelly fine sandy loam (#25) and Clallam
gravelly loam (#36) soils are included on hills within the soil unit.
Typically the ground surface of the Coveland soil unit is covered with a mat of needles,
leaves and twigs one inch thick. The surface layer is black and dark brown gravelly loam
nine inches thick. The subsurface layer is dark grayish brown very gravelly sandy loam 5
inches thick. The subsoil is olive gray, gray, and dark gray silty clay 38 inches thick.
The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is olive gray silty clay loam.
Hydric soils meeting the criteria of indicator F3: Depleted Matrix were observed at
Sample Plots SP2, SP14 and SP16, each located on the southeast portion of the site, and
at SP6 on the central portion of the site (Figure 4). Non-hydric soils were observed at
twelve (12) of the sixteen (16) documented sample plots. Although redox concentrations
were observed in the subsoils throughout the property, these features were generally
observed at depths below 10 inches from the ground surface in the upland areas and
therefore hydric criteria for soils was not positively met.
Historic grading and fill appears to have occurred on the southwest 'A area of the site
(Figure 4). The northern edge of the gravel driveway and parking pad has a distinct edge
that is set topographically higher than the grade of the adjacent north pasture area by
approximately 1-foot. Fill near the southeast corner of the property bounds the western
edge of the on -site PSS wetland and northern edge of the off -site PEM wetland area at the
subject property's southern property boundary. On other portions of the subject property,
piles of soils, gravels and various debris, such as bricks, some of which are buried, are
present.
Man-made modifications have affected the natural drainage of hydrology at the site.
Seasonal surface water was observed to be ponding in areas on the western portion of the
property where topsoils appear to have been scraped during demolition and past
vegetation clearing, as evidenced by several uprooted shrubs, stumps and cut tree trunks,
from conifers of considerable size with diameters of approximately 18 inches, was
present. Stormwater run-off from developed areas immediately to the west and east of
the subject property was observed to drain onto the property. A concrete and brick lined
shallow swale located along the subject property's eastern boundary conveys stormwater
run-off from adjacent residential areas to the east towards the north (Figure 4). A small
off -site ditch on the adjacent northeast parcel (Parcel #33230) conveys receiving surface
water run-off from the subject property to the northeast towards 32rd Street.
Although man-made disturbances are present, the hydrology on the site was also
considered to be naturally problematic due to seasonal dryness during the late growing
season and the presence of a seasonal high groundwater table during the wet months of
November through April. Permeability of the Coveland soil is slow and available water
Advanced Environmental Solutions
CLICK — 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
10
capacity is high. The effective rooting depth for plants growing in the Coveland soils in
limited by a perched water table that is at the surface to a depth of 18 inches below the
surface from November to April.
The property slopes, and therefore drains, to the northeast at a gradient of approximately
1% to 2%. Sample plots SPI. SP2, SP4, SP9. SP10, SP11, SP13 and SP14 were
purposively located in topographic low positions on the property in order to make a
positive upland or wetland determination. These areas are typically inundated seasonally
during periods of prolonged precipitation or outside of the growing season when the
seasonally perched groundwater table is close to or at the surface. With the exception of
SP14, located within the delineated PSS wetland swale, the other areas on the property
that appear to support seasonal surface water inundation were excluded from wetland
characteristic either due to the dominance by non-hydrophytic vegetation and or the
presence of non-hydric soils.. Surface soil saturation observed at SP1 on November 20,
2014 was attributed to compacted surface soil conditions resulting from historic use of
tracked equipment (trackers, mowers) rather than in association with the ground table
level.
The property supports several upland vegetation communities and one wetland
community. Mixed deciduous and coniferous upland forest and scrub -shrub vegetation is
present on the eastern portion of the property. Open (fallow) pasture and a remnant fruit
tree orchard are present on the western upland portion of the site (Figures 2 and 4).
Hydrophytic species of shrubs and ground cover plants dominate the vegetation within
the small Palustrine scrub -shrub (PSS) wetland located along the southern property
boundary.
Details regarding these communities, as characterized during the site investigation, are
provided in the following sections:
3.1 UPLAND FOREST
Sample plots SP2, SP3, SP12, SP13 and SP16 were located in mixed deciduous and
coniferous upland forest on the eastern portion of the property (Figure 4). With the
exception of SP13, located in a disturbed clearing in the forest, the vegetation at the
upland forest sample plots was dominated by non-hydrophytic plant species.
The dominant canopy species present include Douglas fir (Pseudtotsuga menziesii),
grand fir (Abies grandis), western red cedar (Thuja plicata), red alder (Alnus rubra) and
Scouler's willow (Salix scoulierana), The average diameters -at -breast height (dbh) of
grand firs growing on the highest topographic position of the property near Sample plot
SP3, measure between 8 and 15 inches. Native non-hydrophytic western snowberry
(Symphoricarpos albus) is the dominant shrub. Western salmonberry (Rubus
spectabilis), Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana) and non-native Himalayan blackberry (Rubus
armeniacus) are additionally present. Representative ground cover plant species include
sword fern (Polystichum munitum), trailing blackberry (dewberry) (Rubus ursinus),
Dewey sedge (Carex deweyana) and deer fern (Blechum spicant). Ground cover plants
Advanced Environmental Solutions
CLICK - 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
11
was lacking in some areas where brush was dense and downed leaves covered the ground
surface.
The weedy vegetation observed at SP13 was typically of disturbed clearings in forest
areas. Non-native Himalayan blackberry was mixed with herbaceous buttercup
(Ranunculus sp.), willowherb (Epilobium sp.), largeleaf avens (Geum macrophyllum),
and common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale). Native rose, trailing blackberry and
sword fern were also present. The clearing appears to be a corridor for equipment use or
vehicular access. Tire ruts were observed on the ground surface.
The soils observed at Sample Plots SP2 and SP16 positively met the hydric soil criteria of
a depleted matrix (Soil indicator F3). Very dark gray (10 YR 3/1) or very dark grayish
brown (10 YR 3/2) silt loams were observed overlying mottled grayish brown (2.5 Y 5/2)
sandy clayey loams at a depths of five to six inches from the ground surface at the sample
plot. The prominent redox concentrations displayed in the matrix were yellowish brown
(10 YR 5/8, 10 YR 5/6).
Non-hydric very dark grayish brown (10 YR 3/2) silt loams were observed overlying
dark grayish brown or grayish brown (2.5 YR 4/2, 2.5 YR 5/2) prominently mottled
subsoils to depths of 12 inches or greater within the soil profiles at SP3, SP12 and SP13.
Sample Plot SP2 was located within an area of the site's eastern upland forest where
shallow depressions that lacked vegetation appeared to pool surface water seasonally.
The soils were dry and friable at the time of the site visit on November 20, 2014 and the
groundwater table was not observed within the soil profile investigated to a depth of 20
inches from the ground surface. Secondary indicators inferred hydrology. On February 3,
2015 surface water inundation was observed to be present within the shallow depressions.
Saturated surface soils were observed at SP13 during the December 10, 2014 site visit.
The subsoils were dry however and the groundwater table was not observed within
depths of twenty inches from the ground surface at the sample plot. The saturated surface
soils appear to be due to associated with the adjacent man-made drainage ditch that
borders the eastern edge of the property.
Saturated soils associated with the high groundwater table were observed at a depth of 10
inches from the ground surface at sample plot SP12 on December 10, 2014. No primary
or secondary indicators of wetland hydrology were observed at Sample Plots SP2 or
SP16.
3.2 UPLAND SCRUB -SHRUB
Sample Plots SP1, SP4, SP6 and SP11 were located within upland scrub -shrub
communities on the central portion of the property (Figure 4). Hydrophytic species of
shrubs and ground cover plants dominate the scrub -shrub vegetation on the property.
Native Nootka rose and non-native Himalayan blackberry shrubs are dominant. Saplings
of red alder and a non-native beech (Betula sp.) tree were observed to present, but did not
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
12
dominate the vegetation. Additional shrub and ground cover species represented include
black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata), hardhack (Spireae douglasii), bracken fern
(Pterdium aquillium), trailing blackberry, curley dock (Rumex crispus) and Canada thistle
(Cirsium arvense).
Sample Plot SP1 was located at a low topographic position within a shallow swale that
appears to have been historically cleared and crossed by tracked equipment (tracker,
mower) in order to access the eastern portion of the property. Hydrophytic \species of
herbaceous plants, including creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), soft rush (Juncus
effusus), and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), often depictive of disturbed areas,
were recorded.
The swale at SP1 was documented as upland due to the lack of the hydric soils. Very dark
grayish brown (10 YR 3/2) silt loams were observed overlying dark grayish brown to
dark brown (10 YR 4/2-4/3) sandy clayey loam to a depth of 12 inches from the ground
surface. Prominent yellowish brown (10 YR 5/8) redox concentrations were observed in
the subsoils. The ground surface at SP1 was saturated, but not inundated, at the time of
the November 20, 2014 site visit. The groundwater table was not observed at the sample
plot and therefore was not associated with the surface soil saturation. Although
secondary indicators for wetland hydrology, including geomorphic position and the
results of the FAC neutral test, were positive at the sample plot, the primary wetland
indicator A3 for saturated soils was not positively met due to the lack of association with
the groundwater table. The condition of saturated surface soils was attributed to the
compaction of soiis and associated lack of infiltration resulting from tracked equipment
use at the sample plot location. Surface water inundation was observed within the swale
at SP1 during the February 3, 2015 site visit.
Sample Plots SP4 and SP11 were located within the extended swale to the north of SP1
(Figure 4). Wetland vegetation and hydrology parameters were positively met; however
non-hydric soils, similar to those observed at SP1, were present. Distinct reddish brown
(5 YR 4/3) redox concentrations were displayed at 50% in the subsoils observed at a
depth of 14 inches from the ground surface at SP4. At SP11, redox concentrations were
observed in grayish brown (2.5 YR 5/2) sandy loam suboils at a depth of 16 inches from
the ground surface. Observations of redox conditions in soils at depths greater than 10
inches from the ground surface do not meet hydric soil criteria.
Saturated soils associated with the groundwater table were observed at 12 inches from the
ground surface at the sample plot SP4 at the time of the November 20, 2014 site visit.
Saturated surface soils were observed at SP11; however the groundwater table was
recorded at a depth of 16 inches below the ground surface at the time of the December
10, 2014 site visit.
Hydric soils meeting the criteria of depleted matrix indicator (F3) were observed at SP6,
located in upland scrub -shrub to the east of SP4 (Figure 4). Very dark gray to very dark
grayish brown (10 YR 3/1-3/2) silt loams were observed overlying mottled dark grayish
brown (10 YR 4/2) sandy clayey loam to a depth of 10 inches from the ground surface.
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK — 2109 34T" STREET, ANACORTES
13
Prominent dark yellowish brown (10 YR 4/6) redox concentrations were observed in the
subsoils. Primary and secondary indicators of wetland hydrology were not positive at the
sample plot at the time of the November site visit. Saturated soils were recorded at 14
inches below the ground surface; the groundwater table, however, was not observed.
3.3 FALLOW OPEN PASTURE/REMNANT ORCHARD
A mix of facilitative species of grasses and weedy herbaceous plants, including tall and
red fescue (Festuca arundinacea, F. rubra) and thistle (Cirsium sp.), is present on the
property's fallow open pasture areas. Non-native and invasive Himalayan blackberry is
encroaching on the edges of the pasture.
Sample Plot SP5 was located in the fallow open pasture near the northwest corner of the
property (Figure 4). The very dark grayish brown (10 YR 3/2) silt loams overlying
prominently mottled dark grayish brown (10 YR 4/2) sandy clayey loam subsoils at the
depth of 14 inches from the ground surface were similar in characteristics to the non-
hydric soils observed at the majority of the sample plots on the property. No primary or
secondary indicators of wetland hydrology were observed at the sample plot. Moisture
glistening depictive of saturated soils was observed at depths of 20 inches from the
ground surface; however the groundwater table was directly observed at the time of the
November 20, 2014 site visit.
Sample Plot SP7 was located in the disturbed southwest 14 of the property where fill and
debris of various sorts are present on the ground surface. Non-hydric very dark grayish
brown (10 YR 3/2) silt loams with some gravel were observed from the surface to a depth
of 20 inches in the sample plot. Redox concentrations were not displayed in the soil
profile. The vegetation on this portion of the property, dominated by reed canarygrass,
non-native Evergreen or cut -leaf blackberry (Rubus laciniatus), rose and teasel (Dispacus
fullionum), is indicative of distributed areas. No primary or secondary indicators of
wetland hydrology were observed on this portion of the property.
Sample Plot SP8 was located in the disturbed upland pasture area to the north of the
driveway (Figure 4). Dark brown (7.5 YR 3/2) topsoils were observed to a depth of 8
inches from the ground surface at the sample plot. Charcoal and a two-inch thick band of
reddish brown (5 YR 4/3) soils, indicative of disturbances associated with fire, were
observed overlying mottled grayish brown (2.5 Y 5/2) subsoils. Redox concentrations
were observed to increase in size and density with greater depth in the subsoils.
