Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
SHORELINE MITIGATION PLAN
U5logical Land Services SHORELINE ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION PLAN Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 r■■r■a.� 2190 Black Point Road Burell Residence Brinnon, Washington Prepared for Mike and Rhonda Burell 515 Walnut Street, Apt. 1 Edmonds, WA 98020 (206) 696-5537 Prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. 1157 3rd Avenue, Suite 220A • Longview, WA 98632 (360) 578-1371 • Project Number 3409.01 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................1 EXISTINGCONDITIONS....................................................................................................................1 DEVELOPMENTPROPOSAL..............................................................................................................1 ENVIRONMENTAL AND HABITAT CONDITIONS ..................... ...............................1 Jefferson County Critical Area and Habitat Mapping............................................................. 1 State and Federally Listed Species and Critical Habitat......................................................... 2 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Priority Habitats and Species ........................ 2 Washington Department of Ecology, Coastal Atlas................................................................ 3 Washington Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program .......................... 3 Research and Site Investigation............................................................................................... 3 SHORELINEIMPACT ASSESSMENT..................................................................................................4 ShorelineEnvironment............................................................................................................. 4 ShorelineBuffer......................................................................................................................... 4 Shoreline Ecological Functions and Cumulative Impacts....................................................... 5 No -Net -Loss Assessment.......................................................................................................... 5 FEMAFLOODPLAIN HABITAT ASSESSMENT.................................................................................6 Floodplain Habitat Effects Determination ..................... ................................. 7 SHORELINEBUFFER MITIGATION..................................................................................................8 MaintenancePlan.................................................................................................................. 10 MonitoringPlan..................................................................................................................... 10 ContingencyPlan................................................................................................................... 11 LIMITATIONS ................................................. .....................................................11 REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................12 Table 1: State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species and Critical Habitat FIGURES & PHOTOPLATES Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Existing Conditions Figure 3 Proposed Conditions Figure 4 Jefferson County Critical Areas Map Figure 5 Coastal Atlas Figure 6 Coastal Shoreline Photo Figure 7 WDFW Priority Habitat & Species Figure 8 No -Net -Loss Assessment Figure 9 Shoreline Mitigation Plan Photoplates Site Photos Mike Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc. Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 SIGNATURE PAGE The information and data in this report were compiled and prepared under the supervision and direction of the undersigned. Joanne Bartlett, SPWS Senior Biologist Mike Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc. Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report it Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 INTRODUCTION Ecological Land Services, Inc. (ELS) has been contracted by Mike Burell to conduct a shoreline and no -net -loss assessment to address potential impacts of a new home at 2190 Black Point Road, Jefferson County Tax Parcel Number 502143016, in Brinnon, Washington. It is in a portion of Section 14, Township 25 North, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian (Figure 1). The project is located within the 200-foot shoreline jurisdiction and requires completion of the no -net -loss assessment to satisfy the requirements of Jefferson County, Title 18, Shoreline Master Program (JCSMP) to assess potential impacts associated with replacement of the existing house and garage. EXISTING CONDITIONS This property is located near the south end of Black Point south of Brinnon (Figure 1). It is currently developed with a home situated east of Black Point Road, which crosses the western half of the property. From the road, the property slopes down to the existing home and garage; the slope has been terraced to aid in protection of the structures below (Photoplate 2). The driveway enters the northwest corner of the property (Photoplate 1). The home is situated about 80 feet from the top of the existing bulkhead between which is the maintained lawn (Photoplates 3 and 4). The shoreline is armored by a vertical concrete bulkhead with large boulders in front and a wide set of steps to the beach at the north end. Just above the steps is a recreational patio with a built-in fire pit and boat storage area (Photoplate 4). The topography is level throughout the developed area and up to the concrete bulkhead and patio. The shoreline in this area is composed of cobble over a sand base that slopes gradually down into Hood Canal (Photoplates 4 and 5). It is unvegetated and a wrack was not observed during the February 12, 2021 site visit. Drift logs are absent along this shoreline including the areas offsite to the north and south. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL The project proposes to replace the existing modular -style home with a stick -built home in the current footprint. The new home will expand across the existing impervious surfaces to the west and will expand the deck on the waterside of the house. The deck expansion will be parallel to the shoreline and expand into an existing garden area. The house and garage will be combined into a single structure, which will enclose an area of existing garden between the existing house and garage (Photoplates 1, 2, and 3). Although the house will be constructed in roughly in the same footprint, small extensions are proposed into existing impervious surfaces, which currently consist of parking on the north side (Figure 3). ENVIRONMENTAL AND HABITAT CONDITIONS Jefferson County Critical Area and Habitat Mapping The Jefferson County Public Land Record website maps wetlands in the intertidal zone and FEMA 100-year floodplain (Figure 4). The mapped floodplain extends across the entire property and includes the portion of the property west of Black Point Road. Wetlands are mapped along the lawn and shoreline areas of the property, but no wetlands were observed in the mapped location. Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report ! Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 State and Federally Listed Species and Critical Habitat The potential presence of listed species, including fish, bird, and mammals that have a primary association with the habitat of Hood Canal off Black Point, as well as the presence of designated critical habitats was evaluated by a site visit, aerial images, the Jefferson County Public Land Record website (Jefferson County 2021), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitats and Species website (WDFW 2021), the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 2021) Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) website, the NOAA Fisheries Protected Resources App (NOAA 2021), and the Washington Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage website (WDNR 2021). Table 1: State and Federaliv Listed Endangered and Threatened .Cnoeipr and Critirat FTah:faf Species, ESU' or DPSZ State Status4 Federal Critical liabitaO F.Status3 in Project Wicinit Fish Puget Sound ESU Chinook Salmon Oncorh nchw tshaav tschrr Candidate Threatened Yes Hood Canal Summer -run Chum Oncorh nchus keta Candidate Threatened Yes Puget Sound ESU Steelhead Oncorh nchus m kiss None Threatened Yes Bull Trout Salvelinus con uentus Candidate Threatened No Dolly varden Salvelinus malma None Proposed No Puget Sound/Georgia Strait DPS Bocaccio Sebastes aucis inis) Candidate Endangered Yes Puget Sound/Georgia Strait DPS Yellow eye rockfish Sebastes ruberrimus) Candidate Threatened Yes Birds Marbled Murrelet Brach ram hus marmoratus) Endangered Threatened No Yellow -billed Cuckoo Cocc zus americanus) Candidate Threatened No Streaked Horned Lark Eremo hila al estris stri ata Endangered Threatened No 1) ESU - Evolutionarily Significant Unit. A distinct group of Pacific salmon. 2) DPS — Distinct Population Unit. 3) Endangered - In danger of becoming extinct or extirpated; Threatened - Likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range and that has been formally listed as such in the Federal Register under the Federal Endangered Species Act; Sensitive - Vulnerable or declining and could become Endangered or Threatened in the state; Species of Concern - An unofficial status, the species appears to be in jeopardy, but insufficient information to support listing. State candidate species include fish and wildlife species that the Department will review for possible listing as State Endangered, Threatened, or Sensitive. A species will be considered for designation as a State Candidate if sufficient evidence suggests that its status may meet the listing criteria defined for State Endangered, Threatened, or Sensitive. 4) WDFW, PHS website 2021 5) NOAA 2021 6) USFWS 2021 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Priority Habitats and Species The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority and Habitat and Species (PHS) website (WDFW 2021) shows estuarine and marine wetland that has been previously identified and mapped by other sources. Northern spotted owl habitat is also mapped in the area and pacific herring is mapped within the waters of Hood Canal. Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report 2 Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 Washington Department of Ecology, Coastal Atlas The Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology 2021), Coastal Atlas Mapping tool identifies patchy eelgrass and dune grass fringe along the onsite segment of shoreline (Figure 5). Eelgrass was not observed during the field visit and dune grass was absent along the entire armored shoreline. Washington Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program The Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Natural Heritage Program identifies 19 sensitive, 4 threatened, and 1 endangered species of rare plants in Jefferson County (WDNR 2021). Golden paintbrush is listed as threatened by the WDNR and is also federally listed as threatened (USF WS 2021). Research and Site Investigation Fish Hood Canal provides habitat for listed fish and aquatic mammal species appearing on Table 1 as well as other non -listed species. The cobble beach is primarily un-vegetated and drift logs were absent from the beach. There is no overhanging vegetation along this section of shoreline due to the armoring with the concrete bulkhead and rip rap revetment. There are no features along this segment of shoreline that would provide suitable habitat for the listed species. Eelgrass beds offsite provide habitat for pacific herring, which is a food source of the listed salmonids. Birds Research conducted for this project shows that this property is not within habitat or management areas for marbled murrelet, streaked horned lark, and yellow -billed cuckoo (WDFW 2021; USFWS 2021). Although this property is primarily developed, there is forest habitat west of Black Point Road on the steep slopes above the existing home. Activities are not proposed in the forested area of this property because it is outside the developed area. The remainder of the property provides no suitable habitat because it lacks native vegetation and is composed mostly of maintained lawn. Plants The WDNR lists 24 sensitive, threatened, and endangered species that occur within Jefferson County (WDNR 2021). The property for which this assessment was completed is nearly fully developed, particularly at the shoreline, and the sensitive plant species were not observed during the field visit. Wildlife Inventory There are no terrestrial habitat or wildlife occurrences mapped on this or the adjacent properties. The shoreline in this area lacks habitat features (freshwater community adjacent, large wood or boulders, etc.) that would be beneficial to salmon except as feeding areas within the eelgrass habitat that supports forage fishes and other food sources for salmonids. The primary habitat available is the marine waters within Hood Canal for the federally listed endangered, threatened, or sensitive species in the vicinity of this project, which utilize Hood Canal and Puget Sound as part of their lifecycle (USFWS/NOAA Fisheries 2020). None of the species identified during online research were observed during the site visit conducted on February 12, 2021. Buffer Functions This property lies within a Shoreline Residential shoreline designation and requires a buffer of 150 feet (Figure 4). The shoreline buffer is composed primarily of mowed lawn that extends to the top Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report 3 Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 of the bulkhead, which is continuous along the adjoining properties. There are scattered trees within the buffer on several properties but there are no trees or shrubs on this property. The existing home is about 70 feet from the top of the bulkhead from the northeast corner, which is the closest point, and extends to 81 feet from the southeast corner of the home. The distance of the home from the bulkhead and the height of the bulkhead provides the majority of the buffer function by eliminating a direct line of sight to the nearshore. The dense maintained grass comprising the buffer provides water quality function for the shoreline area by filtering any pollutants from runoff prior to entering Hood Canal. The buffer lacks nearshore shading because of the absence of woody vegetation and there is no potential to create shading habitat due to the width of the bulkhead and revetment. Wetlands The Jefferson County GIS indicates the presence of potential wetland across the lawn area of the property. The mapped soil unit is Coastal Beaches, which is classified as hydric. Wetland conditions were not observed at the three test plots conducted in the lawn area because there were no hydric soil indicators (sand to sandy loam, 10YR 4/3 below surface layer, and no redoximorphic features), and hydrology was not present and there was no evidence of wetland hydrology. The vegetation criterion was met in each test plot because there was greater than 50 percent dominance by FAC species; however, because there are no positive indicators of hydric soil or wetland hydrology, the lawn area does not meet the wetland criterion. See Appendix A for the data forms. SHORELINE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Shoreline Environment This section of shoreline is composed of developed residential properties and each is armored with the continuous concrete bulkhead observed on this property. The bulkhead begins about three properties to the south and continues north across the