HomeMy WebLinkAboutMitigation Planting Plan 701184009, 701184018McCullough Residence Expansion
Mitigation Planting Plan
March 21, 2019
Site Address:
1200 East Quilcene Road
Quilcene, WA 98376
Prepared for:
James McCullough
E S (J,1� L� N
.Essm
MARINE SURVEYS £t ASSESSMENTS
267 Hudson Street
Port Townsend WA 98368
(360)385-4073
marine.surveys.incoLgmait.com
niC OEONIG
l MAY 2 6 2019
1V1SA • McCullough Rcsidcncc Fxparnsion Miti,,ation • Planting', Plan
Table of Contents
1. Introduction................................................................................................................................................. 3
2. Project Information... ....... . .......................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Project Location and Site Description................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Proposed Construction.......................................................................................................................... 4
2.3 Ordinary -High Water Mark (OHWM) Determination.......................................................................... 4
3. Regulatory Framework............................................................................................................................... 4
3.1 Expansion/Enlargement with a Conditional "C(d)" Use Permit........................................................... 5
Accordingto JCC 18.25.660 (9): ................................................................................................................ 5
3.2 Critical Areas, Shoreline Buffers, and Ecological Protection............................................................... 5
3.3 Regulations — No Net Loss and Mitigation...........................................................................................6
it4. Mitigation Planting Plan.............................................................................................................................6
4.1 Planting Area ........................................................................................................................................... 6
4.2 Performance Stan drd.....................................................................................................................7
{.3 Mortitor•ii�g. Alata�...%..........................................................................................................................7
..................................................................................................................... 8
4.5 Contingency Plan.................................................................................................................................. 8
References......................................................................................................................................................10
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Wetland Determination/Parcel Map
Figure 3. Site Plan
Figure 4. Area of Impact within Marine Shore Buffer
Figure 5A. Mitigation Planting Plan — Overall
Figure 5B. Mitigation Planting Plan - Planting Area A
Appendix A. Wetland Determination Data Forms (VSH-1 and VSH-2)
Appendix B. Stormwater Calculation Worksheet
Appendix C. Photo Documentation
MSA • MCCullough Residence Expansion Mitigation • Planting Plan 2
1. Introduction'
The proposal described herein is for the construction of an uncovered deck adjoining an existing
residence within the central portion of Parcels 701184009 and 701184018 in Jefferson County,
Washington (Figure 1). An Ordinary High -Water Mark (OHWM) Determination was conducted by
Marine Surveys & Assessment (MSA) on April 27' and September 6th, 2018 to determine the marine
shore OHWM and substantiate the absence or presence of an estuarine wetland. The marine shore
OHWM was identified, delineated, and mapped within the southwestern border of the project site (Figure
2). The standard buffer for marine shores, in all shoreline environments, is a minimum of 150 -feet
(Jefferson County Code, Shoreline Master Program, and 18.25.270 (4)(e)(i) — Standard Buffer). A ten -
foot building setback was also established landward of the standard buffer (18.25.270 (4)(d) — Building
Setbacks). The 150 -foot buffer, plus ten -foot building setback, extends a total of 160 feet northeast into
the area of proposed construction. A Type "Ns" Non -fish bearing stream was identified and delineated.
However, the stream OHWM was consider physically separated from the proposed construction area by
impervious surface associated with the existing single-family residence (JCC 18.25.270 (4)(c)). A
Category II estuarine wetland was also identified and has a 110 -foot buffer (Chapter 18.22 Critical
Areas; Table 18.22.330(2): Wetland Categories, Rating Scores and Buffer Widths for Moderate Impact
Land Uses). The marine shore buffer extends further into the project site than the Category II estuarine
wetland, therefore, the Category II estuarine wetland was not delineated.
MSA was informed by the Department of Community Development (DCD) that a letter, describing our
findings, and Mitigation Planting Plan are required for the proposed development, which this report
satisfies. The proposed expansion of an uncovered deck is approximately 286 ft2 within the marine shore
buffer (Figure 4). As stated in Jefferson County Code Shoreline Master Program 18.25.660 (9)(iii), the
administrator shall require a planting plan to ensure there is no net loss of shoreline functions for
nonconforming lots. A Mitigation Planting Plan shall enhance the shoreline buffer through planting of
native vegetation (300 ft2), plus appropriate additional mitigation (Figures 5A and 513).
2. Project Information
2.1 Project Location and Site Description
The proposal is located on privately -owned, single -residence property in Jefferson County (Figure 1)
Address: 1200 East Quilcene Road, Quilcene, Washington
Coun : Jefferson
Tax Parcels: #701184018 and 701184009
Property Description: 1100 — Residential — Single Unit and 9100 — Vacant Land
PLSS: Section: 18, Township: 27N, Range: 1 W
Latitude. Longitude: 47.825'N, -122.851'W
Water resource inventory area WRIA : WRIA 17 South (Quilcene-Snow)
Water bodies in which work will occur: None
Water bodies bordering or adjacent to the project location: Quilcene Bay
The project site includes Parcels 701184018 and 701184009, which equal 1.75 acres. Parcel 701184018
consists of a single-family residence, residential lawn, well compacted gravel driveway, ditched stream,
and a low energy marine shoreline. Parcel 701184009 consists of a residential lawn, forested area, and
low energy marine shoreline. The parcel slopes gradually waterward from 40 feet elevation, throughout
the northeastern border, to 10 feet along the southwestern border (Figure 1). The approximate slope of
the project site is 8%. Drift logs were present along the marine shoreline as a low energy bulkhead.
MSA • McCullough Residence Expansion \litigation • Plnnting Plan
2.2 Proposed Construction
Proposed construction includes an uncovered deck adjoining the existing single-family residence on Parcel
701184018. The area of construction currently consists of residential lawn (Figure 3).
Current approximate measurements of construction are 656 ft2
The proposed 656 ft2 uncovered deck will be constructed adjoining the southeastern portion of the
existing single-family home, which is in the central portion of the project site (Figure 3).
Existing structures on the project site include a 1,678 ft2 single-family residence, 212 ft2 combined wood
porch, 312 ft2 garage (attached to home), 864 ft2 garage, 288 ft2 carport, and 104 ft2 shed.
2.3 Ordinary -High Water Mark (OHWM) Determination
According to WAC 173-22-030 (11)(a)(ii) Clarifying Criteria:
(ii) In low energy environments where the action of waves and currents is not sufficient to prevent
vegetation establishment below the mean higher high tide, the ordinary high-water mark is
coincident with the landward limit of salt tolerant vegetation.
Salt tolerant vegetation is defined as vegetation which is tolerant of interstitial soil salinities greater than or
equal to 0.5 parts per thousand (ppt) (WAC 173-22-030 (11)(a)(ii)). The salt tolerant vegetation observed
within the OHWM was entirely herbaceous and consisted of Chairmaker's club -rush (Schoenoplectus
americanus), Garden bird's -foot -trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), Dagger -leaf rush (Juncus ensofolius),
Softrush (Juncus effusus), Sow -thistle (Sonchus oleracea), Halberd -leaf orache (Atriplex patula), Western
glasswort (Lilaeopsis occidentalis), and Silverweed (Potentilla anserina). Other indicators of the OHWM
included the presence of the most recent high tide drift line, which was approximately 1.5 to 2 feet below
the OHWM. The OHWM overlapped a drift log bulkhead in some portions of the project site. Two
Wetland Determination Data Forms (VSH-1 and VSH-2; Appendix A) were completed to demonstrate the
transition between wetland and upland vegetation. A Non -fish bearing stream was observed along the
western border of the project site. The marine OHWM mark extended to the elevation within the stream
where it entered tidal water.
The marine shore OHWM was identified, delineated, and mapped within the southwestern border of the
project site (Figure 2). The standard 150 -foot buffer for marine shores was measured landward in a
horizontal direction perpendicular to the OHWM of the shoreline water body using geographic
information system (GIS) software. A Category II estuarine wetland was also identified, predominantly
within the southeastern portion of the project site (Appendix B). Category II estuarine wetlands with
moderate impact land uses have a 110 -foot buffer. The marine shore buffer exceeds the Category II
estuarine wetland by 40 feet into the project site. Category II estuarine wetlands are smaller than one
acre, however, if this estuarine wetland was considered a Category I it would have a 150 -foot buffer
which equals the marine shore OHWM buffer, therefore the estuarine wetland was not delineated.
3. Regulatory Framework
Nonconforming lot means a legal lot of record in existence prior to the effective date of the current
Shoreline Master Program and any amendments thereto, on which it is not possible to construct a structure
outside of/landward of the shoreline buffer or which does not otherwise meet the minimum lot size
MSA • MCCullough Residence Expansion Mitigation . Planting Plan
requirements as set forth in this program. Depth of lot is measured as the distance from the ordinary high-
water mark to the inside edge of the frontage setback (JCC 18.25.100 (14)(h)).
3.1 Expansion/Enlargement with a Conditional "C(d)" Use Permit
According to JCC 18.25.660 (9):
(a) The administrator shall require a conditional use permit for any of the following:
(i) Enlargement or expansion of nonconforming single-family residences by the addition of space to
the exterior of the main structure or normal appurtenances where the total footprint will increase by
more than 25 percent or the expansion/enlargement occurs vertically, laterally or landward, but not
waterward, of the structure.
(ii) Enlargement or expansion of single-family residences where the addition of space to the exterior
of the main structure is likely to adversely affect critical areas or is likely to obstruct the view of an
adjacent development.
(iii) When allowed, an equivalent area of shoreline buffer area shall be enhanced through planting
of native vegetation, plus additional mitigation to be required as appropriate. The administrator shall
require a planting plan to ensure this standard is implemented.
