Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Habitat Management Plan 978802008
Wetland & Aquatic Sciences Wildlife Ecology Landscape Architecture 2111 N. Northgate Way, Ste. 219 Seattle, WA 98133 206-525-8122 www.raedeke.com Associates, Inc. Raedeke TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM March 15, 2021 To: West Harbor Homes c/o Mr. Cliff O’Brien 70 Breaker Lane Port Ludlow, WA 98365 From: Annamaria Clark Christopher W. Wright Raedeke Associates, Inc. RE: Olympic Terrace II - Lots 3, 6, & 8 Stream Delineation & Habitat Assessment (RAI Project No. 90061-103) Per your request, we conducted a site investigation at Lots 3, 6, & 8 in Olympic Terrace II on February 17, 2021 in order to identify and delineate the boundary of streams on or adjacent to Lots 3, 6, & 8 and to assess habitat conditions. This technical memorandum summarizes the results of our investigation. PROJECT LOCATION The Olympic Terrace II property, is approximately 125 acres in size, and is located in the southern half of Section 21, Township 28 North, Range 1 East, W.M., in unincorporated Jefferson County, Washington. Specifically, the study area of this proposal is the vicinity of Lots 3, 6, & 8 of the Olympic Terrace Division 2 Phase 1 plat as depicted on drawings prepared by ESM and received in our office on December 9, 2020. Wetlands and streams on the project site were originally described in Wetland Assessment for the Port Ludlow-Olympic Terrace Jefferson County Washington prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. (2000). Mr. Cliff O’Brien March 15, 2021 Page 2 of 10 METHODS Definitions & Methodology We based our delineation of the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) for streams within the Phase II area on definitions provided under the Washington State Shorelines Management Act of 1971. The Washington State definition for the OHWM is as follows: Ordinary high water line" or "OHWL" means the mark on the shores of all waters that will be found by examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual and so long continued in ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil or vegetation a character distinct from that of the abutting upland, provided that in any area where the ordinary high water line cannot be found, the ordinary high water line adjoining saltwater shall be the line of mean higher high water, and the ordinary high water line adjoining freshwater shall be the elevation of the mean annual flood.”…(RCW 90.58.030(2)(b) and WAC173-22-030(5); WDOE 1994). As outlined in the Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE 1994) Shoreline Administrators Manual, the general guidelines for determining the OHWM include: (1) a clear vegetation mark; (2) wetland/upland edge; (3) elevation; (4) a combination of changes in vegetation, elevation, and landward limit of drift deposition; (5) soil surface changes from algae or sediment deposition to areas where soils show no sign of depositional processes; and/or (6) soil profile changes from wetter conditions (low chroma, high soil organic matter, and lack of mottling) to drier conditions (higher chroma, less organic matter, or brighter mottles). During our stream OHWM demarcation and habitat assessment, we also investigated the site for the presence of wetlands. The COE wetland definition was used to determine if any portions of the project area could be classified as wetland. A wetland is defined as an area “inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances does support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (Federal Register 1986:41251). We based our investigation upon the guidelines of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and subsequent amendments and clarifications provided by the COE (1991a, 1991b, 1992, 1994), as updated for this area by the regional supplement to the COE wetland delineation manual for the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (COE 2010). The COE wetlands manual is required by state law (WAC 173-22-035, as revised) for all local jurisdictions, including that of Jefferson County (2021b). As outlined in the COE wetland delineation manual, wetlands are distinguished by the presence of three diagnostic characteristics: hydrophytic vegetation (wetland plants), hydric soil (wetland soil), and wetland hydrology. Mr. Cliff O’Brien March 15, 2021 Page 3 of 10 BACKGROUND REVIEW In preparation for our site investigations, we reviewed our previous baseline investigations completed in June and July of 2000 and May of 2017 (Raedeke Associates, Inc. 2000, 2017) in the vicinity of the site. We also reviewed online resource maps from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS 2021) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), the U.S.D.A. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS 2021) Soil Survey, Washington Department of Natural Resources (2021) Forest Practices Base Maps, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (2021a, 2021b) Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) on- line mapper and SalmonScape mapper, and the Jefferson County (2021a) Public GIS maps. We examined current and historical aerial photographs (Google Earth 2021) to assist in the definition of existing plant communities, drainage patterns, and land use. None of the background materials depict wetlands in or adjacent to the location of Lots 3, 6, or 8. Several background maps do depict a stream in the vicinity of Stream 7 characterized as a perennial, fish-bearing stream originating at Teal Lake to the southeast of the project site and continuing off-site to the north where it appears to outlet to Port Ludlow Bay (Raedeke Associates, Inc. 2021). FIELD SAMPLING PROCEDURES AND DATA ANALYSIS Raedeke Associates, Inc. staff visited Lots 3, 6, & 8 in the Olympic Terrace project area on February 17, 2021 in order to identify and delineate the boundary of wetlands or streams on or adjacent to lots and to assess habitat conditions. During our field investigation, we identified the OHWM of Stream 7 using methods described above. We also classified and described representative areas of habitat communities within and adjacent to Lots 3, 6, and 8. We searched for priority habitat indicators, such as raptor stick nests, woodpecker cavities, and priority snags. In locations of potential wetlands, we investigated for positive indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology. Vegetation, soils, and hydrology were examined in representative portions of the investigated area according to the procedures described in the COE Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), as updated by the Regional Supplement (COE 2010). Plant communities were inventoried, classified, and described during our field investigation. We estimated the percent coverage of each species. Plant identifications were made according to standard taxonomic procedures described in Hitchcock and Cronquist (1976), with nomenclature as updated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar et al. 2016). Wetland classification follows the USFWS wetland classification system (Cowardin et al. 1992). We determined the presence of a hydrophytic vegetation community using the procedure described in the Regional Supplement (COE 2010), which requires the use of the dominance test, unless positive indicators of hydric soils and wetland hydrology are Mr. Cliff O’Brien March 15, 2021 Page 4 of 10 also present, in which case the prevalence index or the use of other indicators of a hydrophytic vegetation community as described in the Regional Supplement (COE 2010) may also be required. We excavated pits to at least 18 inches below the soil surface, where possible, in order to describe the soil and hydrologic conditions throughout the study area. We sampled soil at locations that corresponded with vegetation sampling areas and potential wetland areas. Soil colors were determined using the Munsell Soil Color Chart (Munsell Color 2009). We used the indicators described in the Regional Supplement (COE 2010) to determine the presence of hydric soils and wetland hydrology. RESULTS The project is vested to the 1994 Jefferson County Code which regulates wetlands and streams as critical areas. The Phase II area of Olympic Terrace is in the southeastern portion of the project site. We specifically investigated on and adjacent to Lots 3, 6, & 8 located along the west side of Mt Constance Way. Streams We identified Stream 7 originating at the culvert on the north side of Mt Wilder Way, at the outlet of Wetland B (Exhibit A). It runs through the west portion of Lots 6, 7, 8, and 9, and continues in a northwesterly direction through Tract A. Generally, top of bank is approximately 6 to18 inches high and 1 to 2 feet wide, with a grade of 10 to 15%. In one location the stream channel splits and forms an oxbow approximately 20 feet wide before merging back into a single channel. At the time of our investigation the stream appeared to have received high flows due to the recent snow melt event and we observed wrack and sediment material outside of the OHWM of the stream. In some portions of the stream water was two inches deep with flow of approximately 1 cubic foot per second. We delineated the OHWM of Stream 7 starting where it is closest to Lot 8 and followed it north until we had passed Lot 3. The vegetation within the Stream 7 corridor is dominated by a forest canopy of western red cedar (Thuja plicata, FAC) and red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC) with an understory dominated by salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis, FAC) and sword fern (Polystichum munitum, FACU) growing predominantly on hummocks. Multiple background maps depict the entire length of Stream 7 as fish-bearing (WDFW 2021b, Jefferson County 2021a, WDNR 2021), and it is mapped as salmonid habitat on the PHS Habitat Map (WDFW 2021a) and the Water Quality Atlas map (WDOE 2021). However, data provided by