Underlying angular fill was observed at a depth of 16 inches from the ground surface.
Tree stumps and holes left from uprooted shrubs were present on the ground surface. Past
land clearing practices of burning stumps in the ground also appears to have occurred on -
site.
The site visit on December 10, 2014 was conducted during a rain event. Surface water
run-off from 34th Street was observed to flow on -site and pool within several narrow
gullies and shallow depressions to the north of the driveway. Although the topsoils were
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK - 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
14
saturated at the surface to a depth of approximately 8 inches, the underlying fire scar
band and the upper portion of the subsoils were dry. The groundwater table was observed
at approximately 11 inches from the ground surface.
Sample plot SPIO was located in a topographically low area in the disturbed open pasture
to the west of upland scrub -shrub areas on the property (Figure 4). The vegetation was
dominated by facultative species of grasses. Iris, a typical landscaping and garden plant,
was also present. Non-hydric very dark gray (10 YR 3/1) gravelly silt loams were
observed overlying mottled sandy loams to a depth of 16 inches from the ground surface.
The soils have been disturbed by fill, bricks were found within the soil profile. Soils
were saturated to the surface at the time of the December 10, 2014 site investigation.
Sample plot SP9 was located along the southern property boundary in a low
topographical depression. The upland pasture plot was situated between berms to the east
and west and bound by fill to the north (Figure 4). The height of the vegetation on this
portion of the property is maintained by mowing. Roses were observed to reach only six
inches in height.
This portion of the property appears to have the potential to be connected to a PEM
wetland area located off -site on the adjacent parcel to the south (Figure 4). Although soils
were saturated to the surface during the February site visit, non-hydric soil characteristics
typical of the upland soils documented on the majority of the property were observed.
Very dark grayish brown (10 YR 3/2) silt loams were observed overlying mottled dark
grayish brown (10 YR 4/2) sandy loam subosils at a depth of 14 inches from the ground
surface.
3.4 PALUSTRINE SCRUB -SHRUB WETLAND
Wetland parameters for vegetation, soils, and hydrology were each positive at Sample
plot SP14, located within a narrow Palustrine Scrub -Shrub (PWSS) wetland that parallels
the south property line (Figure 4). The on -site wetland, approximately 1,120 square feet
in area (120 linear feet x 10 feet wide, on average), appears to be associated with an off -
site disturbed (ditched) PEM wetland that is mapped by the City on the adjacent parcel #
P33219 (#3511 D. Avenue) to the south (Figure 3).
The vegetation within and adjacent to the wetland is dense. Thorny hawthorn, rose, and
Himalayan blackberry are present. Dense herbaceous vegetation, including soft rush
(Juncus effusus), sedges and grass are present within the wetland swale. Bare areas
within the wetland where prolonged surface water inundation occurs represent
approximately 5% of the ground surface. The eastern end of the wetland swale is bound
to the sound by a low ridge or berm that is densely vegetated with snowberry. Double
parallel wire fences delineate the southern property boundary.
Black (10 YR 2/1) surface soils were observed overlying depleted mottled grayish brown
(2.5 Y 5/2) subsoils at a depth of six inches from the ground surface at the wetland
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK — 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
15
sample plot. The soils were saturated to the surface and surface water inundation within
the wetland was less than 6 inches deep.
Direct precipitations, surface water run-off and the seasonally high groundwater table
appear to contribute to the wetland's seasonal hydrology. Overflow from the wetland is
relatively unrestricted in the southeast corner of the property. The ditch along the eastern
property boundary may serve to convey wetland overflows off -site to the northeast
(Figure 4).
The western extent of the wetland is bound to the north by fill. Sample Plot SP15 was
located to the west of the wetland within the transition zone between upland and wetland
(Figure 4). Non-hydric very dark brown (10 YR 3/2) surface soils were observed to a
depth of 10 inches in the soil profiles. Faint dark brown (7.5 YR 3/4) redox
concentrations were observed in very dark brown (7.5 YR 2/2) silt loams located at
depths between 10 and 14 inches at the soil profile. Mottled grayish brown (2.5 Y 5/2)
subsoils were observed at depths between 14 and 20 inches in the soil profile. The
groundwater table was observed at a depth of 13 inches at the sample plot.
4.0 WETLAND CLASSIFICATIONS & ASSOCIATED FUNCTIONS
Wetland categorization is based on the Washington State - Wetland Rating System for
Western Washington: 2014 Update as revised by Ecology for use effective on January 1,
2015 (Hruby, 2014). The use of updated versions of the State's Wetland Rating System,
for the purposes of classifying wetlands within the jurisdiction of the City of Anacortes
for local regulatory review is provided for in the Section 17.70.320 of the City's
municipal code. Completed wetland classification forms are included in Appendix B.
The system rates wetlands into four categories (Category I, II, III and IV) on the basis of
their sensitivity to disturbance and the functions, including habitat, they provide. Water
quality and hydrologic functions are rated specific to a wetland's hydrogeomorphic
(HGM) class (estuarine -tidal fringe, riverine and freshwater tidal, lake fringe, slope,
depressioanal). Wetlands with special characteristics, such as old -growth forests and
coastal lagoons, are also rated.
The wetland does not meet the criteria for categorization based on special characteristics.
The HGM class for the wetland is depressional. Dataforms specific for rating
depressional wetlands according to water quality and hydrological functions were used to
determine the overall category rating of the wetland.
Category I wetlands are those that 1) represent a unique or rare wetland type; or 2) are
more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; or 3) are relatively undisturbed and
contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or 4)
provide a high level of functions. In western Washington, wetlands with Natural
Heritage features, bogs, coastal lagoons, and estuarine and mature and old -growth
forested wetlands and Category I wetlands. Wetlands that perform many functions well,
receiving scores of 23-27 points on the rating forms, are Category I wetlands.
Advanced Environmental Solutions
CLICK - 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
16
Category II wetlands are difficult though not impossible to replace, and provide high
levels of some functions. Although these wetlands are more comment than Category I
wetlands, they still need a relatively high level protection: Category II wetlands in
western Washington include:
• Estuarine wetlands — less than 1 acre in size or greater, if disturbed;
• Interdunal wetlands greater than 1 acre; and
• Wetlands that perform functions well receiving a score between 20 and 22
points on the rating forms
Category III wetlands, scoring between 16 and 19 points on the rating forms, generally
have been disturbed in some ways and are often less diverse or more isolated from other
natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands. Category III wetlands
provide a moderate level of functions. Interdunal wetlands between 0.1 acre and 1 acre
in size are also classified as Category III wetlands.
Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of functions (scores less than 16 points) and
are often heavily disturbed. Category IV wetlands may provide some important
functions; but should be replaceable and or improved.
The on -site PSS/off-site PEM wetland received a score of 12 points on the rating
dataforms and therefore is a classified as Category IV wetland. The wetland received a
moderate score for improving water quality (5 points) and low scores of 4 points and 3
points for hydrologic functions and habitat, respectively.
No federal or state listed or proposed animal or plant species or Washington Natural
Heritage Program feastures are associated with the property (WDNR, 2014). No fish
habitat is associated with wetland (WDNR, 2015). The seasonal saturation/inundation of
the subject wetlands limit the ability for wetland -associated birds, waterfowl and
mammals, such as ducks and beavers, to utilize the wetlands for breeding habitat. A
Pacific tree / chorus frog (Hyla regilla) was observed in the east boundary drainage ditch
during the December site visit.
There are no 303d listed waters or Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) programs for the
basin in which the wetland resides, which includes City owned Forest Lands associated
with Cranberry Lake to the south (Figures 3 and 4) (Ecology, 2012a, 2015).
The existing trees on the forested portion of the property provide habitat and contribute
towards the recruitment of large woody debris on the site. Large woody debris provides
foraging and shelter opportunities for a wide variety of bird, insect, amphibian and
mammal species.
No large nests, such as those associated with bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus),
osprey (Pandion haliaetus), or red-tailed hawks (Buteo lagopus), were observed to be
located on or within the immediate vicinity of the property. Deer are common on the
property as well as a variety of passerine birds (sparrows, wrens and robins) and small
mammals, such as Douglas squirrels (Tamiasciurus douglasii).
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK — 2109 34T" STREET, ANACORTES
17
5.0 REGULATORY SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. CITY OF ANACORTES
The City of Anacortes regulates Category IV wetlands equal to or greater than 1,000
square feet in size. The City's standard required protective wetland buffer for Category IV
wetlands is 40-feet.
Activities and uses shall be prohibited in regulated wetlands and associated protective
wetland buffers, except for those as provided in the City's Critical Areas Ordinance.
Redevelopment of the subject property into multiple lots with single-family residences
and attendant features is anticipated. The reduction of infiltration functions and increased
stormwater run-off on the subject property will be proportional to the area of introduced
built surfaces in association with the project.
Typically, residential uses that are located adjacent to natural areas inadvertently create
disturbances to the native habitat and associated wildlife. Table 17.70.340 of the City's
Critical Areas Ordinance lists the following measures that can be utilized to assist in
minimizing impacts to wetlands from proposed changes in land use that have the
potential for high impacts:
Residential Lighting:
Residential Noise:
Toxic Run-off
Residential Areas:
Stormwater Runoff/
Residential Areas:
Direct lights away from wetland
Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland to
the maximum extent practicable
Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while
ensuring wetland is not dewatered. Establish covenants
limiting use of pesticides within 150-feet of wetland.
Apply integrated pest management.
Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and
existing adjacent development. Prevent channelized flow
from lawns that directly enter the buffer.
Avoid changes to the wetland's hydrology regime through
the infiltration or treatment, detention and dispersal of
increased runoff from impervious surfaces.
Pets & Human Disturbances/ Use privacy fencing: plant dense vegetation to delineate
Residential Areas: buffer edge and to discourage disturbances using
vegetation appropriate for the eco-region: place wetland
and the buffer in a separate tract.
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK — 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
18
The utilization of low -impact design elements in the residential development project,
such as limiting the amount of lawn areas on the residential sites and increasing the use of
native vegetation for typical residential and street landscaping, are additional
recommendations. Such minimal actions will thereby reduce the need for fertilizers and
irrigation of areas adjacent to the natural forest habitat.
In order to minimize indirect impacts associated with the potential sedimentation of
aquatic habitats within the site wetland due to erosional stormwater run-off during the
construction phase of the project, Best Management Practices (BMPs), as outlined in the
Washington Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual, shall be
implemented at the project site (Ecology, 2012b). Although not inclusive of all
appropriate measures that may be implemented at the project site, examples of BMPs that
should be utilized include:
• Installation of silt fencing along the upslope perimeter of proposed
clearing/building areas;
• Limiting soil disturbances to only those areas necessary to complete the project;
• Limiting ground construction operations to dry periods and stable soil conditions.
• Preventing equipment use and transport from occurring within the drip -line of any
trees to be retained on the property.
5.2 OTHER REGULATORY JURISDICTIONS
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) requires pre -notification for all disturbances
to wetlands and it is incumbent upon the landowner to disclose such disturbances.
Isolated wetlands however are not within the jurisdiction of the Corps. The Corps must
make the isolated determination. Disturbances equal to 1/2-acre or less require application
for a Nationwide Permit. Fills exceeding 1/2-acre require an Individual Permit from the
Corps. The Corps also has discretion to not allow disturbances to high quality wetlands.
The Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) and Corps require certification that
no listed or known endangered or threatened animal species or national historic places are
present within the project area.
Ecology reviews all permits received to the Corps for Water Quality Certification.
Ecology requires an individual review of all wetland disturbances greater than one -
quarter acre. Water Quality Certification is required for all Individual Permit
applications. Ecology has authority over discharges into all wetlands and streams and
can impose buffer and compensatory mitigation of impacts to these features.
6.0 DISCLAIMER
The findings and conclusions documented in this report have been prepared in a manner
consistent with established scientific methods in making wetland determinations.
Conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are the professional opinions
of AES based on interpretation of information currently available. It should be noted that
wetland boundaries are dynamic elements that vary with changes in climate, vegetation
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK — 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
19
and up -slope modifications in the drainage patterns. AES has used the most current,
State and federally approved methodology to make the determination as to the location,
size, and type of critical areas on the subject property. Wetland boundaries identified by
AES are considered to be preliminary until validated by the Corps and/or the local
jurisdiction agency(ies).
7.0 LITERATURE CITED
City of Anacortes Muncipal Code. Title 17 Zoning, Chapter 17.70 Critical Areas
Regulations. Anacortes, Washington.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands
and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Performed for the U.S. Department of
the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Biological Services. Washington,
D.C.
Ecology, 2012a. Washington State Department of Ecology. Water Quality Assessment
and 303d List. Available at: http://www.ecv.wa.gov/programs/Wq/303d/index.html.
Ecology, 2012b. Washington State Department of Ecology. Stormwater Manual for
Western Washington Volumes I — V. 2012. Olympia, Washington. Available at:
http://www.ecv.wa.gov.
Ecology, 2015. Washington State Department of Ecology. Water Quality Improvement,
Water Cleanup Plans: Listed by County and Water Resource Inventory Area
(WRIA) 0 Water Quality Projects (TMDLs) by WRIA- WRIA 3: Lower Skagit-
Samish. Available at:
http://www.ecy. wa.gov/programs/wq/tmdl/TMDLsbyWria/TMDLbyWria. html
Accessed on February 20, 2015.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Hruby, T. (2014). Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington:
2014 Update. (Publication #14-06-029). Olympia, WA: Washington Department of
Ecology.
Munsell Color. 2009. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Munsell Color X-Rite. Grand Rapids,
Michigan.
Reed, R.B. Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1988
Northwest Biological Report 88 (26.9), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, St.
Petersburg, Florida.
Soil Conservation Service. 1991. Skagit County Areas Hydric Soils List. Skagit County, WA.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers._ 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
(Version 2.0). Vicksburg, Mississippi.
. 2012. Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast. 2012 Final Regional Wetland Plant
list. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Hanover, New Hampshire.
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK - 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
20
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1989. Soil Survey of Skagit County
Area, Washington.
Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR). 2014. Washington Natural
Heritage Program. September 2014. Sections that Contain Natural Heritage Features
Associated with Wetlands.pdf . Data Current as of September 24, 2014. Available
at: http:llwww Ldnr.wa. gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf. Olympia,
WA. Accessed on February 23, 2015.
U.S. Fish and WildlifeService (USFWS). 2015. National Wetland Inventory.Online
Wetland Mapper. Accessed at http://wetlandsfws.er.usgs.gov/NWU
Washington State Department of Natural Resources. 2015. Forest Practices
Application Review System. Water Typing Map. Accessed at
http://www3.wadnr.govidnrapb5/website/fparsiviewer.htm.
Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR). 2014. Washington Natural
Heritage Program. September 2014. Sections that Contain Natural Heritage Features
Associated with Wetlands.pdf . Data Current as of September 24, 2014. Available
at: http:\\wwwl.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.p df. Olympia,
WA. Accessed on February 23, 2015.
Weather Underground. 2015. Accessed at http://www.wunderground.com/personal-
weather-
station/dashboard?ID=KW AANACO 1#history/s20150101/e20150131 /mmonth.
Western Regional Climate Center. 2015. Anacortes, Washington (450176) Monthly
Climate Summary Period of Record: 09/01/1892 to 12/31/2014. Accessed on
February 7, 2015 at http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cai-bin/c1iMALN.p1?wa0176.
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK - 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
21
APPENDIX A: PHOTOGRAPH$
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK - 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
22
Views looking at the northwest and southwest 'A s of the property from 34th St. and the west property line.
Open pasture and remnant orchard are
present to the north of the driveway.
Scrub -shrub upland habitat is present to the
northeast of the pasture.
Uprooted and cut vegetation on pasture edge.
Forest habitat is present on the eastern
half of the property.
Fill on the southwest '/a of the property
and associated with the driveway is
approximately 1 foot higher in
topographic grade than adjacent pasture
areas to the north and south. Surface
water run-off from 34th Street was
observed to flow onto the property to
the east (left) of the driveway during a
rain event in December 2014.
(Photos: November 20, 2014)
Non-hydric soils with evidence of fire scar were observed at SP8 located in the pasture to the north of the
driveway. Mottled subsoils observed at 11 inches and angular fill was present at 16 inches.
1,4
(Photos: December 10, 2014)
Views of the disturbed pasture on the southwest 'A of the property. Reed canarygrass and teasel dominate the
vegetation. The ground surface has been graded and debris is stockpiled on the site. Non-hydric very grayish
brown (10 YR 3/2) silt loams were observed to a depth of 20 inches from the ground surface at Sample Plot
SP7. No primary or secondary indicators of wetland hydrology were observed on this portion of the property.
View of doubled fenced southern property
line near the SW corner of the site.
Sample Plot 9 was located in a
topographic low spot between the fences
along the southern property boundary and
adjacent to the off -site wetland pasture.
Non-hydric soils were documented. Very
dark silt loams were observed overlying
mottled dark grayish brown (10 YR 4/2)
subsoils. Redox concentrations were
observed at depths below 14 inches in the
sample plot.
View of off -site ditched PEM
wetland area mapped by the City of
Anacortes on the adjacent parcel to
the south of the subject property.
(Photos: February 3, 2015)
The vegetation in the on -site PSS
wetland is dense with rose. Himalayan
blackberry is also present on the upland
edges. Herbaceous soft rush and
grasses dominate the ground cover.
The wetland, approximately 120 linear
feet x 10 feet wide parallels the south
perimeter fence near the southeast
corner of the property.
Sample Plot SP5 was located in
upland pasture near the northwest
property corner. Dry, friable non-
hydric soils were observed and no
indicators of wetland hydrology
were positive. Blackberry is
dominant along the edges of the
pasture.
(Photos: November 20, 2014)
Sample Plot SP1 was located in a shallow
swale where disturbances associated with
mowed tractor access and past vegetation
clearing are present. Non-hydric soils were
observed at the upland scrub -shrub sample
plot. Reed canarygrass and non-native
Himalyan blackberry shrubs are present.
Although surface soils were saturated, the
groundwater table was not observed within
20 inches of depth from the ground surface
at the sample plot.
Sample Plot SP11 was located further north in the scrub -shrub habitat during the
December 10, 2014 site visit in order to re -investigate the groundwater table
level in comparison with the results of SP1 observed on November 20, 2014.
Similarly, saturated conditions were observed in the surface soils however the
groundwater table was located at depth, 16 inches from the ground surface.
(Photos: December 10, 2014)
SP4 was located in a topographic low point on the upland scrub -shrub habitat on central
portion of the property. The groundwater table was observed at a depth of 12 inches from
the surface; however non-hydric soils were present. Bracken fern and rose dominate the
vegetation.
SP6 was located in upland scrub -shrub habitat on northeast portion of the property. Mixed
hydrophytic and non-hydrophytic species of hardhack and trailing blackberry are dominant.
Although hydric soils are present, no primary or secondary indicators of wetland hydrology were
observed.
(Photos: November 20, 2014)
Sample Plots SP2 and SP3 were located in upland forest on the southeastern portion of
the property.
Hydric soils were observed in SP2 and secondary indicators of wetland hydrology were
.positive at SP2; Vegetation however was dominated by non- hydrophytic vegetation.
Indicators of seasonal pooling of surface
water in small shallow depressions at SP2.
SP3 located at a higher topographic position in
the landscape than SP2.
Parameters for wetland vegetation, soils and hydrology were not positive at SP3.
(Photos: November 10, 2014)
SP12 was located within a disturbed clearing in
the upland forest adjacent to a man-made ditch
on the east property line. Run-off from
residential parcels east of the property enters
the ditch, which flows north.
An off -site ditch to the northeast of the
property drains the run-off towards 31st Street.
!
{j I r
t 1
Photo: November 20, 2014
The ditch is lined with bricks, pavers and
rocks. Hydrophytic weedy herbaceous
vegetation and non-hydric soils were
observed at sample plot 12. Surface water
hydrology at the sample plot appears to be
due to overtopping from the ditch.
(Photos: December 10, 2014)
APPENDIX B: DATAFORMS
Advanced Environmental Solutions CLICK - 2109 34TH STREET, ANACORTES
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 34" Street. Parcel P32217 City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:11/20/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Billy D. Click State: WA Sampling Point: SP1
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25, T35N. RO1E. W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslooe Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A tat: Long:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland Gravelly loam (Soil Series Unit 35). 0-3 % slopes NWI classification: (N/A - Upland scrub -shrub
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes El No ❑
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes .w No El
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No El
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes li No ❑
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes El No El
Remarks: Sample plot located in a shallow narrow swale on the central poriton of the property. Non-hydric soils are present. Secondary indicators
infer wetalnd hydrology although the groundwater table was not observed to be associated with surface soil saturation. Soils may be locally
compacted due to past practices of trackor mowing. Hydrology is naturally problemattic due to sesonally dry conditois during later porrtion of the
growing season and high groundwater table November through March outside of the growing season..
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 15') % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
= Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80 (A/B)
Saolina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1. Alnus rubra (saolina) 5 N FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Rosa nutkcana 25 Y FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. OBL species x 1 =
4. FACW species x 2 =
5. FAC species x 3 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x 5
30 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
1. Rancuculus reoens 30 Y FACW Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Juncus effusus 20 Y FACW
3. Phalaris arundinacea 20 Y FACW Prevalence Index = B/A =
4. Rumex crisosus 8 N FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5. Dinsacus fullonum 5 N FAC ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
6. Blechnum soicant 5 N FAC ® Dominance Test is >50%
i. ❑ Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
8. ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
0 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
10 El Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
11. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
88 =Total Cover Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
)
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1. Rubus armeniacus FACU
2. Hydrophytic
Vegetation
20 = Total Cover Present? Yes El No ❑
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: Vegetation is dominated by hydrophytic species.
US Army Corps of Engineers Westem Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
Cinches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2
0-12 10 YR 3/2 100
No redox
12-20 2.5 YR 4/2-5/3 60 10 YR 5/8 40 C M
Texture Remarks
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
❑ Histosol (A1) ❑
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑
❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑
O Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑
O Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ araveflv sitl loam
sandy clayey loam with redox
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
0 2 cm Muck (A10)
O Red Parent Material (TF2)
O Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes ❑ No
Remarks: Soil does not meet hydric criteria. Redox concentrations begin at depths greater than 10 inches of the profile and therefore do no
critiera for depleted matrix (F3). Matrix chromes are too high to meet the critiera for thick dark surface (Al2).
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
O Surface Water (A1)
O High Water Table (A2)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Water Marks (B1)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
O Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
O Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
O Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No El
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No El
Saturation Present? Yes ® No 0
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
O Salt Crust (B11)
❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
O Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches): N/A
Depth (inches): NIA
Depth (inches): SURFACE ONLY
meet
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reauired)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 46)
El Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
• FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
No ❑
Remarks: Although saturated soils were observed at the ground surface, saturation was not associated with the groundwater table and thus primary
indicator A3 is riot positive. Secondary indicators however infer wetland hydrology. Swalw was observerd to be inundated in February - outside of
the growing seaon.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast— Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street, Parcel P32217
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Billy D. Click
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile, PWS
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslooe
Subregion (LRR): A
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland aravellv loam (Soil Series Unit 35). 0-3 % slopes
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ig
Are Vegetation No, Soil No or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation No, Soil No or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic?
City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:11/20/2014
State: WA Sampling Point: SP2
Section, Township, Range: Section 25. T35N, RO1E. W.M.
Local relief (concave, convex; none): concave
Slope (%): 2
Datum:
NWI classification: N/A - Upland forest
No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes ® No ❑
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ❑ No El
Yes® No❑
Yes® No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No Ei
Remarks: Sample plot located in small shallow depresions that are lacking vegetation due to sesonal pooling of surfacewater outside of the growing
season..Non-hydrrophytic vegetatoin is dominant in the upland forest. Soils meet the critiea of hydric indicator F3: Depleted Matrix. Wetland
hydrology inferred by secondary indicators - drainage pattern and geomorphic position. Hydrology is naturally problemattic due to sesonally dry
conditois during later porrtion of the growing season and high groundwater table in November through March - outside of the growing season..
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Species? Status
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1. Pseudotsuaa menziesii
2. Salix Scouleriana
3.
4.
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1. Svmohoricarous albus
2. Rubus soectabilis
3. Rosa so.
4.
5.
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1. Carex dewevana
2. Rubus ursinuss
3. Blechnum soicant
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10..
11.
}
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
2.
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 5%
}
20 Y FACU
20 Y FAC
40
= Total Cover
50 Y FACU
10 N FAC
5 N FAC
65 = Total Cover
40 Y FAC
20 Y FACU
4 N FAC
64 = Total Cover
Remarks: Vegetation is not dominated by hydrophytic species.
= Total Cover
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 40 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) _
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
El Dominance Test is >50%
❑ Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
D Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
▪ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants''
El Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes ❑ No El
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
Yes❑ Nol
Yes ❑ No
Yes No®
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
0 Salt Crust (B 11)
❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (613)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (DI) (LRR A)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches): N/A
Depth (inches): N/A
Depth (inches): N/A
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP2
t Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture
0-6 10 YR 3/1 100 silt loam
6-20 2.5 Y 5/2 60 10 YR 5/8 20 C M
''Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
O Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
O Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (FI) (except MLRA 1)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
® Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
O Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Remarks
sandy clayey loam with redox conc.
'`Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10)
O Red Parent Material (TF2)
O Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ig No ❑
Remarks: Sails postively meet criteria for hydric soil indicator F3-Depleted Matrix. Redox concentrations observed in depleted matrix at depths less
than 10 inches from the ground surface.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)
O Surface Water (A1)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Saturation (A3)
O Water Marks (B1)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
O Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ iron Deposits (65)
O Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
O Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reouired)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
® Drainage Patterns (610)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
® Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑
Remarks: Soils are friable and dry. Hydrology inferred by secondary indictors - drainage pattern and geomorphic position (Flat microtopography with
shallow depressions. Evidence of seasonal ponding of surface water is present however inundation is most likely prevalent outside of the growing
season. Groundwater table was not observed within 20 inches in depth from the ground surface at the time of the site visit. Surface water inundation
was observed in Feb 2015 - outside of the growing season.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P322'7 City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:11/20/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Billy D. Click State: WA Sampling Point: SP3
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25, T35N, R01 E, W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex; none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland aravellv loam (Soil Series Unit #35t. 0-3 % slopes NWI classification: N/A - Upland forest
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No , Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No ❑
Are Vegetation No, Soil No or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ❑ No El
Yes ❑ No El
Yes ❑ No rgi
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: .Sample plot located in upland forest on southeastern portion of the property. Wetland parameters are not positive. Hydrology is naturally
problematic due to seasonal dryness during the late growing season and a high groundwater table in November - March, outside of the growing
season.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Abies grand's 40 Y FACU That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: n (A)
2.
3.
4.
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1. Svmphoricarpus albus
2.
3. Rosa so.
4.
5.
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1. Not Applicable - downed leaves cover surface
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
40 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
20 Y FACU Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
5 N FAC OBL species x 1
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
25 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A)
N/A = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Rubus armeninacus 20 Y FACU
2.
20 = Total Cover
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑ Dominance Test is >50%
❑ Prevalence Index is s3.0'
❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes ❑ No El
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 50
Remarks: Vegetation is dominated by non-hydrophytic species. Ground cover plants are not present - downed leaves cover the ground surface
which is generally bare of ground cover plants.
US Army Corps of Engineers Westem Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
0-12
12-20
Matrix
Color(moist)
10YR3/2 100
Redox Features
Color (moist) °!a Type' Loc2
2.5 Y 5/2 60 10 Y R 4/6 20 C M
Texture
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surtace (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Remarks
silt loam (no redox) some rocks
sandy clayey loam
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
O 2 cm Muck (A10)
O Red Parent Material (TF2)
0 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: Soil is friable and dry. Soil does not meet hydric criteria. Redox concentrations observed below 10" from the ground surface do not meet
the critiera for indicator F3: depleted matrix.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired: check all that apply)
❑ Surface Water(A1)
O High Water Table (A2)
❑ Saturation (A3)
O Water Marks (B1)
O Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
O Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
O Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
O Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
O Salt Crust (B11)
O Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
O Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
O Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): N/A
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): N/A _
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No ® Depth (inches): N/A
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
El Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑®
►5
Remarks: No primary or secondary indicators of wetland hydrology are positive.
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ❑ No El
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys; and Coast— Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:11/20/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Billy D. Click State: WA Sampling Point: SP4
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25 T35N. R01E, W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coverland aravellv loam (Soil Series Unit #35). 0-3 % slopes NWI classification: N/A - Uoland scrub -shrub
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes El No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil No , or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes El No ❑
Are Vegetation No, Soil No. or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes El No ❑
Yes NoIE
Yes ® No ❑
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: .Sample plot locaed in upland scrib-shrub on the northem poriton of the property. Non-hydric soils are present.Hydorology is naturally
problematic due to dryness in late growing season and a high groundwater table in November- March, outside of the growing season..
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1. Not Applicable
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66 (NB)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1 F Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Lonicera involucrata 5 N FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply bv:
3. Rosa so. 50 Y FAC OBL species x 1
4. _ _ FACW species x 2 =
5. FAC species x 3 =
= Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x 5 =
1. Rubus ursinus 20 Y FACU Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Cirsium so. 5 N FAC
3. Rumex crisous 5 N FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = _
4. Festuca rubus 30 Y FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5. Pterdium aauillium 5 N FACU ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
6 El Dominance Test is >50%
7 0 Prevalence Index is :53.0''
8 0 Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
O Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
65 = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Rubus armeninacus 5 N FACU
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: Vegetation is dominated by hydrophytic species.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes ® No ❑
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast— Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP4
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist)
0-14 10 YR 3/2
14-20 10 YR 4/2
Matrix
100
50
Color (moist)
5 YR 4/3
Redox Features
ok Type'
Loc2
Texture
50 C
M
'Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
(Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
O Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
O Depleted Matrix (F3)
O Redox Dark Surface (F6)
O Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Remarks
silt loam (no redox) some rocks
clayey loam with distinct redox
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
O 2 cm Muck (A10)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
O Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
0 Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: Soil is friable and dry witihin the upper 12 inches of the soil profile. Soils does not meet criteria of hydric soil indicators . Depleted matrix
soils with distinct redox concentrations not present within 10 inches of ground surface in the the soil profile. Hydric soil indicator Al2 - Thick Dark
Surface is not met duet to surface soils displaying chormas =2.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required, check all that aoply)
❑ ❑❑❑❑®®❑
Surface Water (Al)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B 1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
O Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
❑ Salt Crust (B11)
O Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
O Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
O Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
O Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): N/A
Water Table Present?. Yes ® No 0 Depth (inches): 12
Saturation Present? Yes Z No 0 Depth (inches): 12
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections). if available:
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Ei
Remarks: Saturated soils and ground water table observed at 12 inches from the groundsurface meets wetland hydrology critiera.
No ❑
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P32217 City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:11/20/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Billy D. Click State: WA Sampling Point: SP5
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25. T35N. RO1E, W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslooe Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A L-=' Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coverland gravelly loam (Soil Series Unit #351. 0-3% slope NWI classification: N/A - Upland pasture
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No , Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No ❑
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ® No ❑
Yes ❑ No El
Yes ❑ No El
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No
Remarks: .Sample plot located in upland pasture near the northwest corner of the property. Non-hydric soils are present. Vegetation is domianted by
facultative species of grass and weedy herbaceous plants. No primary or secondary indicators of wetland hydrology are positive. Hydrology is
naturally problematic due to seasonal dryness in late growing season and high groundwater table from November through March outside of the
growing season.
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1. Not applicable
2.
3.
4.
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1 Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Total % Cover of: Multiply bv:
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
= Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66 (A/B)
3. Rosa so. Trace N Fr> OBL species x 1 =
4. FACW species x 2 =
5. FAC species x 3 =
trace = Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x 5 =
1. Fesuca arundinacea 90 Y FAC Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Festuca rubra 40 Y FAC
3. Cirsium so. 10 N FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =
4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5. 0 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
6. ® Dominance Test is >50%
7. ❑ Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
S. ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
9 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
10. ElWetland Non -Vascular Plants'
11. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
140 = Total Cover Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
)
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size
1. Rubus armeninacus 2.5 Y FACU
2. Hydrophytic
Vegetation
25 = Total Cover Present? Yes ® No 0
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: Pasture vegetation is dominated by facultative species of grass and weedy herbacoeus plants that are tyipcal of disturbed sites.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP5
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix Redox Features
Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2
0-14 10 YR 3!2
14-20 10 YR 4/2
100
50
10 YR 4/6
50 C M
Texture
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Deoletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
O Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
O Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
O Sandy Redox (S5)
O Stripped Matrix (S6)
O Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
O Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
O Depleted Matrix (F3)
O Redox Dark Surface (F6)
O Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
O Redox Depressions (F8)
Remarks
silt loam (no redox) some rocks
clayey loam with redox
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
O 2 cm Muck (A10)
O Red Parent Material (TF2)
O Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No
Remarks: Hydric soil critieria is not positively met. Depleted matrix soils with redox concentrations are riot present within 10 inches of soil profile as
required to meet indicator F3 for depleted matrix . Hydric soil indicator Al2: Thick Dark Surface is not met due to surface soils displaying chroma = 2.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)
❑ Surface Water (A1)
O High Water Table (A2)
O Saturation (A3)
O Water Marks (B1)
O Sediment Deposits (B2)
O Drift Deposits (B3)
O Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
O iron Deposits (B5)
O Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
O Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Yes No
Yes ❑ No
Yes ® No ❑
O Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
O Salt Crust (B11)
O Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
O Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
O Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
O Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches): N/A
Depth (inches): N/A
Depth (inches): 20
❑
0
0
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No
Remarks: No preimary or secondary indicators of wetland hydrology are present. Moisture glistening indicative of saturated soil conditions was
observed at a depth of 20 inches from the ground surface.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version. 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel Parcel P32217 City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:11/20/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Billy D. Click State: WA Sampling Point: SP6
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25. T35N. R01 E. W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslone Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland aravellv loam (Soil Series Unit #35). 0-3% slopes NWI classification: N/A - Upland scrub -shrub
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No , Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No 0
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ❑ No
Yes ® No ❑
Yes ❑ No El
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: .Sample plot located in upland scrub -shrub near the northeastern corner of the property. Soils meet hydric critiera of indicator F3: Depleted
Matrix. Vegetation is mixed with non-hydrophytic and hydrophytic species. No primary or secondary indicators of wetland hdyrology are positive.
Season) hydrology is naturally problematic due to high water table November - March, outside of the growing season.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. Betula r'-- N FAC* That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. — - - Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B)
Saolina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Spriaea doualasii 70 Y FACW Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Rosa so. 15 N FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. OBL species 0 x 1 =
4. FACW species 70 x 2 = 140
FAC species 40 x 3 = 120
85 = Total Cover FACU species 90 x 4 = 360
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x 5 =
1. Pteridium aauillinum 20 Y FACU Column Totals: 200 (A) 620 (B)
2. Festuca rubra 40 Y FAC
3. Rubus ursinus 70 Y FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.1
4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5. 0 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
6. ❑ Dominance Test is >50%
7. 0 Prevalence Index is S3.0'
8. 0 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
9.
10. 0 Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
11 0 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
130 = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2. Hydrophytic
Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes ❑ No El
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: Vegetation is mixed with non-hydrophytic and hydrophytic species. Hydrophytic species are not dominant. The prevalence Index is 3.1.
* Assummed indicator
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast- Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP6
j Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist)
0-10
Matrix
10 YR 3/1-3/2
10-20 2.5 Y 4/2
Redox Features
% Color (moist) % Type' Loc2
100
50 10 YR 4/6 50 C M
1
Texture
Remarks
silt loam (no redoxl some rocks
clayey loam w/ redox concentration
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10)
❑ Histosol (A1)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
O Black Histic (A3)
O Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
O Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al1)
O Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
O Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
O Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks: Soils meet criteria of hydric indicator F3: Depleted Matrix
O Sandy Redox (S5)
O Stripped Matrix (S6)
O Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
O Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
® Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
O Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required- check all that apply)
O Surface Water (A1)
O High Water Table (A2)
O Saturation (A3)
❑ Water Marks (B1)
O Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
O Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
O inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
O Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
0 Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Salt Crust (B11)
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
O Red Parent Material (TF2)
O Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes rgi No ❑
Yes 0 No ® Depth (inches): N/A
Yes 0 No ® Depth (inches): N/A
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No ® Depth (inches): 14 Wetland Hydrology Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: No preirnary or secondary indicators of wetland hydrology are present. The ground table ws observed at depths greater than 12 inches
from the ground surface at the sample plot.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast— Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P32217 City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:11/20/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. BiIv D. Click _ State: WA Sampling Point: SP7
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25. T35N. R01E. W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland aravellv loam (Soil Series Unit #35), 0-3% slopes NWI classification: N/A -disturbed pasture
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil Yes or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes El No ❑
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ❑ No El
Yes El No ❑
Yes ❑ No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: The sample plot is located on the disturbed southeast 1/4 of the subject property where fill and grade associiated with demolition of a
single-family residence have occurred in the past. The filled areas have an abrupt edge that sets topographically higher than the grade on adjacent
land areas by approximately 1-feet. The western edge of an on -site P5S wetland and the northern extent of an off -site PEM wetland to the south
appear to bounded by the fill on this portion of the property.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 15') % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
= Total Cover
1. Crateoeus so. 5 N FAC
2. Rosa SD. 15 N FAC
3..
4.
5.
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1. Phalaris arundinacea
2. Diosacus fullionum
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
6.
9.
10. .
11.
Woody Vine Stratum
1. Rubus lancilatus
2.
(Plot size:
20 = Total Cover
100 Y FACW
20 Y FAC
120
= Total Cover
5 N FACU
= Total Cover
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 2
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
Multiply by:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x5=
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
• Dominance Test is >50%
❑ Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
YesNo CI
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: Vegetation is dominated by invasive reed canarygrass and teasel. Dominance test for hydrophytic vegetation is positive.
US Army Corps of Engineers
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP7
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
finches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-20 10 Y R 312 100
Mat ,re=_„ .red nr Cnatarl Sand Grains,'Type: V_CV__en1trafioI, D=Dcoleto,,
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
silt loam (no redoxl
2Location• PL-Pore Lining. M=Matrix.
indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10)
O Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No EZ
Remarks: Soil does not meet critieria of hydric soil indicators. Disturbances associated with historic fill and grading are present on this portion of the
property.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that aoolv)
❑ Surface Water (A1)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Water Marks (B1)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
❑ Salt Crust (B11)
❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Yes ❑ Nu gi
Yes ❑ No Ei
Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): N/A
Depth (inches): N/A
Depth (inches): N/A
Remarks: No preimary nor secondary indicators of wetland hydrology are positive.
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P32217 City/County: Anacortes _ Sampling Date:12/10/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Bilv D. Click
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25. T35N. R01E. W.M.
Landform (hillsiope, terrace, etc.): hillsiooe Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland gravelly loam (Soil Series Unit#351. 0-3% slopes NWI classification: NA/Disturbed pasture
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes El No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil Yes, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No ❑
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes El No ❑
Yes ❑ No El
Yes ❑ No El
State: WA Sampling Point: SP8
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No
Remarks: This porttion of the property has been disturbed in association with past land uses and the demolition of an existing single-family residence.
Evidence of charcoal iin non-hydric soils indicate disturbances associated with fire- possibly burning tree stumps- have occurred in the past.
Hydrology is naturally problematic due to seasonal dryness in late growing season and a high groundwater table November - March - outside of the
growing season.
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 15' raidus) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. Not applicable That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
= Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
Saolina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' radius)
1. Not Applicable
2.
3..
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' raidus)
1. Aarostis so. 20 Y FAC*
2. Festuca rubra 80 Y FAC
3. Achillea millefoiium Trace N FACU
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10. .
11.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 radious')
1. Not Applicable
2.
100 = Total Cover
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: Vegetation is dominated by facilitative species of grasses.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑ Dominance Test is >50%
❑ Prevalence Index is s3.0'
❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes IQ No ❑
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2,0
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP8
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist)
0-8 7.5 YR 3/2
9-11 5 YR 4/3
11-16 2.5Y5/2
16+
Matrix
100
100
96
Color (moist)
Redox Features
Type' Loc2
10 YR 4/6 4 C M
Texture
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
0
El
El
CI
Histosol (Al )
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfde (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Remarks
silt loam (no redox)
Fire scar band with charcoal chunks
fine loam
Anaular oravelly fill
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No LEI
Remarks: Redox is present a depths below 10 inches in the soil profile and therefore does not rneet hydric critiera of indicator F3 - depleted matrix.
Past disturbances associated with fire and fill are present in the soil profile.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired: check all that apply)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
❑ Salt Crust (B11)
❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
El
0
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No
Water Table Present? Yes ® No ❑
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches): N/A
Depth (inches): 11
Depth (inches): 0-8
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reouiredl
El
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Saturation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Wetland Hydrology Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Yes® No
Remarks: Primary indicators of sesonally high ground water table and saturted surface soils are present. Stormwater runoff was observed to flow
onto the subject property from off -site roadway to the west.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P32217
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Bily D. Click
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslooe
Subregion (LRR): A
Lat:
City/County: Anacortes
Sampling Date:02/03/2015
State: WA Sampling Point: SP9(17)
Section, Township, Range: Section 25. T35N. RO1 E. W.M.
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave
Long:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland Gravelly loam (Soil Series Unit #35). 0-3% slopes
Slope (%): 2
Datum:
NWI classification: NA/Uoland pasture
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes lE No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil no, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic?
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes El No 0
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes El No
Yes ❑ No El
Yes ® No ❑
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No 121
Remarks: Sample Plot located at a low toppographic positon between fence lines along southern boundary. Non-hydric soils are present.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Species? Status
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 15' raidus)
1.
2.
3.
4.
SaDlina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' radius)
1. Cateoeus SD.
2.
3..
4.
5.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' raidus)
1. Aorosist so
2. Rosa nutkanta (6" - mowed)
3. Festuca so.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10..
11.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 radious')
1.
2.
= Total Cover
10 Y FACW
10 = Total Cover
100 Y FAC
10 Y FAC
Trace N FAC*
110 = Total Cover
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: Vegetation is dominated by facultative species of grasses..
Assummed indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 3
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiolv bv:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
O Prevalence Index is s3.0'
❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes ® No ❑
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
SOIL
0-14 10YR312 100
Sampling Point: SP9(17)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
silt loam (no redox)
sandy loam with redox
14-20 10 Y R 4/2 80 10 Y R 4/6 20
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand G
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
O Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
0
0
0
0
0
El
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
rains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: Soil does not meet hydric criteria. Redox is present a depths below 10 inches in the soil profile
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check
r-i
u Surface Water (Al )
I I High Water Table (A2)
® Saturation (A3)
❑ Water Marks (B1)
❑ Sediment Deposits (82)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
O Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? No El
Water Table Present? No 0
Saturation Present? No 0
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Yes 0
Yes El
Yes 21
❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
all that apply)
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Salt Crust (B11)
Aquatic Invertebrates (313)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches): NA
Depth (inches): 0
Depth (inches): 0
❑❑❑❑®❑❑®
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
O Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
No 0
Remarks: Primary indicators of sesonaily high ground water table and saturted surface soils are present at the surface. Hydrology is bound by fill to
the north. A PEM wetland is present off -site on the adjacent parcel to the south. Wetland connectivity was not delineated at this location but is
present further to the south on the subject property.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P32217 City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:12/10/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Bily D. Click State: WA Sampling Point: SP10
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25. T35N, RO1E. W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland aravellv loam (Soil Series Unit#35). 0-3% slooes NWI classification: NA/Upland pasture
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil no, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No ❑
Are Vegetation No, Soil No or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ® No ❑
Yes ❑ No
Yes ® No ❑
►5
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Egi
Remarks: Sample plot located in disturbed pasture at a topographically low point Some fill present - a buried brick was observed at the bottom of the
sample plot. Evidence of past disturbances associred with fire scar and woody stemmed vegetation removal was observed. Although disturbed,
non-hydric soils are present. Wetland hydrology is naturally problematic due to seasonal dryness in the late growing season and a high groundwater
table in November - March outside of the growing season.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
Saplina/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3..
4.
5.
(Plot size:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
= Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' raidus)
1. Fesrtuca arundinacea 80 Y FAC
2. Festuca so. 20 FAC*
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10..
11.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 radious')
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: Vegetation is dominated by facultative species.
"Assummed indicator
100 = Total Cover
= Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply bv:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
(B)
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
® Dominance Test is >50%
❑ Prevalence Index is
O Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
O Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present. unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes ® No ❑
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast— Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP10
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Coior (moist) % Color (moist) Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-16 10YR3/1 100
16-20 2.5YR5/2 10YR416
Type,
silt loam (no redox)
M 1 sandy silt loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Deoletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10)
❑ Histosol (Al )
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
O Black Histic (A3)
O Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
O Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
O Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
O Sandy Redox (S5)
O Stripped Matrix (S6)
O Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
O Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
0 Red Parent Material (TF2)
O Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Egl
Remarks: Soil does not meet hydric criteria. Redox is present a depths below 10 inches in the soil profiie.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reouired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Water (A1)
® High Water Table (A2)
® Saturation (A3)
O Water Marks (B1)
0 Sediment Deposits (B2)
O Drift Deposits (B3)
O Algal Mat or Crust (134)
O Iron Deposits (B5)
0 Surface Soil Cracks (66)
O Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
O Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes El
Water Table Present? Yes El
Saturation Present? Yes
No ❑
No 0
No ❑
O Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
O Salt Crust (B 11)
O Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
O Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
O Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
O Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
O Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
O Stunted or Stressed Plants (DI) (LRR A)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches): +1
Depth (inches): 0
Depth (inches): 0
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reouired)
O Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
® Drainage Patterns (1310)
O Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
O Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
® Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
O Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Wetland Hydrology Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Yes ® No ❑
Remarks: Primary indicators of sesonally high ground water table and saturted surface soils are present outside of the growing season
indicators are positive.
Seconday
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P32217 City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:12/10/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. BiIv D. Click _ State: WA Sampling Point: SP11
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile, PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25, T35N, RO1E, W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslooe Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland gravelly loam (Soil Series Unit #351. 0-3% slopes NWI classification: NA/Upland Scrub -Shrub
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil no, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No ❑
Are Vegetation No, Soil No or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes l2] No ❑
Yes ❑ No El
Yes ® No ❑
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No EMI
Remarks: Non-hydric soils are present. Hydrology is naturally problematic due to seasonal dryness late in the growing season and a high
groundwater table outside of the growing table in November - March.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 15' raidus) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. Alnus rubra (sapling) N FAC That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
10 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' radius)
1. Rosa nutkana 40 Y FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Soiraea doualasii 25 N FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3.. OBL species x 1 =
4. FACW species x 2 =
5. FAC species x 3 =
65 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' raidus) UPL species x 5 =
1. Phalaris arundinacea 40 Y FACW Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Diosacus fullonum 10 N FAC
3. Rubus ursinus 20 Y FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5. ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
6. ® Dominance Test is >50%
7. ❑ Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
b. ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
9 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
10 ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
11. ElProblematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
70 = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 radious')
1. Rubus armeniacus Trace N FACU
Hydrophytic
2. Vegetation
Trace = Total Cover Present? Yes El No ❑
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: Vegetation is dominated by hydrophytic species
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast— Version 2.0
SOIL
Profile Description:
Sampling Point: SP11
(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist)
0-16 7.5 YR 2/2-3/2 100
16-20 2.5 YR 4/2 80 10 YR 4/6
__ Type' Loc2
20 C M
Texture
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
❑ Histosol (A1)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
O Stripped Matrix (S6)
O Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
O Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
O Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Remarks
silt loam (no redox)
siit loam w/ 1 larrge rounded cobble
Redox concentrations
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10)
0 Red Parent Material (TF2)
O Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No LZ
Remarks: Soil does not meet hydric criteria. Redox is present a depths below 10 inches in the soil profile.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)
❑ SurfaceWater(A1)
® High Water Table (A2)
® Saturation (A3)
O Water Marks (B 1)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
O Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
O Iron Deposits (B5)
O Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
O Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
O Water -Stained Leaves (69) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
O Salt Crust (61 1)
❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
El Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
O Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
O Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches): NA
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
El Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
O Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
O Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
® Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Yes ❑ No
Yes ® No ❑
Yes ® No ❑
Depth (inches): 16 _
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ® No ❑
Remarks: Primary indicators of sesonally high ground water table and saturted surface soils are present outside of the growing season.
indicagors are positive.
Secondary
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P32217 City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:12/10/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Bily D. Click State: WA Sampling Point: SP12
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25. T35N. RO1 E. W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillsloDe Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long. Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland gravelly loam (Soil Series Unit#35). 0-3% slopes NWI classification: Upland Forest
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes El No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil no, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes ® No D
Are Vegetation No, Soil No or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ❑ No El
Yes ❑ No ig
Yes El No ❑
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: Sample plot located in upland forest near the northeast corner of the property Non-hydric soils are presnt. Soils and vegetation do not
meet wetland criteria. Saturated soils associated with the seasonal high ground water table observed outside of the growing season.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 15' raidus)
1. Alnus rubra
2. Abies arandis
3.
4.
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' radius)
1. Svmphoricarous albus 20 Y FACU Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. i Total % Cover of:
3. OBL species
4. FACW species x 2 =
5 FAC species x 3 =
20 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' raidus) UPL species x 5
1. Pteridium aguilinum 20 Y FACU Column Totals: (A) (B)
2.
3. Prevalence Index = B/A = _
4_ Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5. ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
6. ❑ Dominance Test is >50%
7. _ ❑ Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
❑ Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
0.
10 ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
11. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
60 Y FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
10 N FACU
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 radious')
1
2.
Percent of Dominant Species
70 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33 (A/B)
20 = Total Cover
= Total Cover
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes ❑ No El
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100
Remarks: Vegetation is not dominated by hydrophytic species. Ground surface covered by leaves. Herbaceous ground cover lacking.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP12
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
finches) Color (moist)
0-14 10 YR 3/2 100
Color (moist)
Redox Features
Type'
Loc2 Texture
14-20 2.5 YR 4/2 10 YR 4/6 C M
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand G
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
' ❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
1
Remarks
silt loam (no redox)
silt loam with redox
rains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks: Soil does not meet hydric criteria. Redox is present a depths below 10 inches in the soil profile.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired: c
❑ Surface Water (A1)
• High Water Table (A2)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Water Marks (B1)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
heck all that apply)
O Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 46)
Salt Crust (B11)
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Yes ❑ No El
Yes ® No ❑
Yes ® No ❑
❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
Depth (inches): NA
Depth (inches): 10 _
Depth (inches): 10_
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Ei
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
No ❑
Remarks: Primary indicators of sesonally high ground water table and saturted surface soils are present outside of the growing season.
indicators are not positive.