3.2 Critical Areas, Shoreline Buffers, and Ecological Protection
According to JCC 18.25.270 (4) Regulations — Critical Areas and Shoreline Buffers:
(c) Unless otherwise specified in this program, a buffer zone shall be established landward of all
shorelines of the state to protect and maintain ecological functions and processes and to minimize risks
to human health and safety. All buffers shall be maintained in a predominantly natural, undisturbed,
undeveloped, and vegetated condition. Buffers shall not extend across lawfully established paved roads
or hardened surfaces to include areas which are functionally isolated from the shoreline or critical area.
(d) Building Setback. As established in Chapter 18.22 JCC, all new uses and developments, including
preferred uses and uses exempt from shoreline permit requirements, shall be located landward of the
standard buffer plus a 10 -foot -wide building setback unless otherwise specified in this program.
(e) Standard Buffer. The standard buffer shall be measured landward in a horizontal direction
perpendicular to the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) of the shoreline water body, and is a three-
dimensional space that includes the airspace above, as follows:
(i) Marine Shores. A minimum buffer of 150 feet shall be maintained in all shoreline environments.
(ii) Lake Shores. A minimum buffer of 100 feet shall be maintained in all shoreline environments.
(iii) Stream/River Shores. A minimum buffer of 150 feet shall be maintained in all shoreline
environments.
MSA • McCullough Residence Expansion Mitigation • Planting Plan
3.3 Regulations — No Net Loss and Mitigation
According to JCC 18.25.270 (2) — Regulations No Net Loss and Mitigation:
(f) When compensatory mitigation measures are required, all of the following shall apply:
(i) The quality and quantity of the replaced, enhanced, or substituted resources shall be the same or
better than the affected resources; and
(ii) The mitigation site and associated vegetative planting shall be nurtured and maintained such that
healthy native plant communities can grow and mature over time; and
(iii) The mitigation shall be informed by pertinent scientific and technical studies, including but not
limited to the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (Final — Revised November 2008),
the Shoreline Restoration Plan (Final October 2008) and other background studies prepared in
support of this program; and
(iv) The mitigation shall replace the functions as quickly as possible following the impacts to ensure
no net loss; and
(v) The mitigation activity shall be monitored and maintained to ensure that it achieves its intended
functions and values. The monitoring timeframes shall be consistent with JCC 18.22.350(3)(h).
(vi) The county shall require the applicant/proponent to post a bond or provide other financial surety
equal to the estimated cost of the mitigation in order to ensure the mitigation is carried out
successfully. The bond/surety shall be refunded to the applicant/proponent upon completion of the
mitigation activity and any required monitoring.
4. Mitigation Planting Plan
4.1 Planting Area
The proposed plan will require —300 ftZ of planting area, which equals or exceeds the area of impact. The
planting area is located within the marine shore buffer and should help to reduce stormwater discharge into
Quilcene Bay. The planting plan will include Planting Area A (Figures 5A — 5B). Planting Area A is
located along the southeast border of the project site and will reduce nutrients and pollutants from entering
Quilcene Bay. Planting Area A will include ten shrubs and ten herbaceous plants. Shrubs will be
installed with —5 -foot centers for spacing with herbs planted between (Figure 513). Plants to be installed for
each area are shown in the following tables:
Table 1. Plant Area A
Quantity
Botanical Name
Common Name
Stratum
Size
3
Ribes sanguineum
Red Flowering Currant
Shrub
1 Gal
4
Rosa gymnocarpa
Baldhip Rose
Shrub
1 Gal
MSA • MCCullough Residcncc Expansion Mitigation • Planting Plan
Quantity
Botanical Name
Common Name
Stratum
Size
3
Symphoricarpus albus
Common Snowberry
Shrub
1 Gal
5
Polystichum munitum
Sword Fern
Herb
1 Gal
3
Mahonia aquifolium
Tall Oregon Grape
Herb
1 Gal
2
Athyrium felix femina
Lady Fern
Herb
1 Gal
(*Plants will be selected from a regional native plant nursery)
All invasive species will be identified and weeded prior to planting and soil will be amended where
necessary. The plants will be installed by digging a one to two -foot hole, loosening the soil and root ball,
and placing the plant in the ground. The hole must be deep enough to ensure that roots are straight, but not
so deep as to bury plants too far above the root collar. Once the plant is in place the hole will be backfilled
and tamped lightly. Mulch should be applied 3" deep at a radius of at least 12" around each plant, being
careful not to touch stem of plant. Each plant shall be watered immediately after planting and mulching.
4.2 Performance Standards
Performance standards are measurable criteria for determining if the goals and objectives of the mitigation
project are being achieved. If the proposed benchmarks are not achieved by comparing the surveys to the
mitigation goals, then contingency plans will need to be implemented.
Performance standards are measurable criteria for determining if the goals and objectives of the mitigation
project are being achieved. If the proposed benchmarks are not achieved by comparing the surveys to the
mitigation goals, then contingency plans will need to be implemented.
The goal of this mitigation plan is to maintain the critical area and to restore wildlife habitat. Performance
standards will include:
A. Survival rate: A 90% survival rate for installed plants and existing native plants will be the goal in
mitigation areas. 90% survival will be expected in all monitoring years.
B. Percent cover by native plants: Year one: at least 10-15% cover by installed and volunteer native
plants. Year two: at least 15-25% cover by installed and volunteer native plants. Year three: at least 25-
35% cover by installed and volunteer native plants. Year four: at least 35-45% cover by installed and
volunteer native plants. Year five: at least 45-55% cover by installed and volunteer native plants.
C. Removal of non-native species in planted area: Less than 10% cover by non-native species.
4.3 Monitoring Plan
An as -built drawing and report will be submitted to Jefferson County Department of Community
Development as documentation of the implementation of the approved planting plan within one month of
installation. The plan will include vegetation description, and photo documentation from established photo
stations.
Monitoring will take place over a period of five years at the end of the growing season (late August or
early September) of each monitoring year. The performance standards will be monitored by measuring
plots in zones within the planting area that will be established and mapped after planting occurs, on the as -
built plan. There will be photo points for each plot and they will be referenced on the as -built plan. Photos
MSA • MCCullotigh Residence Expansion Mitigation • Planting Plan
will be taken at all points for all three years as visual documentation of the performance standards
progress, or lack of. Collected data and photos will be compiled into a report for Jefferson County DCD.
The report will address whether the performance standards are being met during each monitoring year and
if the final end of monitoring period standards are going to be met. Monitoring results will determine
whether or not contingency measures will be needed.
Performance Standard # 1 (survival rate): Immediately after planting, all plants including planted and
naturally established will be counted and documented. At the end of each growing season (late Aug -early
Sept) plots will be visited and a count of surviving plants will be documented. The percent survival for the
plots will be calculated by dividing the total number of plants after planting by the total number of
surviving plants at the end of the season.
Performance Standard # 2 (percent cover): The percent cover standard will be monitored by looking at
each monitoring unit of the enhanced areas from above and estimating the area covered by the individual
species. The percent cover within an area can be quantified as a total greater than 100% because plants (in
tree, high/low shrub and herbaceous layers) overlap in cover.
Performance Standard # 3 (removal of non-native species): The cover of non-native species should be
maintained at less than 10%. The non-native coverage will be determined through the same process as
determining the coverage of native plants in plots. Maintenance should occur at least two times during the
growing season, one of which should be conducted before plants go to seed. The maintenance method will
be hand removal, no herbicides.
4.4 Maintenance
Maintenance shall occur at least twice during the growing season to ensure the survival of all native
species within the mitigation area, including volunteer natives. Watering by hand or sprinkler may be
necessary during year number one until the plants are established. Water requirements will depend on the
timing of planting with the seasons and weather conditions. Once plants are established, extra watering
may not be necessary. Hand weeding will be necessary around all plants that are being monitored for
survival and coverage. It is desired that native species should repopulate the area naturally but should be
considered weeds if the survival of plan plants is jeopardized, unless the species can potentially provide
more value to the overall function of the buffer area in question. All non-native species shall be removed
by hand at least twice during the growing season.
If the 90% survival rate is not met by the end of any monitoring year, plants lost to mortality will be
replaced to achieve the percent cover performance standard described above. Prior to replacement, an
appropriate assessment will be performed to determine if the survival was affected by species/site
selection, animal damage, or some other factor. Subsequent contingency actions must be designed to
respond directly to the stressor(s) which are increasing mortality of planted native species. If a species is
shown not to endure site conditions then another, more appropriate species will be selected. If excessive
damage is observed, protective measures will be introduced. Monitoring years may be added if significant
re -planting becomes necessary.
4.5 Contingency Plan
If the 90% survival rate is not met by the end of any monitoring year, plants lost to mortality will be
replaced to achieve the percent cover performance standard described above. Prior to replacement, an
appropriate assessment will be performed to determine if the survival was affected by species/site
selection, animal damage, or some other factor. Subsequent contingency actions must be designed to
MSA • McCullough Residence Expansion Mitigation • Planting Plan
respond directly to the stressor(s) which are increasing mortality of planted native species. If a species is
shown not to endure site conditions then another, more appropriate species will be selected. If excessive
damage is observed, protective measures will be introduced. Monitoring years may be added if significant
re -planting becomes necessary.
MSA • McCullough Rcsidcncc Expansion Mitigation • Planting Plan
References
Esri. Earthstar Geographics. Jefferson County, Washington Land Records.
https://j effcowa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?i d=3 c6ec 109489b43b l 8196b0a6b89398c
2
Jefferson County Chapter 18.22 Critical Areas code.
Last Updated July 2, 2018 (Ordinance 6-18), (Accessed November 1, 2018).
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/JeffersonCounty/html/JeffersonCounty 18/JeffersonCounty) 822.html
Jefferson County Chapter 18.25 Shoreline Master Program (SMP).
Last Updated July 2, 2018 (Ordinance 6-18), (Accessed November 1, 2018).
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/JeffersonCounty/html/JeffersonCounty 18/JeffersonCounty 1825.html
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987):
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), US Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE), May 2010 (Updated 2014).
Western Mountains, Valleys & Coast 2016 Regional Wetland Plant List.
Last Updated May 12, 2016, (Accessed November 1, 2018).
https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/wetlands/nwpl_wmvc_2016v l .pdf
10
MSA • McCullough Residence Expansion Mitigation • Planting Plan
C
O
�+
rel t . f }s i►''r' rt
' e
vZ.
o
�
coo
a
.�
0
m
op
C6
3Go
N
co
L
U
Jy
C
3
P
CD
r4 W
r4 a
E o
�
4
N
c
c c
U (T
Ln
O
3a
O
2:
c
Li
c
a c
:f
u
cn
W •�
C
f°
O
C
E
U
V
M
�
ffl
fC
Ln
�
N
Oo
00
00
Q1
C
O
O
=
a
Co
m
`...
a)
2
00caLL('ci
4
�
O
C
c
C�
o
�
Z
(0"
�_
j
N
n
p
2:
Z
Z
z
O
N
N
C
-
l2
0
O
(O
a
8.6
Ln
O
ch
1001
rel t . f }s i►''r' rt
' e
vZ.
o
�
coo
a
.�
0
m
op
C6
3Go
N
co
L
U
�1L
g -4
C
3
P
CD
r4 W
r4 a
E o
co
4
N
c
c c
U (T
Ln
O
3a
c
Li
c
a c
:f
u
cn
W •�
C
pcy
C
Figure 3. Site Plan
L-
0
w
2
EXHIBIT SHOWING A PROPOSED DECK FOR A PARCEL SITUATE IN G.L. 3,
SECTION 18, TWP. 27 N., RGE. 1 W., W.M., JEFFERSON COUNTY, WA.
j REVISION NOTES:
3/8/19 REVISED TO REMOVE
A PORTION OF THE
N PROPOSED DECK.
3/15/19 REVISED TO
DIMENSION EXISTING PORCH
TO OHW LINE.
S`
/f R RT
r'
SHOP / \
TWO SHEDS /�Bss TOTAL S4. FT. OF NEW DECK PROPOSED)
PPROX. 7" ABOVE GRADE {PROPOSED DECK)
APPROX. 1 FOOT ABOVE GRA E
��9 2fi x33 'ACCESS FEET ABOVE GRADE (PROPOSED D CK)
t '5��� 6• i/JJ
O
lb
OHW LINE ,1�/ J
APPROX. MEANDER UNE�" M/f,
"IS
1 \� 'c
dw
36791
s791
0 80 160 240
a SCALE: I"=90' (ORIGINAL)
2019
3/75/19
THIS EXHIBIT WAS PREPARED IN AMERICAN LAND SCIENCE, INC.
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON FOR: PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYINGLOCATION: PORT HADLOCK, WA. 98339
MARTY McCULLOUGH MAILING: POST OFFICE BOX 547
IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, WA. CHIMACUM, WA. 99325
4 TELE: (360) 395.9951 EMAIL: OFFICE&MLASC.COM
1 �S• � s ��tr :i 4•v
1 �yr '.�� + �' :z•�� � • ,�-1•-: Sir � �.�
Y?
r
• _ ry r._;� - .-+Lid' � �
E
a�
C,
CL
E
oc p+
+
.;
N
t-1
N
C
2
�• .#t+•�.
L
00
Cl
a
O
fp
S�
O
F'
fu
N
�
00
ob
L
Qi
v
+'
C:)^
U
U
L
Ip
(O
a1
oo
L
_
Y
O
O
=
m
>
07N
�
p O
�
lD
0
0
cn
cn
00
00
00
r1
O
a)
C
0)
C
.�
t
O
O
f0
Q
I'�'
I*'
OL
O
O
N
0
m.,
Z
Z
U
0
O
O
C
L
oLn
v
6
cn
nn
r
• _ ry r._;� - .-+Lid' � �
CA
E In m d
r ID O •~ M m
v n z C C C
1�a:il' f C u O 3
;... e_
OP
}� �`•r1i ` � V d � I D 0
®r-�Il
N
�.;
E
a�
C,
CL
E
oc p+
+
.;
N
t-1
N
C
a
�• .#t+•�.
L
00
Cl
a
4�y!
fp
S�
O
m
oZ$
N
�
00
ob
C:)^
N
ce
r,
CA
E In m d
r ID O •~ M m
v n z C C C
1�a:il' f C u O 3
;... e_
OP
}� �`•r1i ` � V d � I D 0
®r-�Il
N
�.;
E
a�
W �7
CL
E
oc p+
+
.;
N
t-1
C
• L�1
L
a
M®
f0
o v
O g
N U N
Old
m
E O m
ai C9
9
0
mm�
1, % C)
�.ari' N z
Ilk
cl Q)
u
C:)
A 00
fro 0
zm
75 a C
?:
U a 0- 0
La
9 13
0
m C
CY 4)
41 c
(A 4) •
LU
O CY
N
42
C)
C)
r1l)
cr
Ln
<
00
Lo t
U') 0 fo
ti
I.L3
0 71
rP 02
0 CD
'2 C) W CD
0 =
o6 -Y
1-4
C)
, 14
Ui
CP Ul)
0
Q�
a 0 0
:E F= E:
:2 E -o
ru 0
CO U
Ln
I.
CD
LL
CD
CD
1, % C)
�.ari' N z
Ilk
cl Q)
u
C:)
A 00
fro 0
zm
75 a C
?:
U a 0- 0
La
9 13
0
m C
CY 4)
41 c
(A 4) •
LU
O CY
N
42
C)
C)
r1l)
cr
Ln
<
00
Lo t
U') 0 fo
ti
I.L3
0 71
rP 02
0 CD
'2 C) W CD
0 =
o6 -Y
1-4
C)
, 14
Ui
CP Ul)
0
Q�
a 0 0
:E F= E:
:2 E -o
ru 0
CO U
_lk
ry
IL
w... Lel al 1
co
7 Ln
6
0
0
M
u
to
to
�
a
Ol
C
N
Ln C
v
L
� d
U-
++
'2
o Q1
1 I '►
J
Cn
I 01
_ J
'
e
a
WL9Ln
C= 0
�
i
.0
Q
a
o
o
Ip
t
O E
_ E
.Lm
m
V
Appendix A.
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: McCullough OHWM Determination City/County: Quilcene/Jefferson Sampling Date: 9/6/18
Applicant/Owner: James McCullough State: WA Sampling Point: VSH-1
Investigator(s): Paul Ruben and Meg Amos Section, Township, Range: Section 18, Township 27N, Range 1W
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Shore slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): slope Slope (%): 5%
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.825 Long: -122 852 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Kitsap Silt Loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ❑ No _a (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes _LL No El
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 ❑r No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑✓ No ❑ Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑✓ No ❑ within a wetland? Yes No ❑
Remarks:
Sample point VSH-1 is located within an Estuarine wetland within the Ordinary high water mark.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: N/A
1.
2.
3-
4,
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: N/A )
1.
2,
3.
4-
5,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3M t
1 Chairmaker's club rush (Schoenoplectus americanus)
2 Garden bird's foot trefoil (Lotus comiculatus)
3. Softrush (Juncus effusus)
q Dagger leaf rush (Juncus ensifolius)
5, Sow thistle (Sonchus oleraceus)
6. Halberd leaf orache (Atriplex patula)
7 Silverweed (Potentilla anserina)
g White clover (Trifolium repens)
9.
10.
11.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: N/A
1.
2.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Leda-'' Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
45
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
Yes OBL
Yes FAC
Yes FACW
FACW
UPL
FACW
OBL
FAC
= Total Cover
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
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 =
(A)
(B)
(A/B)
(B)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
0 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
= Total Cover Present? Yes ❑✓ No ❑
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 5%
Remarks:
Plot dominated by hydric (solt tolerant) vegetation, which is consistent an estuarine wetland habitat.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to
Sampling Point: VSH-1
the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
finches) Color (moist] % Color (moist) % Type' Loc` Texture Remarks
0-4" 10YR 3/1 93% 7.5YR 4/4 7% D M Sandy clay
4-10" 10YR 4/1 90% 7.5YR 4/4 10% D M Sandy clay
10-18" 10YR 4/1 97% 7.5YR 4/4 3% D M Sandy clay
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. ?Location: PL=Pare Linirig, M=Matrix
Hydric
Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all
LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
II
Histosol (Al)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10)
Ea
Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) II Red Parent Material (TF2)
La
Black Histic (A3)
0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) a Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
❑
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Cj Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Q Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
II Depleted Matrix (F3)
Ea
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
D Redox Dark Surface (F6) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Redox Depressions (Ffi) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type: N/A
Depth (inches): N/A
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑� No ❑
Remarks:
Soil consisted of a matrix of 3 or less chroma and 1 or less value with 2 percent or more distinct redox soft masses.
A redox dark surface (F6), with at least 4" thickness, was observed entirely within the upper 12" of the mineral
(sandy clay ) soil.
HYDROLOGY
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reouired: check all that aonly)
0 Surface Water (Al)
a Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except
0 High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2,4A, and 413)
0 Saturation (A3)
a Salt Crust (1311)
0 Water Marks (131)
Aquatic Invertebrates (1313)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
a Drift Deposits (133)
0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Q Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Q Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
Q Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) a Other (Explain in Remarks)
Q Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB)
Field observations -
Secondary Indicators f2 or more re uired
Q Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 413)
0 Drainage Patterns (610)
0 Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
a Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
a Geomorphic Position (D2)
1.1 Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ FAC -Neutral Test (05)
a Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Surface Water Present? Yes'❑ No T❑ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No LJ Depth (inches): 12"
Saturation Present? Yes tr J No Depth (inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ❑
(includes caoillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Surface water from the shoreline was observed within 10' of the sampling area. Surface water is
present in the area sampled during higher high water. The water table was observed at 12" at the
time of sampling. Saturation was present throughout the sample.
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 McCullough OHWM Determination City/County: Quilcene/Jefferson Sampling Date: 9/6/18
Applicant/Owner: James McCullough State: WA Sampling Point: VSH-2
Investigator(s): Paul Ruben and Meg Amos Section, Township, Range: Section 18, Township 27N, Range 1W
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Shore slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): slope Slope (%): 2%
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.825 Long: -122.852 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Kitsap Silt Loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ❑✓ No _a (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes _a 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 0 No ❑-
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No r❑ Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
—1 No F-1 within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No ❑
Remarks:
Sample point VSH-2 is located within a residential lawn, which is adjacent to the
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 10M }
1 Black Locust (Robina pseudoacacia)
2.
3.
4.
§,2plinelShrub Stratum (Plot size: N/A )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
°I° Cover .Species? Status
25 Yes FACU
25
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3M }
Total % Cover of:
= Total Cover
1 Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis)
35
Yes FAC
2 White clover (Trifolium repens)
20
Yes FAC
3 Creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens)
20
Yes FAC
q Great plantain (Plantago major)
15
FAC
5 Lamb's -quarters (Chenopodium album)
5
FACU
6. Common selfheal (Prunella vulgaris)
3
FACU
7 Silverweed (Potentilla anserina)
2
OBL
8.
9.
10.
11.
inn
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: N/A )
1.
2.
= Total Cover
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
MullLply by:
OBL species 2
x1 = 2
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species 90
x3= 270
FACU species 33
x4= 132
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals: 125
(A) 404 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.23
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0 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
= Total Cover Present? Yes ❑ No ❑
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 5%
Remarks:
Plot dominated by introduced residential grasses and weeds. Some salt tolerant hydric vegetation was
present in plot, which could mean future expansion of the marine shoreline.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: VSH-2
Profile'Descrtptton: joescriAe to the aeptn neeaea to aocument the inaicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
inches Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-7" 10YR 4/2 100% Sandy loam
'Type: G-- Concentration, D=De IeUon, RM=Reduced Matrix CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. ,Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Q� Histosol (Al)
❑
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
4A, and 4B)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
0 Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)
❑
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Algal Mat or Crust (134) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Q Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
II
Depleted Matrix (F3)
0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) Q Other (Explain in Remarks)
Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑,
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
ED Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si)
H
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
wetland hydrology must be present,
III Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Water Table Present? Yes No lJ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Redox Depressions (F8)
unless disturbed or problematic.
strictive Layer (if present):
Tvoe: Gravelly rocks
Depth (inches): 7„
Soil conditions were dry and did not present hydric conditions.
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No 21
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators f it min wm of one required: check all that aooly)
Secondary. Indic tars (2 or more reuuiredj
Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (89) (except
Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2,
0 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2,4A, and 413)
4A, and 4B)
0 Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (1311)
0 Drainage Patterns (1310)
El Water Marks (131) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (1313)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
El Sediment Deposits (132) II Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
II Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Q Drift Deposits (133) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (134) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Shallow Aquitard (133)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
0 FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
0 Surface Soil Cracks (136) 0 Stunted or Stressed Plants (131) (LRR A)
II Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) Q Other (Explain in Remarks)
0 Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Field Observations:
❑ Depth
Surface Water Present? Yes No �0 (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No lJ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No❑
(includes caoilla fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No hydrological indicators were present at the time of sampling.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
Appendix B. Stormwater Calculation Worksheet
SON
( -o DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street, Port Tommsend, WA 98368
Tel: 360.379.4450 1 Fax: 360.379.4451
Web: �� ter. o }rrs,m �ssls ci nnntsiit rclu �lucn
r -t: F.-niail: e cl drer.'c�Fcrsnn.c� n.us
ls y / N VCU=
STORMWATER CALCULATION WORKSHEET
MLA # PROJECT/APPLICANT NAME:
DETERMINING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS: This stormwater calculation worksheet should be completed first to
classify the proposal as "small," "medium," or "large." The size determines whether a Stormwater Site Plan is required in
conjunction with a stand-alone stormwater management permit application, building permit application, or other land use approval
application that involves stormwater review. The basic information will also be helpful for completing a Stormwater Site Plan, if
required.
PARCEL SIZE (I.E., SITE)
1 75 (combined)
Size of parcel acres An acre contains 43,560 square feet. Multiply the acreage by this figure
Size of parcel in square feet
76230
sq/ft
Land -disturbing activity is any activity that results in movement of earth, or a change in the existing soil cover (both vegetative and
non -vegetative) and/or the existing soil topography. Land disturbing activities include, but are not limited to clearing, grading, filling,
excavation, and compaction associated with stabilization of str cture and road construction.
Native vegetation is vegetation comprised on plant species, other than noxious weeds, that are indigenous to the coastal region of
the Pacific Northwest and which reasonably could have been expected to naturally occur on the site. Examples include species such
as Douglas fir, western hemlock, western red cedar, alder, big -leaf maple, and vine maple; shrubs such as willow, elderberry,
salmonberry, and salal; herbaceous plants such as sword fern, foam flower, and fireweed.
LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY CONVERSION OF NATIVE VEGETATION AND VOLUME OF CUTIFILL
Calculate the total area to be cleared, graded, filled,
excavated, and/or compacted for proposed development
project Include in this calculation the area to be cleared for:
Construction site for structures 656 sq/ft
Drainfield, septic tank, etc.
Well, utilities, etc.
Driveway, parking, roads, etc.
Lawn, landscaping, etc.
Other compacted surface, etc.
Total Land Disturbance
sq/ft
sq/ft
sq/ft
sq/ft
sq/ft
sq/ft
Answer the following two questions related to
conversion of native vegetation:
Does the project convert % acres or more of
native vegetation to lawn or landscaped areas?
Circle: Yes No
Does the project convert 2 % acres or more of
native vegetation to pasture?
Circle: Yes No
Indicate Total Volumes of Proposed:
Cut Fill (cu/yd)
Impervious surface is a hard surface that either prevents or retards the entry of water into the soil mantle as under natural
conditions prior to development. A hard surface area which causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities or at an
increased rate of flow from the flow present under natural conditions prior to development. Common impervious surfaces include,
but are not limited to roof tops, walkways, patios, driveways, parking lots or storage areas, concrete or asphalt paving, gravel roads,
packed earthen materials, and oiled, macadam or other surfaces which similarly impede the natural infiltration of stormwater.
stormwater talc worksheet — REV 10/20/2014
,STORMWATER CALCULATIONS_ -IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
NEW EXISTING
Structures (all roof area) sq/ft I Structures (all roof area) 3,246 sq/ft
Sidewalks
Patios
656 sgtft
Solid Decks
(without infiltration below)
Driveway, parking, roads, etc
Other
Total New
TOTAL NEW + TOTAL EXISTING" 6,752
sglh
sq/ft
sq/ft
Sidewalks
Patios
Solid Decks
(without infiltration below)
Driveway, parking, roads, etc
Other '21850
Total Existing 6,096
sq/ft
sq/ft
sq/ft
sgift
sq/ft
sq/ft
sglft "This amount will be used to check total lot coverage
The following questions will help determine whether the proposed project is considered development or redevelopment.
DEVELOPMENT v. REDEVELOPMENT
Divide the total existinq impervious surface above by the size of the parcel and convert to a percentage: 8.0 %
Does the site have 35% or more of existinq impervious surface? Circle. Yes 1 No ❑✓
FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS: If the answer is yes, the proposal is considered redevelopment and the attached Figure 2 should be used
to determine the applicable Minimum Requirements. If the answer is no, the proposal is considered new development and the
attached Figure 1 should be used. At this juncture, the applicant should refer to the applicable Flow Chart to determine the
Minimum Requirements for stormwater management. DCD staff will help verify the classification of the project and the application
requirements.
For proponents of "small" projects who must comply only with Minimum Requirement #2—Construction Stormwater Pollution
Prevention—an additional submittal is not required. The proponent is responsible for employing the 12 Elements to control erosion
and prevent sediment and other pollutants from leaving the site during the construction phase of the project. Pick up the
Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention (SWPP) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Packet. Proponents of "medium"
projects—those that must meet only Minimum Requirements #1 through #5—and for "large" projects—those that must meet all 10
Minimum Requirements—are required to submit a Stormwater Site Plan. DCD has prepared a submittal template of a Stormwater
Site Plan, principally for rural residential projects. Complete the template in the Stormwater Site Plan Instructions and Submittal
Template or prepare a Stormwater Site Plan using the step-by-step guidance in the Stormwater Management Manual.
APPLICANT SIGNATURE
By signing the Stormwater Calculation Worksheet, I as the applicant/owner attest that the information provided herein is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge. I also certify that this application is being made with the full knowledge and consent of all owners of the affected
property.
3/21/2019
(LANDOWNER OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE) (DATE)
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
SMALL_ MEDIUM LARGE REDEVELOPMENT Stormwater Site Plan: yes No
slormwater calc worksheet — REV 10/20/2014 2
APPENDIX C
Marine Shore and Estuarine Wetland — Facing Southwest
Stream Outlet into Quilcene Bay — Facing Southwest
r �, ..
�a�
�'�-�...
•ate.,
-_ .....xr� `
.�...�.
'_ !
J.' �.t
� i��,