three properties at the end of Black Point Road (Figure 6). The concrete wall bulkhead is protected by the rip rap revetment and there are steps from each property onto the shoreline. The shoreline environment is composed of cobble sized rock with and there is no vegetation growing on the beach (Photoplate 5). The project is proposed within the existing developed area, which will remain at least 70 feet from the bulkhead so will have no direct shoreline impacts. Shoreline Buffer The project proposes to replace the existing home in approximately the same footprint and will expand slightly to the north and west into existing impervious surfaces currently used for vehicle parking. It will also be expanded vertically to include an additional 516 square feet of living space over the home and an additional 899 square feet of living space above the garage. There is a deck on the waterward side of the home that will be expanded but will be parallel to the home and will not extend any closer to the shoreline. The square footage of the new home will increase to 5,029 square feet (includes the proposed deck), which is an increase of 2,114 square feet (Figure 8). The second floor is not included in the footprint increase but will increase the living space by 1,415 square feet. However, there will be no change to the overall impervious square footage because the home and garage will be combined into a single attached structure by spanning the short gap currently between the home and garage (Photoplate 2). The deck will be expanded slightly to the south but will not extend any closer to the shoreline than the current deck. The existing driveway and parking areas will remain in their current configuration and square footage. Overall, there will be no increase in the coverage by impervious surfaces and no new sources of runoff as a result of Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report 4 Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 this project. Therefore, the function of the buffer will remain unaffected, and it will continue to provide water quality protection for the shoreline area. Shoreline Ecological Functions and Cumulative Impacts The WAC 173-26-201(3)(d)(i) lists essential functions of different type of shoreline environments. The main functions provided by marine waters are listed below: • Hydrologic: Transporting and stabilizing sediment, attenuating wave and tidal energy, removing excessive nutrients and toxic compounds; recruitment, redistribution and reduction of woody debris and other organic material. The onsite segment of shoreline is in a natural state outside of the concrete bulkhead and rip rap revetment. The project will be maintained at least 70 feet from the bulkhead and shoreline environment so will have no effect on the hydrologic shoreline functions. • Vegetation: Maintaining temperature; removing excess nutrients and toxic compounds, attenuating wave energy, sediment removal and stabilization; and providing woody debris and other organic matter. There is no vegetation currently growing in the buffer or adjacent to the shoreline environment. Vegetation removal will occur in the ornamental landscape area around the existing house and there will be no native vegetation removal from the property or within the buffer. The vegetation conditions within the buffer will not change so there will be no effect to the current function. • Habitat for aquatic and shoreline -dependent birds, invertebrates, mammals; amphibians; and anadromous and resident native fish: Habitat functions may include, but are not limited to, space or conditions for reproduction, resting, hiding and migration; and food production and delivery. The project will not have a significant impact on habitat because the home construction will occur within the current developed area of the property. It will not include any activities below the OHWM or waterward of the bulkhead so will not alter the habitat for aquatic wildlife. There will also be no alteration of terrestrial habitat because no native vegetation will be removed. This project will have no cumulative impacts to the shoreline environment for the reasons stated above and because it will not change the current residential use of the property. No -Net -Loss Assessment This project will introduce no new impacts to the shoreline environment or buffer because the proposed new home will lie within the current footprint of the existing home and garage. No construction activities will extend beyond the existing the impervious surfaces including the parking area and driveway. Although there will be no -net -loss of shoreline buffer function or shoreline conditions, the Jefferson County Code requires mitigation for any expansion of the footprint horizontally as well as increase in living space vertically. Mitigation requires planting areas match the expansion of footprint and living space. The proposed mitigation will equal both areas and planting will take place on the east and west sides of the home to improve buffer functions. Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report 5 Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 FEMA FLOODPLAIN HABITAT ASSESSMENT Habitat Narrative Primary Constituent Elements The habitat narrative includes a discussion of the primary constituent elements (PCEs) for the species that appear on the endangered, threatened, and sensitive list for this area of Hood Canal as they appear in the FEMA floodplain habitat assessment guidance (FEMA 2013). The PCEs include those associated with fish and mammal species utilizing Hood Canal as part of their life cycle as they would be the most likely species found in floodplain areas of saltwater shorelines. Primary Constituent Elements The primary constituent elements for the critical habitat of Puget Sound salmon and steelhead in or adjacent to Hood Canal include: ■ Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning incubation and larval development. ■ Freshwater rcaring sites with: o Water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility, o Water quality and forage supporting juvenile development, o Natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, log jams, and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks. • Estuarine areas free of obstruction and excessive predation with o Water quality, water quantity, and salinity conditions supporting juvenile and adult physiological transitions between fresh- and saltwater, o Natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks, and boulders, side channels, o Juvenile and adult forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation. • Nearshore marine areas free of obstruction and excessive predation: o Water quality and quantity conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation, o Natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and side channels. • Offshore marine areas with water quality conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes supporting growth and maturation. Killer Whale The PCEs for killer whale critical habitat within Hood Canal includes: • Water quality to support growth and development • Prey species of sufficient quantity, quality, and availability to support individual growth, reproduction, and development, as well as population growth; and ■ Passage conditions to allow for migration, resting, and foraging. The FEMA floodplain is mapped across the lawn and existing home and includes the driveway and parking areas, none of which provide primary constituent habitat features for the listed species. There are no stream channels in this area of Hood Canal so there is no input of freshwater that would Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report 6 Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 influence the habitat in this location. Marine vegetation and drift logs are absent so there is minimal protection or feeding habitat for most of the listed species along the shoreline. The only available primary constituent elements available on or adjacent to this segment of shoreline are the nearshore and offshore marine areas. Pacific herring spawning areas are present as well providing feeding habitat within the marine waters. There is no overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, or side channels primary constituent elements for the listed fish species. Water Quality This section of Hood Canal does not have a 3O3(d) impaired water but there is a Category 1 impairment for bacteria along the onsite shoreline. Water Quantity The floodplain is mapped across the existing lawn and a portion of the existing home (Figure 4). There are no sources of freshwater within the vicinity of the property that would contribute to floodplain habitat available for listed species. Vegetation Communities and Habitat Structures The vegetation within the floodplain is composed of maintained lawn that extends several hundred feet to the north and south of this property (Figure 6). There are a few scattered trees and shrubs that are mostly non-native along the shoreline that provide minimal habitat function. There are no habitat structures within the maintained lawn. Floodplain Refugia There is no floodplain refugia on the onsite segment of shoreline because there are no large native trees or shrubs on either of the adjoining properties. There is also no driftwood along this section of Hood Canal. Floodplain Habitat Effects Determination The mapped floodplain is composed of maintained lawn within this area of Hood Canal so it lacks habitat structure, vegetation communities, freshwater inputs, and refugia that would constitute primary constituent elements for listed species. Regardless of the presence of primary constituent elements within the mapped floodplain, the new home will be constructed within the existing developed area and will not result in new sources of noise, light, or runoff. Puget Sound Chinook ESU, Hood Canal summer -run chum ESU, Puget Sound steelhead, and bull trout are designated as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, and the critical habitat is designated. However, there is no suitable habitat within the mapped floodplain nor is there access to other habitat areas through the floodplain. There are also no habitat areas for the listed birds and mammals within the mapped floodplain. Therefore, this project will have no effect on the floodplain habitat of listed species or critical habitat. Minimization and Conservation Measures The project will have no effect on the floodplain habitat but will utilize typical construction methods to protect the shoreline environment. These include installation of silt fences, work within daytime hours, and maintain the work within the developed portion of the property. Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No-Nel-Loss Report 7 Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 SHORELINE BUFFER MITIGATION Mitigation is necessary to compensate for the slight expansion of the house footprint and for the vertical expansion. The native plant calculations are based on the area being unvegetated, but the plants may be installed around the existing landscape vegetation. There are two planting areas. The first area lies immediately east of the proposed new deck and will essentially replace the existing ornamental landscaping with native landscaping. It will include placement of low growing, evergreen shrubs and native herbaceous species. Higher growing shrubs will be planted to the southeast of the proposed home. The second area lies west of the house and will be planted with taller evergreen shrubs (including shore pine) and evergreen understory vegetation. The total area of planting is 2,142 square feet and covers the new impact of 2,114 square feet of increased footprint and living space created by a new second floor. By planting the vegetation immediately adjacent to the house, the proposed plants can stifle the noise and light impacts whereas installing plants along the bulkhead will not sufficiently screen noise. Additionally, vegetation installed at the bulkhead would not be able to overhang the shoreline because of the width of the bulkhead. Planting west of the house will create additional habitat potential for local wildlife species while screening the shoreline area and house from activities along Black Point Road. Specifications for Site Preparation The tasks listed below will achieve the shoreline buffer planting goals and objectives. These tasks are listed in the order they are anticipated to occur; however, some tasks may occur concurrently or may precede other tasks due to site and procedural constraints. Buffer Planting Area 1. Establish the limits of the planting areas on both sides of the house. 2. Install the plants as indicated on the planting plan (Figure 9). Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards Project Goal: Improve the shoreline buffer functions to compensate for expansion of the footprint and living space. The performance standards focus on keeping cover by invasives low and having a high survival rate of planted species so that there will be a resulting increase in percent cover. Objective 1: Control invasive species. Performance Standard 1(a): During Years 1 through 5, invasive species will be removed and suppressed around the plants in the planting area as often as necessary to meet a performance standard of no greater than 10 percent cover by invasive species. Percent cover will be recorded annually and included in monitoring reports. Objective 2: Increase native plant cover within the shoreline buffer. Performance Standard 2(a): The project will maintain 100 percent survival of the installed plants in all five monitoring years. Plant species number will be recorded annually and compared with as - built conditions for inclusion with the monitoring reports. Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report 8 Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 Specifications for Planting The plants specified for installation are to improve the buffer function immediately around the home. The specified shrubs, ferns, and herbaceous plants grow relatively quickly, and if maintained, will create a multi -layer canopy of vegetation within the shoreline buffer. The proposed location of the plants is presented in the planting plan (Figure 9). The actual location of the plants may be altered during implementation of the mitigation plan. Plant Materials Potted Stock 1. 1-gallon and 4 inch potted plants will be purchased from a native plant nursery. 2. Potted stock will have a minimum size of 1.5 to 3 feet tall. 3. Potted stock will be kept in a shaded area prior to being planted. 4. The potted stock will have well -developed roots and sturdy stems with an appropriate root- to -shoot ratio. 5. No damaged or desiccated roots or diseased plants will be accepted. 6. Unplanted stock will be properly stored at the end of each planting day to prevent desiccation. 7. The project biologist will be responsible for inspecting potted stock prior to and during planting and culling unacceptable plant materials. Planting Specifications Plants will be installed as roughly indicated on the attached planting plan (Figure 9). Table 3 provides a list of plants proposed for installation within the buffer based on the square footage of the planting areas. Plants will be spaced to allow for removal of invasive plants and each plant may be protected by weed mat or similar product to prevent the re -growth of invasive plants. Additional native plants can be installed in the planting area voluntarily with approval from the project biologist to verify that they are native. Table 3. Plant specifications forbu fer planting area. Species Name Spacing Minimum Size Quantity (feet from center) Shore pine As shown 1 gallon 2 Pinus contorta contorts Vine maple 10 1-gallon 4 Acer circinatum) Evergreen huckleberry 5 1 gallon 6 Vaccinium ovatum Nootka rose 5 1 gallon 6 (Rosa nutkana) White mountain heather 5 1 gallon 8 (Cassiope mertensiana) Pink mountain heather 5 1 gallon 8 (Phyllodoce empetriformis) Pacific rhododendron 5 1-2 gallon 3 Rhododendron macro h llum) Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report 9 Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 Sword fern (Polvstichum munitum) 5 1 gallon 18 Deer fern 1 gallon 18 Blechnum s icant Western pasqueflower 4" pots 14 (Anemone occidentalis) Starflower 4" pots 14 Trientalis lati olia Bleeding heart 4" pots 14 Dicentra ormosa Total Plantings 119 Planting Methods 1. Install the specified plants as listed in Table 3 at any time of the year following completion of the bulkhead construction. Plant the potted stock with a tree shovel or comparable tool. 2. Place the potted species in the planting holes so that their roots can extend down entirely and do not bend upward or circle inside the hole. 3. Position the root crowns so that they are at, or slightly above, the level of the surrounding soil. 4. Firmly compact the soil around the planted species to eliminate air spaces. 5. Install woody mulch (not beauty bark) around the base of installed plants where they are susceptible to being dominated by invasive plants or lawn grasses. 6. Irrigate all newly installed plants as site and weather conditions warrant. Maintenance Plan Maintenance of the planting areas will occur for 5 years and will involve removing invasive plant species, irrigating planted species, and reinstalling failed plantings, as necessary. The maintenance may include the following activities: 1. Remove and control non-native and/or invasive vegetation from within the shoreline buffer a minimum of two times during the growing season for the first 5 years. 2. Irrigate planted species as needed during the dry season, approximately July 1 through October 15. ELS biologists recommend that watering occur at least every two weeks during the dry season for the first 3 years. The most successful method of watering plants is using a temporary above -ground irrigation system set to a timer to ensure the plants are regularly watered. 3. Replace dead or failed plants as described for the original installation to meet the minimum annual survival rate and percent cover performance standards. Monitoring Plan The buffer planting area will be monitored annually for a 5 -year period following plant installation. However, if the survival rate and invasive plant coverage standards are met within the second monitoring year, additional monitoring may not be required. Monitoring reports will be submitted to the Jefferson County Department of Community Development (JCDCD) by December 31 st of each monitored year. The goal of monitoring is to determine if the previously stated performance standards are being met. The buffer planting area will be monitored once during the growing season, preferably during the same two -week period each year to better compare Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report 10 Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 the data. The planting area is small, and a relatively low number of plants are proposed so each planting area will be monitored in its entirety. Photo stations will be established from several locations within the planting area to visually document the changes that occur in the buffer during the 5-year monitoring period. Vegetation Vegetative monitoring will document the developing native vegetation buffer within the planting area. The following information will be collected during each monitoring visit: ■ Number and frequency of shrub, fern, and herbaceous species. ■ Species composition of native volunteers and installed native plants. ■ Photo documentation of vegetative changes over time. Monitoring Report Contents The annual monitoring reports will contain at least the following: • Location map and representational drawing. • Historic description of project, including dates of plant installation, current year of monitoring, and restatement of goals, objectives, and performance standards. * Description of monitoring methods. ■ Documentation of plant cover and overall development of plant communities. ■ Assessment of non-native, invasive plant species and recommendations for management. ■ Photographs from permanent photo points. ■ Summary of maintenance and contingency measures proposed for the next season and completed for the past season. Contingency Plan If the performance standards are not being met within the first 2 monitoring years, contingency measures will be implemented to achieve the standard and additional monitoring may be required. The contingency measures utilized will depend on the failure of the plants or maintenance activities and will include but are not limited to replacement of dead plants (with the same or a similar species) when the survival rate standard is not met, addition of plants when the yearly percent cover standard is not met, and more intensive maintenance if the invasive plant cover exceeds 10 percent. All contingency actions will be undertaken only after consulting and gaining approval from JCDCD. The applicant will be required to complete a contingency plan that describes (1) the causes of failure, (2) proposed corrective actions, (3) a schedule for completing corrective actions, and (4) whether additional maintenance and monitoring are necessary. LIMITATIONS ELS bases this report's determinations on standard scientific methodology and best professional judgement. In our opinion, local, state, and federal regulatory agencies should agree with our determinations. However, the information contained in this report should be considered preliminary and used at your own risk until it has been approved in writing by the appropriate regulatory agencies. ELS is not responsible for the impacts of any changes in environmental standards, practices, or regulations after the date of this report. ' Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report 11 Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 REFERENCES Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Region 10. August 2013. Floodplain Habitat Assessment and Mitigation, Regional Guidance. Jefferson County Code (JCC). 2020. Chapter 18.25 Shoreline Master Program. Jefferson County Tax Public Land Records. 2021. https://gisweb.jeffcowa.us/LandRecords/. Website accessed February 2021. NOAA Fisheries (NOAA). 2021. Protected Resources App- West Coast Region. https://www.webapps.nwfsc.noaa.gov/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=7514c7l 5 b8594944a6e468dd25aaacc9_Website accessed February 2021. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021. Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaQ Website. https:Hecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Website accessed February 2021. Washington Department of Ecology. 2014. Washington State Coastal Atlas. https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/. Website accessed February 2021. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2021. Priority Habitats and Species PHS on the Web. https://jzeodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hft/2h Website accessed February 2021. Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR). 2021. Natural Heritage Program Website. http://www.dnr.wa.gov/natural-heritage-program. Accessed February 2021. Mike and Rhonda Burell — 2190 Black Point Road Ecological Land Services, Inc Shoreline Assessment and No -Net -Loss Report 12 Revised October 2021, March 11, 2021 FIGURES & PHOTOPLATES WASHINGTON siT� 47.6509' Latitude -122.9032' Longitude LOCATION MAP NOTE: Quadfangfe topographic map from 11SGS. Hm-boY 22 PROJECT VICINITY MAP.�� 0 52 SAN J 11AH SCALE IN MILES sodffrl n, SITE B �a Port -M • 5 CLALLAM JEFFERSW+ r KTT +ana n3.3n`6' GRAYS VO4ATCOM SNOHOMISH KING S e ex i PIERCE I THURSTON� fir, �'y cn [rmn LEWIS Goa ew f OceenArf. EI PACIFIC +� t 1e`a° AH AHU c.m. nea 01�' caor COWI.li2 era. r+�- 61y SKAMANIA wwa CLA K �yy# Cna• savwa. Boston Point -x 4 Hood Cultul O n w i 14 CN U N c N ¢ rnd f0 Q N — 4�-� N >- N p lf) �H OmC)N O7Z � ) C CL c >IL f0 � m C O U N N m O c CO Z N � O o Lu >- (9 U CD 7 00 W CD � H C7XOm 0owo_0o- C< E V ^v7 O O V M l0 N � c v m S p L � 1 u Vl V° Wa SITE � f LU LU LL r CD Z OCD_ N J r Q Quatsap Point U) i i / 23 / / 24 N A ]�j l, �� / w ƒ u t co \ E a W � m r g ~xx x % k 2 e c ~% 2 ^ % E 2 § x \ $ k / Cl) -0 E � / \ w - \ - k I / %9 _2 � / 2 2 2 G m� / = m n> n m w ~ ƒ \ / \ G E 2 / $ Et ©x x w $ \ k k = = \ .2 2 EEn § 2 E\ t —i/ O q LL__= c 2< U- / O O m (D R 2 | / 1 0 f xxx - x� & � o t §§ <k °.-0 4E ES_ �WT �cls£ =-0 Z eo§m /\ 0 /o//§ƒ @ @ \} \k o e Luƒ ƒ § \ \10 §5 k� » rg e±»o o° _� a2 \$j)/§� ceof0-oCL 5ID \\(}j z/k7) \\0 (D 40ul W 2 j 0 E W v i 0 C3 0 rrn T C O Q U m LL 0 W H N L U m a) m O n a) m N Q Y � U a C � 0 c J i` I w c rn > O a7 l`0 N a) o a o J \ \ N ,U .0 \ Z U J \ Z w YO _ r _ •� •U O) M r t is y a) Q Y �. O O U a) o 0} 7 7 f0 y r. - 6 N E C C_ o m O N co d= (L O) O N N Y L O J E E- w N � w Co H =O J m �+ Z O L L O •C a) O V a) C C O a) O a) a) N f0 a) ? W m (n (n m 5 3 o m E o 0 0 w U W = O l!') 7 L 7 7 a) O O a)a) t O O O a J (/� O N LL (n m m 0 O Q LL U> O (n d 6- a- Z Z N CD I I O u�i c CL U Or aFn \ 1 t r � r _ � U N Oa) �rn V m o d) MZ-0 p> >Z �U OmUN rnpO� a) r a _ cnen Oa° 3 a o O L)) am C O U a) U) N m O O m -,IZ N � O o W} o U o bi m m W v H Z d-i Y O co 00IxaUd o m n p E ry o m_ m o ON b LA ^ a i 06 0 v va m J O LL m Q - V eo W -130 iU 3 N Ua g ai _ � n < C.:3 � Cu M�oLO J o f0 mU N Y t`1 M 'Q C Oa 3 Y � m C O U N En N m O C Co -I ZO N O Lij 0 U o m � w Q w 2 Q M xaUa Legend: Eelgrass Fringe (patchy) Dunegrass ,.• Fringe (patchy) NOTE(S): 1. Map provided on-line by WA State Department of Ecology at web address: hges:IlforImss. wawa.govlec�lcoastalatlasllcolslmap. apxx/coastalatlasllcolslmap. apxx r� 1f O N - ,` a c .. W •N m r �• Z —� o of W OmUN �' ;' izO�_Y L rn � ¢ O O m � U o 1 O fa) o Q r U r LL ai O � N m Z M O LL W O C)CL m W �Dofa0d o � c -y, naOi�M u 00 CA U w LA 3 O o cc m ! r 1 z j wm(D v w v v -0 00I r w X O N V f • MO ■ w lu ■w � •� O ■ 1 Q� ' V C 10 W ZI 0 � 3 f • ' r' 1 LU Y � Q cn � 1 O X ; m o .�'• F- tz O Z W in w 11CL w N N N O 'J N 1 O N O k I U) E a } 0 ; 7})«;- )Rkk)/k80 W � � x % 2 D . § % � w o E CD \ U ms@ \ � 9 G 2= � m e ©\ m o M �} e \ o v 0 2 e 2 - % = a Mg 0 ¥ = I = o = m @ 7 2 § o _ o c7 2& $ z o = g� 3 « 2 E£ § § @ § @ E § / b B- 0$ 0> & 2«_ o 0 0 0§ 0 3 -j e 3 g f 2 2 OM 3 6<ƒ o k o R E a"<a z z � ƒ / | | m 0 k I k §S K �$ <f k oc 'n U).o Z §<@33CN �n0)r: �U) 0 E o: 3�r /� £� LU �e 40 zC ