HomeMy WebLinkAbout001195132 Wetland Delineation Part I of 2WE TECH COMPANY
Environmental Consulting - Site Permitting
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
DISCOVERY RIDGE ROAD
PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98325
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL # 001-195-132
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
December 2015
G. Bradford Shea, Ph.D.
Submitted to:
JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT
OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street
Port Townsend, Washington 98368
Submitted by:
WESTECH COMPANY
P.O. Box 2876
Port Angeles, Washington 98362
P.O. Box 2876 - Port Angeles, Washington 98362 - Telephone: (360) 565-1333
email: brad@westechcompany.com
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
DISCOVERY RIDGE ROAD
PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98325
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL # 801495-132
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
December 2015
G. Bradford Shea, Ph.D.
Copyright 2015 by G. Bradford Shea, Westech Company — All Rights Reserved
Submitted to:
JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT
OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street
Port Townsend, Washington 98368
Submitted by:
WESTECH COMPANY
P.O. Box 2876
Port Angeles, Washington 98362
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER/SECTION
PAGE NO.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1
2.0 METHODS
5
3.0 WETLAND DELINEATION RESULTS
9
3.1 Existing Conditions
9
3.2 Land Uses and Habitat Values
16
3.3 Wetland Types and Buffers
17
3.4 Jefferson County Wetland Map
17
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
18
4.1 Conclusions
18
4.2 Recommendations
18
5.0 REFERENCES
19
TABLES
Table 1. List of Plant Species: On -Site Wetland
10
Table 2. Dominance Test Using 50/20 Rule for Plant Selection
13
Table 3. Site Soils
15
FIGURES
Figure 1. Location Map
2
Figure 2. Vicinity Map
3
Figure 3. Parcel Map
4
Figure 4. Site Map Showing Wetland Location Soil Test Pits
12
APPENDICES
Appendix A — Site Photographs
A-1
Appendix B — Rating Summary and Data Forms
B-1
Appendix C — Maps for Wetland Rating System
C-1
WWI 458-DiscoveryRidgeWD300121115/mas
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Property (Site) is a 6.18 acre parcel located on Discovery Ridge Road in Port
Townsend, Washington 98368. The Property is listed as Assessor's Parcel # 001-195-
132 and is located in the Northeast Quarter of Section 19, Township 30 North, Range 1
West (Figures 1, 2, and 3). The Property owners are listed as William K. Colgate and
Amy Greenbaum at P.O. Box 1917, Issaquah, Washington 98027-0079.
The Property is located in the northwestern corner of Jefferson County approximately
five miles southwest of Port Townsend. The Property lies at the eastern end of
Discovery Ridge Road, The Parcel sits at an elevation of about 145 - 160 feet above
mean sea level (msl). An unoccupied barn -type building is currently located on the
Property.
Mr. William Colgate and Ms. Amy Greenbaum contracted with Westech Company
(Westech) to delineate and rate the wetland and determine the buffer required under the
Jefferson County Codes (Jefferson County 2015a). Chapter 2,0 describes the
Methodology used to conduct this Wetland Delineation. Chapter 3.0 contains results of the
Wetland Delineation. Chapter 4.0 contains Conclusions and Recommendations.
Field investigations of the wetland were conducted by Dr. G. Bradford Shea during May
and October 2015. Dr. Shea performed a final field evaluation on October 27, 2015 and
completed photographic and other site documentation. The wetland was classified in
accordance with the Department of Ecology 2014 Rating System for Western Washington
(WDOE 2014) as a Category IV wetland, requiring a 40 foot buffer under Jefferson County
Codes (JCC 2015) for projects of this land use type and size. The Wetland boundaries
have been marked in the field.
WW 1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD. RPT/121115/mas
,.Ib i16 �kl� '^ 1klr�•;,J._.._ i .Vra �f^A y3��`��."uy�a• t IL :.
qr-, a _
4 � f +! AA14 •' , �I ,
Jk
• � �'µ a.i � , 9 ��' r �"Y..A � af-err
J • _
e�.cyt J�� "'F k���n„ � •''.t. I � �. Nr ' ���.I.Jpfrv9 ZS lirCri
a'
,,dr,J ."� qtr_-}..-`" '� •.
_ n
t � � y Ht�Fr:>ky+,,r. •uastc��at9
s ,jai, c
p 1 (L
1 ✓rf..�l�1 f
t 7 i
.r.. ,•. u -I Mn.rr�r 3 a
)46--
LO
Lo
--
V--
CD
04
V
C)
C\J
z -
WTI
Rio
E
0
0
X-
U)
-----mmWmkllW 10
CbCL
�
;t—
U)
c
o
CbCL
;t—
U)
c
o
0
di
m
cei
LL
2.0 METHODS
The Wetland was delineated and rated according to procedures required by the Jefferson
County Code (JCC). The JCC requires that wetlands be identified and delineated
according to procedures in the 1997 Washington State Department of Ecology's (WDOE)
Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology Publication
No. 96-94 or as amended) (JCC 18.22.300). Because the State of Washington now
defers to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) wetland delineation methods, this
wetland was delineated according to the Corps' Regional Supplement for the Western
Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region (Corps 2010). The Wetland was rated by the
methods outlined in the Washington State Department of Ecology's Wetland Rating
System for Western Washington (WDOE 2014).
The following methods are drawn from the Corps' Supplement for the Western Mountains,
Valleys and Coast Region (Corps 2010). The Corps' manual defines wetlands as those
"areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances, do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions." Wetlands
are defined by the following three criteria:
1. Vegetation: Prevalent vegetation consisting of macrophytes adapted to areas with
wetland hydrologic and soil conditions.
2. Hydric, soils: Soils that are histosols, in aquic suborders or that show certain
characteristics associated with poor draining, very poor draining or ponding for a
long duration during the growing season.
3. Hydrology: Evidence that the area is inundated or saturated to the surface between
5 and 12.5 percent of the growing season in most years.
Evidence of at least one wetland indicator from each of these three categories is generally
required to identify an area as a wetland.
Preliminary data gathering consisted of the examining U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
maps, county parcel, wetlands, and topographic maps, aerial photographs and Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil surveys. Because these sources were
insufficient to make a determination, additional information on site vegetation, soils and
hydrology was unavailable, and the Site did not appear to have the complexity to require a
comprehensive determination, a Routine Determination with Onsite Inspection was used.
M1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD.RPT/121115/mas 5
Because the wetland on -Site was less than five acres, the procedure for "Areas Equal to
or Less Than 5 Acres in Size" was used. The wetland and its boundaries were initially
estimated by noting likely areas of topographic and vegetative distinction between
wetlands and uplands. The routine method for delineating wetlands begins with the
identification of plant communities, as uplands and wetlands are often occupied by
different assemblages of species determined by combinations of environmental
influences.
These plant communities were identified and evaluated for the presence or absence of
hydrophytic vegetation. The wetland indicator status of the dominant species is used to
determine the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. Each species has an indicator status
defined according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (USDA 2012). A
species indicator status refers to the relative frequency at which the species occurs in
jurisdictional wetlands. Wetland plant species (OBL, FACW and/or FAC) must constitute
greater than 50 percent of the dominant vegetation to meet Department of Ecology (DOE)
criterion for hydrophytic vegetation (Corps 2010). Because non-dominant plants in the
wetland were scattered irregularly throughout, small transects could not be utilized to
estimate percent coverage. Accordingly, a combination of on -Site visual inspection and
aerial maps were used to estimate percent coverage. These estimates were used to
conduct a dominance test with 50/20 selection as described in the Corps manual (Corps
2010).
Wetland plants were primarily identified in the field, with subsequent collection and keying
when necessary. Plants were identified using the following sources:
Pojar and MacKinnon 1994 (Updated 2004)
Guard 1995
Cooke 1997
Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973
Lyons 9997
Taylor 1995
Keying of plants using magnifying lenses and dissecting microscope was used as
necessary. Determination of wetland indicator status utilized regional keys published by
USDA. This indicator replaced the previous U.S. Fish and Wildlife key in June 2012
(USDA 2012).
Areas with plant communities dominated by hydrophytic vegetation were then evaluated
for wetland hydrology and hydric soils. Wetland hydrology refers to "all hydrological
characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the
surface at some time during the growing season." These are areas with evidence that
the presence of water has an overriding influence on the characteristics of vegetation
and soils due to anaerobic and reducing conditions (Corps 2010).
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD.RPT/121115/mas 6
An area has wetland hydrology if it is inundated or saturated to the surface continuously
for at least five percent (5%) of the growing season in most years. The level of
inundation can range from permanently inundated to irregularly inundated/saturated.
The level of inundation/saturation can be impacted by precipitation, topography and soil
characteristics.
Hydrology is often the least exact of the parameters used to delineate wetland edges
because it is the most ephemeral and leaves the least reliable traces in the landscape
after water tables or floods have receded. Therefore, indicators of wetland hydrology
are sometimes difficult to find in the field. However, it is essential that a wetland area is
periodically inundated or has saturated soils for a sufficient duration during the growing
season.
Based on Corps recommendations, Westech staff noted areas with evident
characteristics of wetland hydrology. In general, places with wetland hydrology show
evidence that the presence of water has had an overriding influence on characteristics
of vegetation and soils due to anaerobic and chemically -reducing conditions. Hydrologic
conditions were determined through examination of topographic relief and drainage
patterns. Soil moistness was determined by hand and, in the event of standing water,
depth to standing water was noted. Field indicators of wetland hydrology include such
features as watermarks, historic records, and visual observation of saturated soils or
inundation.
Evidence of hydric soils was checked along the apparent wetland boundary. These are
soils that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding or ponding long enough during
the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper layers. These soils are
identified in the field mainly by morphological features such as color patterns, organic
matter accumulation, and observation of inundation.
Soils were sampled to depths of up to 18-24 inches, when feasible, using a wetland
shovel. Soil consistency was determined by feeling for grain size and texture. Soil moisture
was determined at that time. In the event of saturated conditions in the hole, depth to
standing water was noted. Soil color was determined through comparison of field samples
with standard Munsell Color Charts (Munsell 1994). Soil was also examined for presence
of redox features, gley or other indicators of anaerobic soil oxidation. If one or more of
these indicators was present in the wetlands, the soil was considered hydric.
The wetland was determined based on the Routine On -Site Field Method used by the
Corps using a combination of vegetation, soil and hydrology indicators. The boundaries of
the wetland were determined by first mapping each plant community area as wetland or
non -wetland. The general wetland boundary was determined by the interface of these two
mapping units. These boundaries were confirmed and the boundary locations narrowed
down by sampling specific transects along wetland boundaries. Various points were
sampled for vegetation, soil and hydrology in order to pinpoint the location of wetland
boundaries. Appendix B contains data forms for two sample points (one wetland and one
upland) from a typical area in the delineated wetland.
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD. RPT/121115/mas
Wetland boundaries were indicated in the field by the use of pink "Wetland Delineation
Boundary" flagging tape tied to the wooden stakes (24" or 48") or to trees as appropriate.
All boundaries were staked and/or flagged every 25-30 feet. Buffer widths were
determined based the Jefferson County Critical Areas Code and marked in the field with
orange and black tape. Soil test pits were indicated by blue/white diagonal flagging and
stakes containing the test pit number.
Site visits were carried out in May and October 2015 by Dr. G. Bradford Shea. This report
was prepared by Dr. G. Bradford Shea. Exploration of the Property involved noting Site
characteristics such as hydrology and soil conditions. A botanical study involving
identification of the plant species found growing on the Site was also conducted. The
wetland edge was delineated and photographic documentation was acquired (Appendix
A). Measurements for mapping purposes were made using a fiberglass tape measure.
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD.RPT/121115/mas
3.0 WETLAND DELINEATION RESULTS
3.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
This approximately 6.18 acre parcel is located in the eastern portion of Jefferson County
approximately 5.0 miles southwest of Port Townsend. The Property lies east of Cape
George Road and west of South Discovery Road. The Parcel is at an elevation of about
145-160 feet above mean sea level. The Parcel increases slightly in elevation to the
north and west, reaching an elevation of about above 160 feet msl at its northern end. A
large barn type structure is currently located on the Property.
The Property is an open field fringed with an open lowland forest to the east dominated
in the tree layer by Western red cedar (Thuja plicata), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga
menziesil), and red alder (Alnus rubra) with cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) and
willow (Salix sitchensis) along the margins of the on-site wetland with bitter cherry
(Prunus emarginata) outside of the wetland boundary. Salal (Gautheria shallon), ocean
spray (Holodiscus discolor) and salmonberry (Rubes spectabilis) were found in the
shrub layer; and sword fern (Polystichum munitum) and bracken fern (Pteridium
aquilinum) in the herb layer. Wetland plants located on the Site are specifically
discussed below (see also Table 1).
The surrounding area consists of open fields and coniferous forests utilized for single
family units to the north, west and south. Parcels to the east appear to be larger
agricultural areas in aerial maps. More dense residential properties lie to the west along
Blue Sky and Cape George Roads, while lands further to the east and southeast are used
for agriculture.
The Property is rated Rural Residential 20 (RR20) indicating an allowance of one
residence per 20 acres. A large barn -like structure is currently located on the Property.
The Property owner intends to construct a new residence and septic system on the
Property outside the wetland buffer.
Wetland
Westech's field investigation determined that one wetland is located on the Site. This
slope wetland is located on the northeastern portion of the Property along the edge of the
field and a narrow forested area. A public recreational trail lies east of the wetland, on an
easement near the eastern Property boundary. The wetland is approximately 12,000
square feet in size (dimensions roughly 400 feet in length and an average 30 feet in width).
Wetland boundaries were determined by first noting likely areas of topographic and
vegetative distinction between wetland and uplands. The Site vegetation was found to
transition from upland to wetland in a gradual fashion. Because of the extension of
wetland vegetation into upland areas, soil characteristics and hydrology were especially
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD.RPT/121115/mas
TABLE 1. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES: ON-SITE WETLAND
Common Na
Scientific_ Name
indicator *
% Ca
-
-
Wetland
Red alder
Alnus rubra _
FAC
20.0
Western red cedar
Thy a plicata
FAC
15.0
Sitka willow
Salix sitchensis
FAC
5.0
Black cottonwood _
Populus balsamifera
FAC
5,0
Salmonberry
Rubus s ectabilis
FAC
2.0
Nootka rose
Rosa nutkana
FAC
8.0
Velvetgrass
Holcus lanatus
FAC
15.0
Tall fescue
Festuca arundinacea
FAC
10.0
Sword fern _
Pol stichum munitum
FACU
3.0
Horsetail
E uisitum arvense
FAC
2.0
Creeping buttercup
Ranunculus re ens
FACW
5.0
Timothy
Phleum pratense
FAC
5.0
Upland
Red alder
Alnus rubra
FAC
15.0
Western red cedar
Thu a oficata
FAC
10.0
Douglas fir
Pseudotsu a menziesii
FACU
15.0
Salal
Gaultheria shallon
FACU
15.0
Dull Oregon grape
Mahonia nervosa
FACU
3.0
Sword fern
Pol stichum munitum
FACU
5.0
Bracken fern
Pteridium a uilinum
FACU
5.0
Curly dock
Rumex cris us
FAC
5.0
Dandelion
Taraxacum officinale
FACU
10.0
Stinging nettle
Urtica dioica
FAC
5.0
Canada thistle
Cirsium arvense
FAC
FACU
4.0
8.0
Trailing blackberry
Rubus ursinus
*Indicators: UPL = Upland plant, FACU= Facultative Upland Plant (more upland than
wetland), FAC = Facultative (borderline wetland plant), FACW = Facultative
Wetland Plant (prefers wetland conditions), OBL = Obligate (only found in
wetlands).
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD.Tab1/121115/mas 10
important in marking the line separating the wetland from upland. Evidence of hydric soils
was checked along the apparent wetland boundary. Westech staff noted the presence of
a dark layer of organic soils in boundary areas of the wetland.
Westech staff also noted the presence of hydrological indicators. While difficult to find, and
often the least exact of the three indicators, Westech staff noted areas with evident
characteristics of wetland hydrology, places where the presence of water has an
overriding influence on characteristics of vegetation and soils due to anaerobic and
chemically -reducing conditions. These included evidence of water in the root zone and the
presence of water-logged leaves (see Figure 4 and Appendix B).
The vegetation, soils, and hydrology of the Site are described in more detail in the
following subsections. Results of these three factors at two test pit locations (one in the
wetland, one in the upland area (Figure 4)) are contained in Appendix B. Figure 4 shows
the location of the wetland relative to nearby features. Site photographs are shown in
Appendix A.
Vegetation
Table 1 lists wetland vegetation and the upland vegetation present in the area adjacent to
the wetland boundary. Dominant vegetation in the wetland includes red alder (FAC),
western red cedar (FAC), sitka willow (FACW) and cottonwood (FAC) in the tree layer;
salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis, FAC) in the shrub layer; and velvetgrass (Holcus
lanatus, FAC), redtop (Agrostis alba), and tall fescue (Fesfuca arunadinacea, FAC) in
the herb layer (of the open field).
Tables 2 shows the results of a dominance test conducted following the guidelines of
the Corps (Corps 2010). As this table indicates, the dominant species in the Wetland
were rated FACW or FAC. The vegetation in this wetland can thus be characterized as
hydrophytic for the purposes of delineating the wetlands.
Vegetation in the upland area does not meet the requirement for wetland vegetation. It
is dominated by Douglas fir (Pseudotsuge menziesii), big -leaf maple (Acer
macrophyllum) and bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata) although red alder and western
red cedar (Thuja plicata) were also present in the tree layer. Salal (Gaultheria shallop)
and salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) were present in the shrub layer, however
salmonberry was not dominant outside of the wetland. Sword fern and bracken fern
(Polystichum munitum, Pteridium aquilinum) were present in the forested area, while
upland grasses including Bromus spp. (FACU) and meadow fescue (Festuca pratensis -
FACU) were found outside of the wetland boundary as well as dandelion (Taraxacum
otficinale). This was found to include less than 20% dominants that are FAC and does
not meet Corps criterion for wetland vegetation. The area is transitional to upland
vegetation, though this made soil conditions and hydrology important to delineating the
wetland. Appendix B includes data forms for upland and wetland vegetation.
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD, RPT/121115/mas 11
TABLE 2. DOMINANCE TEST USING 50120 RULE FOR PLANT SELECTION
STRATUM
SCIENTIFIC NAME
WETLAND ^ ABSOLUTE
DOMINANT?
INDICATOR PERCENT
_
Alnus rubra
STATUS COVER
Tree
FAC 20.0
Yes
Thuja plicata
FAC 15.0
Yes
Salix sitchensis
FAC 8.0
No
Total cover 43.0%
50/20 Thresholds
50% total cover = 21.5
20% total cover = 8.6
Shrub
Rubus spectabilis
FAC
20.0
Yes
Rosa nutkana
FAC
3.0
Yes
Total cover 23.0%
50/20 Thresholds
50% total cover = 11.5
_
Holcus lanatus
20% total cover = 5.4
FAC 20.5
Yes
Herb
Festuca arundinacea
FAC 1.0
Yes
Polystichum munitum
FACU 5.0
No
Equisitum arvense
FAC 1.5
No
Ranunculus repense
FACW 12.0
No
Total cover 40.0%
___..__ ...... _.._-
50/20 Thresholds:
-- -
50% total cover = 20.0
20% total cover = 8.0%
Hydrophytic
Total number of dominant species across all strata = 6
Vegetation
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW or FAC = 100%
Determination
Therefore, the community
is hydrophytic by Indicator 2 (Dominance
---..- . —
Test)
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD.Tab2/121115/mas 13
Soils
"Hydric soils" is a name for soils commonly found in wetlands. These soils are identified
mainly by morphological features such as color patterns, organic matter accumulation,
or observation of inundation. A soil may be considered hydric if it is inundated (flooded
or ponded) for at least one continuous week during the growing season in most years
(Corps 2010). Westech staff looked for field indicators of hydric soil conditions as
recommended by the Corps. If one or more of these indicators was present in the
wetlands, the soil was considered hydric (Corps 2010).
Westech staff examined existing NRCS soil surveys of the Site. The NRCS maps three
soils on the Site (NRCS 2015). The soils mapped by the NRCS on the Site include:
Lick Loamy Sand OcC 0 to 15 percent slopes. This is a somewhat excessively
drained soil which originated on terraces and plains from glacial outwash. It is a
loamy sand with a depth of 37 inches underlain by stratified sand to a depth of 60
inches. It has a high capacity to transmit water in its most limiting layer (5.95 to
19.98 inches per hour; and a depth of more than 80 inches to the water table.
This soil is recorded as having low water storage capacity and no frequency of
flooding or ponding.
Tukey Gravelly Loam TuC 0 to 15 perppat sloj2es is a moderately well drained
soil with more than 20-40 inches to its most restrictive feature; a low capacity to
transmit water in its most limiting layer; and more than 18 - 36 inches to the water
table. These soils formed on terraces from basil till. The soil is listed as having a
low water storage capacity (3.9 inches) and no frequency of flooding or ponding.
Its profile consists of gravelly loam to 8 inches, underlain by very gravelly loam to
60 inches.
Belfast Silty Clay Loam, wet variant is a soil type which formed in floodplains
from alluvium. It consists of 9 inches of silty clay loam, underlain by loam from 9-
20 inches, with stratified gravelly fine sandy loam to clay loam to a depth of 60
inches. This soil type is poorly drained with a depth to water table of 6-12 inches.
It has no frequency of ponding, but an occasional risk of flooding. Available
water storage in the profile is listed as high (about 10.3 inches).
The Belfast silty clay loam soils are listed as hydric on the NRCS national hydric soils
list (NRCS 2015).
Because NRCS soil surveys do not necessarily capture small scale variation, Westech
staff conducted additional field studies of the soils. To examine soils in the wetland
boundaries, Westech staff dug soil pits and observed soil characteristics. The location of
two soil pits examined by Westech is shown in Figure 4. These VSH plots are located
within representative upland and wetland areas. The location of these plots has been
marked in the field using wooden stakes tied with blue and white striped flagging. The soil
information taken at these sample points is highlighted in Table 3.
WW1 458-DiscoveryRidgeWD.RPT/121115/mas 14
TABLE 3. SITE SOILS
5 Lo EI Cath.`
VaW61Chroma
Redd�Colorl%)
Plot #VHS -1 Wetland
0-6
Silty
gravellyclay loam
2/2 (10YR)
none
6-12
Gravelly hardpan
3/2 10YR
minor 1%
Plot # VHS -2 (Upland)..-__.._
0-16
Silty
sandy loam
3/3 10YR
none
6-12
Silt
ravelly loam
4/2 {10YR�
none _
.�
��
T
{„[[
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD.Tab3/121115/mas 15
Micro -conditions on the Property have created wetland soils distinct from those
recorded by the NRCS which only maps the hydric (Bellingham) soils at the northern tip
of the Property. Soil pits dug in the wetland demonstrate the presence of wetland soils
on the Site. A soil pit in the wetland exhibited soils with a value/chroma of 2/2 (10YR) to
a depth of six (6) inches and 3/2 (10YR) in a gravelly hardpan with a few small redox
features (less than five (5) percent). This soil met the criterion for a hydric soil classified
by the Army Corps as a wetland soil. These soils were silty gravelly clay loams. A soil
pit in an upland area exhibited sandy soils with a value/chroma of 3/3 (10YR) to a depth
of about six (6) inches and 4/2 (10YR) at depths of 6-12 inches. These soils were silty
sandy loams which do not appear to be hydric (Corps 2010).
Hydrolog
Numerous factors (e.g., precipitation, topography, soil permeability, and plant cover)
influence the wetness of an area. The water source for this wetland comes from a
combination of direct precipitation, coupled with runoff from upslope areas surrounding the
wetland and possibly groundwater sources. Indicators of wetland soils were observed
during field observations.
Hydrologic indicators in the wetland included areas of previous inundation and
saturation to the surface as well as water-logged leaves lying in the forested area of the
wetland. The soil pit dug in the wetland exhibited moisture at 12 inches depth and signs
of previous saturation (within the root zone). The soil pit dug in the upland area had no
standing water or significant moisture to a depth of 15 - 20 inches (Corps 2010).
3.2 LAND USES AND HABITAT VALUES
Wetlands are transitional areas between upland and aquatic environments where water is
present long enough to form distinct soils, and where specialized, water -tolerant plants
grow. Wetlands serve a variety of functions such as transferring surface water into the
ground, thereby recharging groundwater supplies. Wetlands trap water along with
sediments and pollutants providing stormwater detention and filtration; mitigate flood
impacts; and provide wildlife habitat.
Wetland buffers are important because they reduce the adverse impacts of adjacent land
uses on wetlands. The buffers serve to stabilize soil and prevent erosion, filter suspended
solids, nutrients and toxic substances and moderate impacts of stormwater runoff. As
such, buffers serve to preserve wetland functions. They also provide important habitat for
wildlife living in and around the wetland.
Grazing occurs on the adjacent property west of the wetland. A field area on the Site
forms the western portion of the wetland. Limited grazing (one horse observed) is within
150 feet of the wetland. Because of this, the wetland could possibly be expected to make
a minor contribution to water quality, however, there appears to be no direct connection to
WWI 458- Discovery RidgeWD. RPT/ 121115/mas 16
the surrounding waterbodies (Discovery Bay and the Strait of Juan de Fuca). The on-site
wetland appears to have little capacity to mitigate flooding due to its low capacity to hold
water and the absence of homes on the adjacent properties to the east. This wetland does
not likely provide habitat for amphibians because of the absence of thick -stemmed
vegetation or standing water.
3.3 WETLAND TYPES AND BUFFERS
The buffer sizes to be applied at this Site are governed by the Jefferson County Critical
Areas Code. In order to establish buffer sizes, Jefferson County requires that wetlands be
rated using the Washington State Department of Ecology's Wetland Rating System for
Western Washington (WDOE 2014). In this system, wetland ratings are based on:
1) Water Quality Function (i.e., Does the wetland have the ability to improve water
quality?)
2) Hydrologic Function (i.e., Does the wetland decrease flooding and/or erosion?)
3) Habitat Function (i.e., Does the wetiand provide habitat for many species?)
In Washington, wetland rating categories are based on the rarity of the type of wetland, our
ability to replace it, its sensitivity to adjacent human disturbances, and the functions it
performs. The objective of the rating system is to divide wetlands into groups that have
similar needs for protection.
The on -Site wetland was classified as a Category IV slope wetland with an overall score
of 11. Water quality was rated as 4 and hydrologic/flood control was rated as 3. The
habitat score was rated at 4 (See Wetland Rating Forms in Appendix B). The Jefferson
County Codes require 40 foot buffers to protect these functions in areas of moderate
use projects (such as single family residences). The existing barn lies approximately 40 -
50 feet from the wetland, outside of the buffer. The proposed home -site appears to be
roughly 40 — 50 feet outside the buffer (about 90 —100 feet from the wetland).
3.4 JEFFERSON COUNTY WETLAND MAP
Jefferson County online maps shows two wetlands on the Parcel (Jefferson County
2015b). These maps appear to be somewhat inaccurate. The maps show a wetland to the
north of the Parcel which has a slight intrusion into the northern corner. The actual
wetland on the Site extends further south than that wetland is shown to extend. Another
wetland is shown on the county map as along the southeastern portion of the Property.
That wetland does not appear to exist on the Site. Conditions on the Site appear to have
created wetland conditions and locations not reflected in the County maps (See Figure 4).
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD.RPT/121115/mas 17
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 CONCLUSIONS
The wetland was identified and flagged on the Site. Figure 4 shows the location and
extent of the mapped wetland. This is a slope wetland located at the eastern end of a
gradually sloping field. The wetland has been rated according to state guidelines and
classified as a Category IV wetland. Jefferson County requires buffer widths of 40 feet for
this type of wetland and the proposed intensity of land use for the Site. Wetland
boundaries have been marked in the field.
4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
This project is allowed under the Jefferson County Code, provided that the newly
constructed facilities are placed outside the buffer zone. Westech recommends that all
construction activity for the new home and drainfield take place outside the buffer zone.
Westech also recommends that the County modify existing maps to reflect the wetland
boundary.
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD. RPT/121115/mas 18
5.0 REFERENCES
Cooke, S.S. 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington
and Northwestern „Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society. Seattle, Washington.
Google Earth. 2015. Online mapping software. www.googleearth.com.
Guard, J. 1995. Wetland Plants of Oregon and Washington. Lone Pine Publishing.
Renton, Washington.
Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of
Washington Press. Seattle, Washington.
Jefferson County. 2015a. Critical Areas Code website. http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/
commdevelop_ment/Critical%20Areas%200rdinance%2OWeb%2OFiles/CAOrd03-
0317-08.pdf
Jefferson County. 2015b. Online Interactive Mapping website.
hftp://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/idms/mapserver.shtmi
Lyons, C.P. 1997. Wildflowers of Washington. Lone Pine Publishing. Renton,
Washington.
Munsell. 1994. Munsell Soil Color Charts. GretagMacbeth. New Windsor, New York,
Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2015. Hydric Soils.
littp://soils.usda.gov/use/hydi-ic .
Pojar, J. and A. MacKinnon. 1994 (Updated 2004). Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast.
Lone Pine Publishing Company. Redmond, Washington.
Sova, W.D. 2015. Unpublished Architectural Site Plan of Green Gate Farm at 1164
Discovery Ridge Road, Port Townsend, Washington. David Sova, Registered
Architect, dated 9/18/15.
Taylor, R. 1995. Northwest Weeds. Mountain Press Publishing Company. Missoula
Montana.
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (Corps). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast
Regions dVersion 2.0}. May 2010. Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2012. 2072 National Wetland Plant List.
http://plants.usda.gov/core/wetiandSearch.
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD. RPT/121115/mas 19
Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE). 2014. Washington State Wetlands Rating
System for Western Washington. Thomas Hruby. Publication #14-06-029.
Olympia, Washington.
Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE). 1997. Washington State Wetlands
Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication #. 96-94. Olympia, Washington.
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD. RPT/1 2111 5/mas 20
APPENDICES
WW 1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD, RPT/121115/mas 21
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD/121115/mas A-1
1) Southern area of Site.
2) Northern and central areas of Site with existing barn,
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD/121115/mas A-2
x.. .t
J
2) Northern and central areas of Site with existing barn,
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD/121115/mas A-2
3) Central area of Site with wetland in background at tree line.
4) Slope wetland near tree line.
WW1 458 -Discovery Rid geWD/121115/mas A-3
APPENDIX B
RATING SUMMARY AND DATA FORMS
WW1458-DiscoveryRidgeWD.APP S/121115/mas g-1
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: r f nv - , " �� City/County:.-4e__h Sampling Date: 30z1�
Applicant/Owner: t'
_ State:dAA Sampling Point: t/S�'I f
Investigator(s): e? r Section, Township, Range:ti� �'�h% I
`
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): ( Local relief (concave, convex, none): Aa rte_ Slope (%): I/
Subregion (LRR): La t: 0 ong: [ ��,�r� r ,/y tr✓ Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: + w NWI classification: fL}t-
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the sit ypicat for this ti a of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes t/ No
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes �_ No Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes _ 4L No within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: _ ++x �) % Cgyer Soecles? Status
1. — 02.
3.
4.
G
SPAtir3srl5hrub StFatum (Plot size: = Total Cover
2. eie
3. 0k' 1 f
4.
5.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: �� L = Total Cover
1. -,fes — f:Al
2. t fid- .+ —
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
O �/ =Total Cover
Waedtl Vlne Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
=Total Cover
%Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Z. {3 f
Remar'lcs: - - -
/-1
US Army Corps of Engineers
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:_ (A)
Total Number of Dominant 3
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: �%i (A/B)
Prevalence Index
worksheet—tai % Cover of: Multiply I V'._
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species J� x 3 = _ �r
FACU species_ x 4 = L-
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals:_ (A) L 7 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data In Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ 5 - 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
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (molst) % _ Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
'Type: C=Conaentratlon, D=Depletion, RM -Reduced Matrix, GS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Histosol (Al)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_/1 Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (171) (except MLRA 1)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type
Depth (inches): iJ
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
2Locahon: PL=Pore Linino, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ 2 cm Muck (A10)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired:_check all that apply)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except
High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2,4A, and 413)
✓ Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (1311)
Water Marks (131)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Field Observations:
/
Surface Water Present? Yes No� Depth (inches):
b P
Secondary Indicators (2 or_more renulred)
Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 413)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ 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)
Water Ta le resent? Yes No Depth(inches). /
Saturation Present? Yes No _,. Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
(Includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
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: L Sampling Date
Applicantlowner. / f .1 TTr"y`
Stale: Sampling Point: ,� r
—
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:,�� ,— 7 1,ePAIrrv
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc,): I
Local relief (concave, convex, none); - Slope
Subregion (LRR):— �—�
Lat: 0 Long: f,?(i(um
Soil Map Unit Name:.4 NWI classification: / _ !�'
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the slid ypicaI for this tirn of year? Yes ��` No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes—,,/ No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _� No Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes �� No within a Wetland? Yes � No
Remarks:
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Strafu� (Plot size: _1— ) 0A Cover Saecies? Status
1 L _ Number of Dominant Species
2. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: / (A)
3.
4.
=Total Cover
Saplinv/Shrub Stratum/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ��
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: �
= Total Cover
2.
3.
5.
7.
9.
10.
11.
Woody Vine 5 rotg (Plot size: )
iev = Total Cover
1.
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: G/ (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are DBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet
Total % Cover ot: Multiply by,
OBL species k 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species L x 3 =
FACU species x 4 = Z V
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: _ (A) 2h (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A=
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indioators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ 5 - Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
- Hydrophytic
2' Vegetation
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum a
.;E2zz—r1O=Total Cover Present?
Yes No —Z
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast— Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
Lnchc:,) Color frnoistl Color (moist) % Type ILoc2 Texturreej� Remarks
�- /I- //Ad,sa44." ,,rte
CZ_e
Type; C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=RcdU(;C!d MatrixCS=Covered or Coater( Sand Gi
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
Histic Eplpedon (A2)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present): J
Type: 1 "! ' �i xOli[a . rf%,a
�
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
21-ocation: PL=Pore Lkning, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils)
_ 2 cm Muck (Al 0)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No •%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
��
Primary indicators (mini!Durn of one re uired� check all that a l
Secondary Indicators f2 or more reeuiredt
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except
_ Water -Stained Leaves (69) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 413)
4A, and 413)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (B11)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
Water Marks (131)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
_ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
I/
Saturation Present? Yes No 1L Depth (inches): _ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No,
(includes capillary fringe)_ _
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
Wedaild name or number
RATING SUMMARY -- Western Washington
Name of wetland or ID it : �f[%
( } i�.t ��;2 �'�' ��. �' r.:��f,�.�,- 1. ,j,�! Date of site visit
Rated by-^_Trainedby Eco -logy? VYes _ No Date of training.
HGM Class used for rating Wetland has multiple HGM classes? �Y-44/N
NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined).
Source of base aerial photo/maps �'y,• �_
OVERALL WETLAN D CATEGORY (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
,L_Category IV - Total score = 9 - 15
F{JNC7IOIV Improving Hydrologic . Il�liot�t
11Uatcr tu.il
Circle the appropriate ratings
Site Potential H M L1 H M H M
Landscape Potential H ('MN L H M H e"M L
Value
Score Based on
Ratings
H M( C ,i
H M !
H M J
I�1AL
2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland
Cf ARACURISTIC.
t -ATF .
Estuarine
1 if
Wetland of High Conservation Value
[
Bog
i
Mature Forest
i
Old Growth Forest
Coastal Lagoon
Interdunal
1 11 111 IV
None of the above
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2019• Update
Rating dorm - Effective January 1, 2015
Score for each
function based
on three
ratings
(order of ratings
is not
important)
9 = H,H,H
S = H,H,M
7 = H,H,L
7 = H,M,M
6 = H, M, L
6 = M,M,M
5 = H,L,L
S = M,M,L
M,L,L
3 = L, L, L
1