Secondary
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P32217 City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:12/10/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. BiIv D. Click State: WA Sampling Point: SP13
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25, T35N. RO1E. W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslooe _ Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland aravellv loam (Soil Series Unit#351. 0-3% slopes NWI classification: Clearino in Ualand Forest
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No 0
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ® No Di
Yes ❑ No
Yes ® No ❑
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: Sample located in disturbed clearing in the forest adjacent to a man-made drainge ditch along the east property line. Tire ruts present on
ground surface. The ditch/swale conveys surface water flows to the north from adjacent developed residential parcels along the eastern property
boundary. Overtopping of ditch occurs during periods of increased precipitation and the winter wet season.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Sar lino/Shrub Stratum
1.
2. Rosa so.
3..
4.
5.
(Plot size:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1. Ranunculs ao.
2. Eoilobium watsonii
3. Rubus ursinus
4. Geum macrophvllum
5. Polvstichum munitum
6. Taraxacum officinale
7.
6.
9.
10. .
11.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1. Rubus armeniacus
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: Vegetation is dominated by hydrophytic species.
= Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (NB)
Percent of Dominant Species
Prevalence Index worksheet:
10 N FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 = _
10 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
70 Y FACW Column Totals: (A) (B)
20 Y FAC
Trace N FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
Trace N FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Trace N FACU 0 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Trace N FACU ® Dominance Test is >50%
O Prevalence Index is .0
❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
O Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
90 = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5 N FACU
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes® No CI
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast— Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P32217 City/County. Anacortes Sampling Date:12/10/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Bilv D. Click State: WA Sampling Point: SP13__
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25. T35N. RO1E, W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslooe Local reiief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Let: _ Long:
Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland gravelly loam (Soil Series Unit #35). 0-3% slopes NWI classification: Clearing in Upland Forest
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no. explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No ❑
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ® No ❑
Yes ❑ No Egi
Yes ® No ❑
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: Sample located in disturbed clearing in the forest adjacent to a man-made drainge ditch along the east property line. Tire ruts present on
ground surface. The ditch/swale conveys surface water flows to the north from adjacent developed residential parcels along the eastern property
boundary. Overtopping of ditch occurs during periods of increased precipitation and the winter wet season.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
SaplinaiShrub Stratum (Plot size: _i _)
1.
2. Rosa so. 10 N FAC
3..
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status
= Total Cover
4.
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1. Ranunculs ao.
I 2. Epilobium watsonii
3. Rubus ursinus
4. Geum macroohvllum
5. Polvstichum munitum
6. Taraxacum officinale
7.
8.
9.
10. .
11.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1. Rubus armeniacus
2.
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: Vegetation is dominated by hydrophytic species.
10 = Total Cover
70 Y FACW
20 Y FAC
Trace N FACU
Trace N FACW
Trace N FACU
Trace N FACU
90
= Total Cover
5 N FACU
5 = Total Cover
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 2
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species _ x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑ Dominance Test is >50%
❑ Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
(B)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes Ei No ❑
US Arrny Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast— Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street, Parcel P32217 City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:12/10/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. BiIv D. Click State: WA Sampling Point: SP14
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township; Range: Section 25. T35N. RO1E. W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslooe Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland gravelly loam (Soil Series Unit#35). 0-3%slopes NWI classification: PSS Wetland
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No ❑
Are Vegetation No. Soil No, or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed; explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ® No ❑
Yes ® No ❑
Yes ® No ❑
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes ® No ❑
Remarks: Wetlands parameters are positive. Wetland appears to be associated with an off -site disturbed (ditched) PEM Wetland to the south. The
wetland's western boundary appears to be constrained by historic fill.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
3.
4.
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1. Crateueus so.
2. Rosa nutkana
3.
4.
5.
(Plot size:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1. Juncus so.
2. Agrostis so.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10..
11.
}
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
40 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
20 Y FACW Prevalence Index worksheet:
60 Y FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply bv:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
80 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
80 Y FACW Column Totals: (A)
20 Y FAC
130 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: _)
1. Rubus armeniacus N FACU
2.
= Total Cover
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑ Dominance Test is >50%
❑ Prevalence Index is
❑ Morphological Adaptations(Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
❑ Prohlematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes ® No ❑
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 5
Remarks: Dense vegetation is dominated by hydrophytic species. Small areas of bare ground where prolonged surface water inundation occurs.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP14
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist)
0-6 2.5 YR 2/1
6-20 2.5 Y 5/2
Matrix
100
80
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture
10 YR 4/6 20
1
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix. CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
❑ Histosol (Al ) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6)
O Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
0 Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ® Depleted Matrix (F3)
O Thick Dark Surface (Al2) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6)
0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
O Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks: Soil meet hydric critiera of indicator F3 (Depleted Matrix)
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired: check all that apply)
® Surface Water (A1)
® High Water Table (A2)
® Saturation (A3)
O Water Marks (81)
0 Sediment Deposits (132)
0 Drift Deposits (B3)
0 Alga! Mat or Crust (B4)
0 Iron Deposits (B5)
0 Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Remarks
silt loam (no redoxl
clalvev loam
location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
O 2 cm Muck (A10)
O Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ® No ❑
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
0 Salt Crust (B11)
0 Aquatic Invertebrates (813)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
O Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
0 Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
0 Other (Explain in Remarks)
Yes El No 0 Depth (inches): +2
Yes E No 0 Depth (inches): 0 _.
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reauired)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
® Drainage Patterns (810)
O Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
® Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
• FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
O Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Saturation Present? Yes ® No 0 Depth (inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ❑
(includes capillary frinae) -
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: Priimary and secondary indicators of wetland hydrology are positive.
US Army Corps of Engineers
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM —Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P32217 City/County: Anacortes Sampling Date:12/10/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Bill/ D. Click State: WA Sampling Point: SP15
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25. T35N. RO1E. W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslooe Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Daturr
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland aravelly loam (Soil Series Unit #35). 0-3% slopes NWI classification: Upland scrub -shrub
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil Yes, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No ❑
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ® No ❑
Yes ❑ No El
Yes ❑ No Ei
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: Sample plot located at the edge of fill directly to the north of the on -site PSS wetland near the south property boundary.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 15' raidus) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: ^ (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. T Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
70 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' radius)
1. Rosa nutkana 60 Y FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. i Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3.. OBL species
4. FACW species
5. FAC species x 3 =
60 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' raidus) UPL species x 5
1. Phalaris arundinacea 20 Y FACW Column Totals: (A) (B)
2.
3. Prevalence Index = B/A =
4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5. 0 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
6. ❑ Dominance Test is >50%
7. _ 0 Prevalence Index is
8. 0 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
9 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
10 0 Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
11 0 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
20 = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 radious')
1. Rubus armeniacus 20 Y FACU
2 Hydrophytic
Vegetation
20 = Total Cover Present? Yes El No ❑
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks: Vegetation is dominated by hydrophytic species.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast— Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP15
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
finches)_ Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type'
0-10 10 YR 3/2 100
10-14 7.5 YR 2/2 95 7.5 YR 3/4
14-20 2.5 Y 3/2 70 10 YR 4/6
5 C
30-50 C
Loc2 Texture
M 1
M
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand G
Hydric Soil indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
O Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
O Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
O Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
O Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
O Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
O Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
O Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
O Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
O Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Remarks
silt loam (no redox)
silt loam with faint redox
sandy soils with prominent redox
rains. `Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10)
0 Red Parent Material (TF2)
O Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: Soil is distrubed at the edge of fill on the southeast portion of the property. Faint redox concentrations observed at 10 inches in th soil ar
profile. Prominent redox observed below 14 inches. Soil is a transistion plot from PSS wetland to the east and upland fill and to the west.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired: check all that apply)
❑ Surface Water (A1)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
O Saturation (A3) ❑
❑ Water Marks (B1) ❑
O Sediment Deposits (B2) ❑
❑ Drift Deposits (B3) 0
O Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ❑
❑ Iron Deposits (B5) ❑
O Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ❑
O Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0
O Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Salt Crust (B11)
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Yes 0 No ® Depth (inches): NA
Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): 13
Yes ® No 0 Depth (inches): 13
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reauired)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
O Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
O Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
O Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
O Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑
No
Remarks: Primary and secondary indicators of wetland hydrology are not postive. Soil saturateion and the ground water table areat depths greater
than 12 inches from the ground surface. Sample plot located upslope of the adjacent wetland.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
3• Species Across All Strata:
4.
Project/Site: 2109 Street. Parcel P32217 Sampling Date:12/10/2014
Applicant/Owner: Mr. BiIv D. Click State. WA Sampling Point: SP16
Investigator(s): Tina Mirabile. PWS Section, Township, Range: Section 25, T35N, RO1E, W.M.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR,: Lat: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Coveland aravelly loam (Soil Series Unit#35). 0-3% slopes NWI classcation: Upland Forest
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes El No El (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation No, Soil no, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® No ❑
Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology Yes naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ❑ No El
Yes ® No ❑
Yes ❑ No El
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ❑ No El
Remarks: Sample plot located in upland forest to the north of the on -site PSS wetland along the southern property boundary. Hydric soils meeting
depleted matric indicator F3 observed however vegetation is dominanted by non-hydrophytic speices and no primary or secondary indicators of
wetland hdyrology are present. Hydrology is naturally problematic due to seasonal dryness late in the growing season and a high groundwater table
outside of the gowing season in November - March.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 15' raidus) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1 • That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0
2. Abies arandie Y FACU
Total Number of Dominant
Percent of Dominant Species
20 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' radius)
1. Svmphoricarous albus 50 Y FACU Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. i
3.
4.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' raidus)
1. Herbaceous veaetation Iackino
2..
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
6.
9.
10. .
11.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 radious')
1. Rubus armeaniacus
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
50 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = __
UPL species _ x 5 = 4 _
Column Totals: (A)
= Total Cover
20 Y FACU
= Total Cover
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
El Dominance Test is >50%
El Prevalence Index is s3.0'
El Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes ❑ No
Remarks: Vegetation is not dominated by hydrophytic species. Ground surface covered by leaves. Herbaceous ground cover lacking.
US Army Corps of Engineers
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: SP16
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) _ % Type' Loc2 Texture
0-5 10 YR 3/2 100
5-20 2.5 YR 5/2 75 10 YR 5/6 25 C M 1
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, R M=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
❑ Histosol (A1)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
O Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
O Sandy Redox (S5)
O Stripped Matrix (S6)
O Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
O Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
® Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
O Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Remarks
silt loam (no redox)
gravelly sandy losm with fine redox
2Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
O 2crnMuck(A10)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
O Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
'indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ® No 0
Remarks: Soil meet hydric criteria of Depleted Matrix (F3). Redox is present at depths less than 10 inches in the soil profile.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
jPrimary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)
Yes ❑ No
Yes ❑ No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Surface Water (A1)
• High Water Table (A2)
® Saturation (A3)
O Water Marks (B1)
O Sediment Deposits (132)
O Drift Deposits (B3)
O Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring wellaerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
O Salt Crust (B11)
❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reauired)
❑
0
❑
Depth (inches): NA
Depth (inches): N/A
Depth (inches): N/A
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No
Remarks: No Primary or secondary indicators of wetland hydrology are positive. Sample plot located upslope of adjacent depressional wetland.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0
Wetland name or number Click Parcel P32217-Anacortes, WA
RATING SUMMARY — Western Washington
Name of wetland (or ID #): Click - 2109 34th Street, Anacortes Date of site visit: Feb. 3, 2015
Rated by Tina Mirabile, PWS Trained by Ecology?_X Yes _No Date of training)10/ 2005;Credit/Debit: 09/15/:
HGM Class used for rating _Depressional Wetland has multiple HGM classes? Y X N
NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be
combined). Source of base aerial photo/map Skagit County Aerials 2013
OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY IV x
(based on functions or special characteristics
1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS
Category I — Total score = 23 - 27
Category II — Total score = 20 - 22
Category III — Total score = 16 - 19
Category IV — Total score = 9 - 15
x
FUNtfON
(Site Potential
'Landscape Potential
Value
Score Based on
Ratings
tmprnving Hyctraiogic I kabifat
cf'atprChiatity
Circle the appropriate ratings
H
H
H
M
M
L H M[J H M L
L H M L'
M I —I H MILI H M L 'TOTAL
5
4 3
12
2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland
CHARACTERISTIC
Estuarine
Wetland of High Conservation Value
Bog
Mature Forest
Old Growth Forest
Coastal Lagoon
Interdunal
None of the above
CATEGORY
I II
I
I
I
Special Characterisitcs are Not Applicable
Score for each
function based
on three
ratings
(order of ratings
is not
important)
9 = H,H,H
8 = H,H,M
7 = H, H, L
7=H,M,M
6 = H,M,L
6 = M,M,M
5 = H,L,L
5 = M, M, L
4= M,L,L
3 = L,L,L
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
)
Wetland name or number Click Parcel P32217-Anacortes, WA
Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for
Western Washington
Depressional Wetlands
Map Of:
Cowardin plant classes
Hydroperiods
Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods)
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure)
Map of the contributing basin
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRiA in which unit is found (from web)
Riverine Wetlands
To answer questions:
D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4
D 1.4, H 1.2
D 1.1, D 4.1
D 2.2, D 5.2
D 4.3, D 5.3
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
D 3.1, D 3.2
D 3.3
Map of: To answer. questions:
Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4
Hydroperiods 1 H 1.2
Ponded depressions R 1.1
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) R 2.4
Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2
Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1
Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) j R 3.2, R 3.3
Lake Fringe Wetlands
Map of:
Cowardin plant classes
Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure)
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)
1 To answer questions:
L1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4
L 1.2
L 2.2
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
L 3.1, L 3.2
L 3.3
Slope Wetlands
Ma
of; 1 To answer questions:
Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4
Hydroperiods H 1.2
Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3
Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 4.1
(can be added to figure above)
Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, 5 5.1
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
2
re
7
1
1
1,2
2
2
3
4
Figure
fFigure
Figure
Wetland name or number click Parcel P32217-Anacortes, WA
HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington
For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated.
If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you
probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in
questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8.
1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods?
I NO - go to 2 I YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe - go to 1.1
1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)?
NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe
Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it
is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to
score functions for estuarine wetlands.
2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater
and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit.
NO - go to 3 I YES - The wetland class is Flats
Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands.
3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
_The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any
plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size;
At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m).
NU — go to 4 I YES - The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe)
4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual),
_The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from
seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks,
The water leaves the wetland without being impounded.
INO - go to 5 I YES - The wetland class is Slope
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and
shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft
deep).
5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that
stream or river,
_The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years.
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 3
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Wetland name or number Click Parcel P32217-Anacortes, WA
NO - go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine
NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not
flooding
6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the
surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior
of the wetland.
NO-goto7
YES - The wetland class is Depressional
7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank
flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be
maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural
outlet.
NO - go to 8 YES The wetland class is Depressional
8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM
classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small
stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY
WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT
AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the
appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the
wetland unit being scored.
NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or
more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2
is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the
total area.
classes within the wetland unit
being rated
Slope + Riverine
Slope + Depressional
Slope + Lake Fringe
Depressional + Riverine along stream
within boundary of depression
Depressional + Lake Fringe
Riverine + Lake Fringe
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other
class of freshwater wetland
HGM class to
use in rating
Riverine
Depressional
Lake Fringe
Depressional
Depressional
Riverine
Treat as
ESTUARINE
Ifyou are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or ifyou have
more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the
rating.
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Wetland name or number Click Parcel P32217-Anacortes, WA
DEPREEWONAL AN :MATS WNPP$
Water Quality Functions - Irtciicators that the site functions to improve water quality
D ..0.Does the site have the potential to improve water, quality?
D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland:
Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet).
points = 3
Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing+
points = 2
Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points =1
Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points =1
D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff laver) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions).Yes = 41 No = 0
D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub -shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes):
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area The offsite agricultural field maybe
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants >1/2 of area mowed , grazed or tilled for part of the
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/10 of area year however ermergent vegetation is
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants <1/10 of area persistent during the wet season.
D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal oondine or inundation:
This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual.
Area seasonally ponded is >1/2 total area of wetland
Area seasonally ponded is > % total area of wetland
Area seasonally ponded is < % total area of wetland
Saturation may persist but surface
water does not appear to pond on
the surface for long enough.
points = 5
points = 3
points = 1
points = 0
points = 4
points = 2
points = 0
2
5
0
Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above 7
Rating of Site Potential If score is:_12-16 = H X 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 2_0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site?
D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No - 0
D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? J Yes = No = 0
D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 I No = 0
D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1-D 2.3?
Source
Total for D 2
Yes=1 !No =0
Add the points in the boxes above
0
1
0
1
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:_3 or 4 = H x 1 or 2 = M X 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society?
D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the
303(d) list? Yes = 11 No = 0 1
D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub -basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes =1 I No = 0 I
D 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality (answer YES
if there is a TMDL far the basin in which the unit is found)? Yes = 21 No = 0
Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M x 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 5
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
0
0
0
Wetland name or number Click Parcel P32217-Anacortes, WA
}EPR $S1ON MO FLATS WETLAND
Hydro! gic RID40ns - Ir'dicatcrs that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation
D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion?
D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland:
Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4
Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outletpoints f]
Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points = 1 2
Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 0
D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands
with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part.
Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet
Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet
Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet
The wetland is a "headwater" wetland
Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water
Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in)
points = 7
points = 5
points = 3
points = 3
points =1
points = 0
D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin
contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself.
The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit
The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit
The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit I points = 0
Entire wetland is in the Flats class points = 5
points = 5
0
0
Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above 2
Rating of Site Potential If score is:_12-16 = H _6-11= M X 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page
I D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site? . '_.
D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 11—N7 = 0
D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? I Yes = 1 I No = 0
D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at
>1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? I Yes = 1 INo = 0
Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above 2
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:_3 = H X 1 or 2 = M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page
0
1
1
D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society?
D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around
the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the hiahest score if more than one condition is met.
The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down -gradient into areas where flooding has
damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds):
• Flooding occurs in a sub -basin that is immediately down -gradient of unit. points = 2
• Surface flooding problems are in a sub -basin farther down -gradient. points = 1
Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub -basin. points = 1
The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the
water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why points = 0
There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. 'points = 0
D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan?
Yes =2, No=0
Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above 0
1= M X 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
Rating of Value If score is:_2-4 = H
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 6
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
0
0
Wetland name or number Click Parcel P32217-Anacortes, WA
These questions apply to wetlands cif all HGN1 classes.
HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators That site functions to provide important habitat
H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to r p ovide habitat?
H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the
Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold
of % ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked.
Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4
X Emergent 3 structures: points = 2
X Scrub -shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 12 structures: points = 1
Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0
If the unit has a Forested class, check if.
The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub -canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover)
that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon
H 1.2. Hydroperiods
Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover
more than 10% of the wetland or 1/4 ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods).
Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3
X Seasonally flooded or inundated _ 3 types present: points = 2
Occasionally flooded or inundated 12 types present: points =1
_X_Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0
Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland
Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland
Lake Fringe wetland 2 points
Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points
H 1.3. Richness of plant species
Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2.
Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name
the species. Do not include Eurasian mllfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle
If you counted: > 19 species
5 -19 species
< 5 species
H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats
Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or
the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you
have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high.
CD
None = 0 points I Low = 1 point
All three diagrams
in this row
are HIGH = 3points
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
points = 2
points =1 I
points = 0
cap
Moderate = 2 points
13
Wetland name or number Click Parcel P32217-Anacortes, WA
H 1.5. Special habitat features:
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points.
Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long).
Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland
Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m)
over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m) None are
Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree applicable
slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered
where wood is exposed)
At least % ac of thin -stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are
permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg -laying by amphibians)
Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of
strata)
Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above 4
Rating of Site Potential If score is:_15-18 = H
7-14 = M X 0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page
H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site?
H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit).
Calculate: % undisturbed habitat____+ [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = 1
If total accessible habitat is:
> 1/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3
20-33% of 1 km Polygon points - 2
10-19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1 0
< 10% of 1 km Polygon ! points = 0 i
H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland.
Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] =33% %
Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3
Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2 1
Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches I points = 1'
Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0
H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If
> 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use I points = (- 2) I -2
<_ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0
Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above j -1
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:_4-6 = H 2 1-3 = M x < 1= L Record the rating on the first page
H 3.0. is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society?
H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score
that applies to the wetland being rated.
Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2
— It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)
It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists)
It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species
It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources
It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a
Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan
Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within. 100 m points = 1
Site does not meet any of the criteria above ! points = 0 I
Record the rating on the first page
Rating of Value If score is:_2 = H _1= M X 0 = L
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 14
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
0
Wetland name or number Click Parcel P32217-Anacortes, WA
WDFW Priority Habitats
priority hitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can
be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington.
177 pp. http: //wdfw.wa.Eov /publications/001651wdfw00165.ndf or access the list from here:
httn: / /wdfw.wa.uov/conservation inhs !list/1
Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is
independent of the land usebetween the wetland unit and the priority habitgt
No priority habitats are present within 330 feet of the wetland !I
— Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha).
— Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and
wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report).
— Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
— Old-growth/Mature forests: Old -growth west of Cascade crest - Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi -
layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200
years of age. Mature forests - Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less
than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that
found in old -growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest.
— Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak
component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 - see web link above).
— Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.
— Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non -forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet
prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 - see web Iink above).
— Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide
functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.
— Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and
Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report -
see web link on previous page).
Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock,
ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.
— Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation.
— Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite,
and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.
— Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to
enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western
Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft
(6 m) long.
Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed
elsewhere.
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Wetland name or number Click Parcel P32217-Anacortes, WA
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Not Applicable
Wetland Type
Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category whthe appmpriol,
SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands
Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?
— The dominant water regime is tidal,
— Vegetated, and
— With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt
feria rire nlet
Yes -Go to SC 1.1 I No= Not an estuarine wetland
SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area
Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151?
Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 1.2
SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions?
— The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less
than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25)
— At least % of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-
mowed grassland.
— The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or
contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I No = Category II
SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV)
SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High
Conservation Value? Yes - Go to SC 2.2 I No - Go to SC 2.3 I
SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value?
Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV
SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland?
htto://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nho/refdesk/datasearch/wnhowetlands.odf
Yes - Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 I No = Not a WHCV
SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on
their website? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV
SC 3.0. Bogs
Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key
below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.
SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or
more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes - Go to SC 3.3 No - Go to SC 3.2
SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetiand unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep
over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floati of a Iakp or
pond? Yes - Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog
SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, ND at least a 30%
cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog No - Go to SC 3.4
NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory, you may substitute that criterion by
measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is Tess than 5.0 and the
plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog. Cat.
SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar,
western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the
species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy?
Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog
Cat. I
Cat. I
Cat. II
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Cat. I
Wetland name or number Click Parcel P32217-Anacortes, WA
SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands
Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA
Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate
the wetland based on its functions.
Old -growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi -layered
canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of
age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more.
Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the
species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm).
Yes = Category I I No = Not a forested wetland for this section
SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
— The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from
marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks
— The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt)
during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom)
Yes — Go to SC 5.1 I No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon
SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?
—The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less
than 20%o cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100).
— At least % of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-
mowed grassland.
—The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2)
Yes = Category I No = Category II
SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands
Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If
you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions.
In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:
— Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103
— Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105
— Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109
Yes — Go to SC 6.1 1 No = not an interdunal wetland for rating
SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M
for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No — Go to SC 6.2
SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger?
Yes = Category II No — Go to SC 6.3
SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac?
Yes = Category I11 No = Category IV
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
If you answered No for all types, enter "Not Applicable" on Summary Form
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Cat. I
Cat.
Cat. II
Cat I
Cat. II
Cat. III
Cat. IV
Not
Applicable 1
Wetland name or number
This page left blank intentionally
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 18
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
;Parcel P33230
;2015 34nd
Street
Ditches
On -site
seasonal
Category IV
PSS
wetland
(1,120 sf)
that
appears to
be
associated
with City of
Anacortes
mapped
PEM
wetland
area off -site
to the
south.
Standard
protective
buffer width
is 40' buffer.
Scale:
a
n
a
4n'
34TH STREET, ANACORTES, WA
N
N-+
:270'
Double fence line on southern property boundary
•
w
w
w
.A w
F-r
3135''—
LEGEND
North
0 Existing blackberry
encroachment
Observed surface
water flows, ditches
told spates
#dS
w
0
The sizes and shapes of depicted critical areas are estimates. A
professional survey would be required for exact dimensions. The
wetland delineation was limited to the subject parcel P32217. Indicators
of potential hydrological connectivity to off -site areas are based on visual
observations and have not been verified by a formal delineation or
assessment.
Advanced Environmental Solutions (360) 202-6839
e
i
I
,
0, .a . 7
ii' v I•
"' n Q p: / s
•:rsi :111�•
• �.
t - -r ,. Ai,MCORTE3
rI
S
• ?2na Since?.
•
Burrows
Bay
Pt;GET
.5OL; D
February 9, 2015
Legend
County Boundary Hydro Labels
City Names Regional Labels
Road Labels — 500 foot contours
100 foot contours
1:36,112
0 0.3 0.6
' II
0 0.5 1
I
•
1.2 mi
2 km
Data Accuracy Warning: All GIS data was created from available public records and existing
map sources. Map features have been adjusted to achieve a best -fit registration. While great
care was taken in this process, maps from different sources rarely agree as to the precise
location of geographic features. Map discrepancies can be as great as 300 feet.
•
EcoE.O.cr
Water Quality Assessment for Washington
Map Search p L:
Water Quality Assessment for Washington Data 715tiamer orrvacy Notice Contact Us
Copyright I) 2J12 Wash'.^gtcr State Department of Eaicpy. Gn Sighs=eser;ec.
Advanced Environmental Solutions
1500A EAST COLLEGE WAY, STE. 506, MOUNT VERNON, WA 98273 (360) 202-6839
July 31, 2020
Mr. Ryan Walters, JD, AICP
Planning and Community Development Director
Samish Indian Nation
2837 Summit Park Road
P.O. Box 217
Anacortes, WA 98221
RE: Samish 34th Street Housing - Wetland Buffer Width Averaging
Dear Mr. Walters:
This letter provides an analysis of wetland buffer width averaging associated with the
Samish Nation’s proposed housing project on Parcel #P32217, approximately 2-acres,
located at 2109 34th Street in Anacortes, Washington. This letter is supplemental to the
Critical Areas/Wetlands Site Assessment prepared by Advanced Environmental Solutions
(AES) in February 2015. An approximate 1.9-acre seasonally saturated/inundated
Category IV wetland, that extends off-site to the south, encumbers approximately 962
square feet (0.02 acre) of subject property (Figure 1). The wetland does not have a direct
hydrological connection to any vicinity streams or other water bodies. Existing wetland
functions, including habitat, are served at low levels. AES reviewed and reflagged the
wetland boundary in preparation of professional survey in May 2019.
The City of Anacortes’ (City) standard wetland buffer to protect regulated Category IV
wetlands that are equal to or greater than 1,000 square feet in size is 40-feet (Section
17.70.340.F.1 of Anacortes Municipal Code [AMC]). The total standard width buffer
area on the property represents 9,267 square feet (0.21 acre).
Modification of the City’s standard protective wetland buffer width may be allowed on a
case-by-case basis by averaging buffer widths, in accordance with an approved critical
area report and the best available science, as outlined in Section 17.70.340.F.4 of
Anacortes Municipal Code. Averaging of buffer widths may only be allowed where a
qualified professional wetland scientist demonstrates that:
a.It will not reduce wetland functions or functional performance;
b.The wetland contains variations in sensitivity due to existing physical
characteristics or the character of the buffer varies in slope, soils, or vegetation,
and the wetland would benefit from a wider buffer in places and would not be
adversely impacted by a narrower buffer in other places;
c.The total area contained in the buffer area after averaging is no less than that
which would be contained within the standard buffer; and
8/10/20
Advanced Environmental Solutions – Samish Nation – 34th Street Housing Buffer Width Averaging 2
d. For Category I and II wetlands the buffer width is not reduced to less than
seventy-five percent of the standard width.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION OF PROJECT-ASSOCIATED IMPACTS
The project has been designed to avoid and minimize impacts to the City’s regulated
critical areas. No direct wetland impacts are associated with the project. The project has
been designed to minimum impacts to the City’s standard 40-foot wide buffer designated
to protect the wetland, however due to the City’s cottage development plan requirements
and built area setbacks, minor buffer impacts are unavoidable in order to accommodate
the project’s project plan. Buffer impacts associated with a proposed playground and
allowance for a 5-feet wide setback from adjacent built surfaces to the buffer edge, result
in a total proposed buffer area reduction of 1,872 square feet (0.04 acre) (Figure 1). The
project’s minimum reduced buffer width, adjacent to the playground, is 20–feet. Table 1
summarizes the project-associated impacts to City regulated critical areas.
Table 1. Summary of Project-Associated Environmental Impact Areas
City of Anacortes
Regulated Critical
Area
Type of Impact Area of Impact
(square feet)/
[Acre]
Category IV PEM/PSS
Wetland
Not Applicable
Total Avoidance
None
Standard Protective
40-foot wide Wetland
Buffer
Permanent Buffer
Reduction Resulting from
Playground area
encroachment and
reserved 5-foot setback
from adjacent built area
1,872 square feet
(0.04 Acre)
Total: 1,872 square feet
(0.04 acre)
The project’s proposed reduction of the standard regulated buffer area will be
compensated for through the City’s provisions for buffer-width averaging which will
require, minimally, a reciprocal 1,872 square feet of increased buffer area to be
designated on the property. The proposed site plan designates two increased buffer areas
representing a total area of 1,876 square feet near the property’s southeast corner and
along its southern boundary (Figure 1). The widest buffer width proposed as a
component of the increased buffer area on the property is 77-feet.
EXISTING WETLAND BUFFER FUNCTIONS
Buffers typically function according to the type of vegetation community that is present.
Forested buffer areas typically serve buffer functions at the highest levels and open
pasture areas and maintained lawns provide functions at the lowest levels. Shrubs
typically serve functions at moderate levels. With the exception of the existing reed
Advanced Environmental Solutions – Samish Nation – 34th Street Housing Buffer Width Averaging 3
canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) vegetation to the northeast of the wetland,
moderately functioning forest and scrub-shrub vegetation communities dominate the
vegetation along the wetland’s northern and southern buffer edges, respectively (Figure
2-Aerial Photo). The majority of the trees present within the northern buffer adjacent to
the wetland are second-growth aged conifers [Grand fir (Abies grandis) and Douglas fir
(Pseudotsuga menziesii)] with diameters-at-breast (dbh) measuring, on average, between
8 and 15 inches (AES, 2015). A dense corridor of rose (Rosa sp.) and common snowberry
(Symphoricapros albus) shrubs is present along the wetland’s southern edge and adjacent
property boundary. Invasive Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) is also present
along the wetland and buffer edges.
Table 2 provides a rating of the existing wetland buffer functions at the project site. Most
buffer functions being provided on the property are rated at moderate levels, however for
the purposes of the Category IV wetland rating, habitat was rated as low overall due to
vicinity area development and the lack of contiguous and accessible adjacent buffer
habitat areas. Additionally, wildlife species diversity is limited, as no fish are associated
with the wetland.
Trees and woody-stemmed shrubs typically provide year-round infiltration and water
quality improvement functions at high to moderate levels, respectively. Trees additionally
provide shade for moderating air and surface water temperatures. In the Pacific
Northwest, trees oriented to the south of water bodies typically contribute the greatest
shade moderation function for reducing temperatures. The existing trees along the
northern edge of the wetland will typically produce shade towards the north, away from
the wetland, and therefore the forest buffer does not provide the highest level of function
for reducing the site wetland’s surface water temperature. Trees contribute large woody
debris habitat features within buffers and adjacent aquatic areas. This function was rated
as moderate for the project site. Shoreline stability buffer functions are not applicable to
the project site.
Table 2. Rating of Existing Wetland Buffer Functions on the Samish Nation’s
34th Street Housing Project Site
Buffer Function:
Existing Buffer Vegetation Class:
Forest/Scrub-Shrub
Surface Water Run-off
Infiltration/Water Quality
High-Moderate
Shoreline Stability Not Applicable
Temperature moderation/Shade Moderate
General wildlife habitat Moderate
Contribution of large woody debris Moderate
The preservation of the existing forest vegetation within the designated buffer areas will
help to retain the existing level of wetland and buffer functions being provided on the
site, even with the minor reduction in width in some areas. The project was redesigned
from earlier plans to reduce potential buffer impacts by switching the former location of
the community center that was situated within the buffer with the playground. This
Advanced Environmental Solutions – Samish Nation – 34th Street Housing Buffer Width Averaging 4
switch allows for a vegetated lawn area to be present within the vicinity of the
playground, rather than direct buffer encroachment by an impervious building area.
Additionally, the proposed 5-foot setback that is established between the proposed built
areas and the designated averaged buffer width areas will help to protect adjacent trees in
the buffer from root and overhanging limb damage during construction activities. A split
rail fence will be installed within this setback area to identify the site’s protected wetland
and buffer habitat area. Should any hazard trees be identified for removal from the buffer
due to their direct proximity to built areas, it is recommended that native replacement
conifer trees be installed at a ratio of 3:1 within the increase buffer area designated on the
property.
STORMWATER RUN-OFF– INFILTRATION
Stormwater run-off on the site will be increased proportionally to the area of introduced
built areas associated with the project. Best Management Practices (BMPs), as outlined
by Ecology in the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington or other
treatments as required by the City, will be implemented such that no untreated and or
unmanaged surface water run-off from the site’s developed areas will be directed towards
the wetland.
ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USE
Typically, residential uses that are located adjacent to natural areas inadvertently create
disturbances to native habitats and associated wildlife. To assist in minimizing potential
impacts to wetlands resulting from the project’s proposed change in land use, the Samish
Nation is proposing to implement the following measures, as recommended by the City,
in Table 17.70.340 of the City's Critical Areas Ordinance.
Residential Lighting: Direct lights away from wetland;
Residential Noise: Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland to
the maximum extent practicable;
Toxic Run-off Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while
Residential Areas: ensuring wetland is not dewatered; Limit use of pesticides
within 150-feet of the wetland; Apply integrated pest
management;
Stormwater Runoff/ Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and
Residential Areas: existing adjacent development. Prevent channelized flow
from lawns that directly enter the buffer.
Avoid changes to the wetland's hydrology regime through
the infiltration or treatment, detention and dispersal of
increased runoff from impervious surfaces and;
Pets & Human Disturbances/ Use privacy fencing: plant dense vegetation to delineate
Residential Areas: buffer edge and to discourage disturbances using
vegetation appropriate for the eco-region.
Advanced Environmental Solutions – Samish Nation – 34th Street Housing Buffer Width Averaging 5
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES - CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS
Clearing and grading activities will occur directly adjacent to the site’s wetland buffer
during construction. In order to minimize indirect impacts associated with the potential
sedimentation of aquatic habitats within the site wetland due to erosional stormwater run-
off during the construction phase of the project, BMPs as outlined in Ecology’s
Stormwater Management Manual, shall be implemented. Although not inclusive of all
appropriate measures that may be implemented at the project site, examples of BMPs that
should be utilized include:
• Installation of silt fencing along the upslope perimeter of proposed
clearing/building areas;
• Limiting soil disturbances to only those areas necessary to complete the project;
• Limiting ground construction operations to dry periods and stable soil conditions;
and,
• Preventing equipment use and transport from occurring within the drip-line of any
trees to be retained on the property.
All trees to be retained on-site will be protected before, during and after development as
outlined in Section 16.50.100 of AMC.
SUMMARY
The project has been designed to avoid and minimize impacts to the City’s regulated
critical areas. The total City regulated and protected Category IV wetland and associated
buffer area on the subject Samish nation property represents 10,233 square feet (0.23
acre). The project is not anticipated to result in a reduction of existing wetland functions,
as no direct wetland impacts are proposed and existing forested and scrub-shrub buffer
areas will be preserved. Minor reductions in buffer widths are being compensated for
through the City’s provisions for buffer width averaging (Section 17.70.340.F.4 of
Anacortes Municipal Code). A total of 1,876 square feet (approximately 0.04 acre) of
increased buffer area will be established in exchange for 1,874 square feet (0.04 acre) of
reduced buffer area resulting from the playground encroachment and other building
setbacks. The proposed post-development buffer on the subject property equal to 9,271
square feet (0.21 acre) in area, represents a minor increase of 4 square feet from the
existing on-site buffer area prior to development [9,267 square feet (0.21 acre]. The
maximum buffer width to be established within the proposed increased buffer wetland
area on the east end of the property is 77-feet (Figure 1).
Measures to reduce impacts resulting from adjacent residential use, as outlined in Table
l7.70.340 of the City’s Critical Areas Ordinance will be implemented, as well as
construction associated Best Management Practices (BMPs). A spilt rail fence will be
installed within a 5-foot built area setback established along the edge of the buffer to
delineate the protected environmental areas from the developed areas on the site. Any
hazard tree removal proposed from the protected buffer area shall be replaced with native
conifer trees at a 3:1 ratio.
Advanced Environmental Solutions – Samish Nation – 34th Street Housing Buffer Width Averaging 6
Should you have questions regarding this buffer width averaging mitigation plan and or
the project impacts in general, please feel free to contact me at (360) 202-6839. Thank
you for the opportunity to be of assistance.
Sincerely,
Tina Mirabile, PWS
Attachments: Figure 1. Buffer Width Averaging Project Site Plan (July 31, 2020)
Figure 2. Aerial Photo (Skagit County GIS/Imap, 2020)
P R O F E S S I O N A L, I N C.
www.red-plains.com
CIVIL ENGINEERING • GIS • PLANNING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
Lege nd
Co unty Bo un da ry
City N ame s
Ro ad L abe ls
Hy dr o La be ls
Re gion al La be ls
Ap ril 7, 20 20
Co pyrigh t 2016
0 0.015 0.0 30.0 0 75 mi
0 0.03 0.0 60.015 km
1:1,12 8
0 0.015 0.0 30.0 0 75 mi
Da ta Accuracy Warning:All GIS da ta was crea ted from a vailable p ub lic re cords andexisting m ap sou rces. M ap fe atures ha ve bee n adju sted to ach ieve a b est-fitregistration. While grea t care was take n in this process, maps from diffe re nt so urcesrarely ag ree as t o t he precise loca tion of ge og ra ph ic feature s. Map d iscre pan cies ca nbe as g re at as 300 fe et.