the project proponent (O’Brien 2020), indicates that there are downstream reaches of Stream 7 that are in excess of 20% gradient, thus precluding fish passage. This data also shows that Stream 7 was previously classified as a Type 5 stream. Therefore, we conclude that Stream 7 meets the criteria as a seasonal, nonfish-bearing stream, Type Ns or Type 5. Mr. Cliff O’Brien March 15, 2021 Page 5 of 10 We also investigated three potential tributaries on or adjacent to Lots 3, 6, & 8 which had previously been identified as stream segments. On Sheet 8 of the ESM Olympic Terrace Division 2 – 2007 Plat Sheets (Exhibit B), Stream 7B is depicted running through the northwest corner of Lot 6 and continuing just north of the property line. Stream 7D is depicted coursing between Lots 3 and 4. Stream 7E is shown running through the west portion of Lot 2 and crossing over the north central property line of Lot 3. We thoroughly investigated the full length of these potential tributaries, but did not identify any indicators of streams. No channelization, scouring, hydrology, or any evidence of flow was observed. In the bottoms of these ravines we also observed leaf and conifer needle litter, duff, and older wildlife scat. In all three locations we observed sword fern growing in the ground of the lowest areas (see Photo Plate 1). We also located culverts along Mt Constance Way that were upland of the Stream 7B and 7D ravines but we did not observe any evidence of hydrology or flow. These topographically low areas appeared to be dry ravines. Therefore, we concluded no streams were present in the locations labeled Stream 7B, 7D, or 7E (Exhibit B). Habitat During our investigation, we characterized the habitat of the undeveloped western portions of Lots 3, 6, & 8, as well as adjacent habitat. Upland areas adjacent to the lots are characterized by second-growth coniferous forest, at elevations of approximately 340 to 360 feet above sea level. Single-family homes have already been built on Lots 2, 4, 5, 7, & 9 adjacent to our investigation and all homes appeared occupied. Lots 3, 6, & 8 have cleared areas adjacent to Mt Constance Way with pads ready for single-family homes. West of the cleared areas is forested upland habitat on approximately 45% slopes. There are also upland forest corridors just north of Lot 6 and south of Lot 3 where ravines are located. Generally, these forested areas are dominated by western red cedar, red alder, western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla, FAC), and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii, FACU) trees with approximately 6-20 inch diameters at breast height (DBH). The understory is dominated by sword fern, salmonberry, and salal (Gaultheria shallon, FACU). West of Lot 3 we observed several old growth nursery stumps with DBH of approximately 4 feet. We also observed snags and an abundance of large woody debris, appearing to largely be the consequence of wind throw, within the upland forested habitat. Some logs were 12 inches or greater in diameter and at least 20 feet long, meeting priority size requirements, During our field visit we observed several wildlife species, including steller’s jays, winter wrens, grouse, chickadees, squirrels, and a large unknown raptor was seen flying high overhead. No evidence of raptor stick nests or heron rookeries were observed in the vicinity. During our visit we also observed deer scat, coyote scat, and cavities in snags and nursery stumps from a woodpecker species (cavities were small and round, not indicative of the pileated species). Based on our site observations and investigations of the site to date we did not document or confirm the presence of any regulated fish and Mr. Cliff O’Brien March 15, 2021 Page 6 of 10 wildlife habitat conservation areas, such as listed or other priority species or habitats, as defined in the Jefferson County code, other than Stream 7. Wetlands We collected soil, vegetation, and hydrologic data along Stream 7 but did not observe indicators of wetland conditions. In addition, no evidence of wetlands was observed in the forested upland areas within or adjacent to Lots 3, 6, or 8. We did observe a low spot within the cleared area of Lot 3 where water was ponding, likely contributed to by the recent snow melt event. This low spot was lined with quarry spalls and a green plastic pipe with sticking out of the ground approximately 15 feet to the west. It was not clear if this feature was associated with a septic drain field or other development feature of the lot. In the location of ponded water, we observed hydrophytic vegetation and the upper 3 inches of soil was depleted with redoximorphic features. We could not dig deeper than 3 inches due to the quarry spalls and therefore the soils we observed did not meet the depth requirements to be considered hydric. We collected GPS boundary points around this feature but did not identify it as a wetland. IMPACTS At the time of our site visit, all lots shown immediately east of the Stream 7 appear to have been permitted as legal building lots. Lots 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 9 have already been developed with occupied residential homes. Development is now proposed on Lots 3, 6, and 8. Residential homes will be built on the eastern portions of these lots adjacent to Mt Constance Way. The eastern portions of the lots have already been cleared of vegetation as part of predevelopment. We identified Stream 7 flowing through undeveloped western portions of lots 6 through 9 (Exhibit A, attached). As the project is vested to the 1994 Jefferson County Code, the stream receives a 15 foot wide buffer. No direct or indirect impacts are proposed to the stream or buffer. The area immediately west of the lots is depicted as Tract A; to be preserved as open space with no proposed impacts (Exhibit B). As noted above, per mitigation measures outlined in Section of the Jefferson County (1994) code, the Stream 7 buffer may be reduced to 11.25 feet. HABITAT MANAGEMENT The stream and associated 15 foot buffer constitute critical habitat. Management of these critical areas within the legal lot boundaries will consist of a hands off approach with no direct or indirect impacts proposed. The on-site forested habitat outside of and adjacent to the stream buffer also have no proposed impacts, as vegetation has already been cleared in the areas of proposed construction. The segments of Stream 7 and its buffer located within Tract A will be preserved within the open space tract with no proposed impacts. Mr. Cliff O’Brien March 15, 2021 Page 7 of 10 CONCLUSION Based on our February 17, 2021 field investigation and data provided by the project proponent, Stream 7 meets the criteria as a seasonal, nonfish-bearing stream or Type Ns or Type 5. The project is vested to the 1994 Jefferson County Code which regulates wetlands and streams as critical areas. According to Jefferson County (1994) code, Type 5 streams receive a 15-foot buffer, regardless of land intensity use, which could be reduced to 11.25 feet with implementation of mitigation measures outlined in Section 10.509. Wetland and stream buffer widths are measured perpendicularly from the wetland boundary or the ordinary high-water mark of the stream, respectively, as surveyed in the field. We did not identify any critical or priority habitat outside of the stream or its buffer. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for the exclusive use of West Harbor Homes, Mr. Cliff O’Brien, and their consultants. No other person or agency may rely upon the information, analysis, or conclusions contained herein without permission from West Harbor Homes. The determination of ecological system classifications, functions, values, and boundaries is an inexact science, and different individuals and agencies may reach different conclusions. With regard to wetlands, the final determination of their boundaries for regulatory purposes is the responsibility of the various agencies that regulate development activities in wetlands. We cannot guarantee the outcome of such determinations. Therefore, the conclusions of this report should be reviewed by the appropriate regulatory agencies. We warrant that the work performed conforms to standards generally accepted in our field, and prepared substantially in accordance with then-current technical guidelines and criteria. The conclusions of this report represent the results of our analysis of the information provided by the project proponent and their consultants, together with information gathered in the course of the study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. If you have any questions about this information, please call me at (206) 525-8122. Mr. Cliff O’Brien March 15, 2021 Page 8 of 10 LITERATURE CITED Cowardin L., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe. 1992. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service Publication. FWS/OBS-79/31. 131 pp. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 100 pp. Federal Register. 1986. 40 CFR Parts 320 through 330: Regulatory programs of the Corps of Engineers; final rule. Vol. 51. No. 219. pp. 41206-41260, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Federal Register. 1995. Soil Conservation Service: changes in hydric soils of the United States. Volume 59, No. 133, pp. 35680-35695. July 13, 1994. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Revised December 15, 1995. Google Earth. 2021. Image for 47.897823N, -122.681928W in Jefferson County, WA. © 2021 Google. Accessed February 2021. Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1976. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle. 730 pp. Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State wetlands rating system for western Washington: 2014 Update. Washington State Department of Ecology, Publication No. 14-06-029. October 2014. Jefferson County. 1994. Jefferson County Interim Critical Areas Ordinance. Jefferson County. 2021a. Maps: Parcel Map and Critical Areas Resources – Public Geographical Information Systems digital data. Accessed February 2021. https://gisweb.jeffcowa.us/LandRecords/ Jefferson County. 2021b. Title 18 Unified Development Code, Chapter 18.22 Critical Areas. Current through ordinances passed November 16, 2020. Accessed February 2021. Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, State of Washington 2016 Wetland Plant List.. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X. Mr. Cliff O’Brien March 15, 2021 Page 9 of 10 Munsell Color. 2009. Munsell soil color charts. Munsell Color, Grand Rapids, MI. O’Brien, C. 2020. December 9, 2020 email to Chris Wright re: Olympic Terrace Wetland B RAI#90061-103. Raedeke Associates, Inc. 2000. Wetland Assessment of the Port Ludlow - Olympic Terrace property, Jefferson County, Washington. September 28, 2000 report to Olympic Resource Management, Poulsbo, Washington. Raedeke Associates, Inc. 2017. Wetland Delineation Update for Port Ludlow, Olympic Terrace II, Jefferson County, Washington. May 17, 2017 report to West Harbor Homes c/o Mr. Cliff O’Brien, Port Ludlow, Washington. Raedeke Associates, Inc. 2021. Wetland B - Wetland Delineation Update, Port Ludlow, Olympic Terrace II, Jefferson County, Washington. January 25, 2021 report to West Harbor Homes, Port Ludlow, Washington. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. Biological Report 88 (26.9). 89 pp. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1991a. Special notice. Subject: Use of the 1987 wetland delineation manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District. August 30, 1991. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1991b. Memorandum. Subject: Questions and answers on the 1987 manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington D.C. October 7, 1991. 7 pp. including cover letter by John P. Studt, Chief, Regulatory Branch. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1992. Memorandum. Subject: Clarification and interpretation of the 1987 methodology. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington D.C., March 26, 1992. 4 pp. Arthur E. Williams, Major General, U.S.A. Directorate of Civil Works. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1994. Public Notice. Subject: Washington regional guidance on the 1987 wetland delineation manual. May 23, 1994, Seattle District. 8 pp. 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). Wakeley, J.S., R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble, eds. May 2010. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. Mr. Cliff O’Brien March 15, 2021 Page 10 of 10 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2012. Special Public Notice. Final Regional Conditions, 401 Water Quality Conditions, Coastal Zone Management Consistency Responses, for Nationwide Permits for the Seattle District Corps of Engineers for the State of Washington. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District. March 19, 2012. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2017. Special Public Notice. Final Seattle District 2017 Nationwide Permit Regional Conditions for Nationwide Permits for the Seattle District Corps of Engineers for the State of Washington. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District. March 17, 2017. U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2021. Web Soil Survey. Soil Map – Jefferson County Area, Washington. Available at: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed February 2021. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory Wetland Mapper. 2021. Available at: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.HTML Washington Department of Ecology. 1994. v.1 Shoreline Administrators Manual. Shoreline Management Guidebook, 2nd Ed. Publication No. 93-104a. January 1994. Washington Department of Ecology. 2021. Water Quality Atlas. https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/waterqualityatlas/map.aspx. Last accessed February 2021. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2021a. Priority Habitat and Species on the Web. http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/phsontheweb/. Accessed February 2021. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2021b. SalmonScape Mapping Tool. http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/salmonscape/map.html. Accessed February 2021. Washington Department of Natural Resources. 2021. Forest Practices Application Mapping Tool. Accessed February 2021. https://fortress.wa.gov/dnr/protectiongis/fpamt/default.aspx . U:\1990\90061 Olympic Terrace\103 Lot 3 and 8\Tech Memo\Photoplate 1.doc Photo-plate 1 Photo 1 Sword fern growing in bottom of 7B ravine. [Image 8028] Photo 2 Sword fern and salal growing in bottom of 7D ravine. [Image 8076] Photo 3 Duff, leaf litter, sword fern and Oregon grape in 7E ravine. [Image 8115] Photo 4 Culvert upslope of 7B ravine shows no evidence of hydrology with upland plant species growing downslope. [Image 8132]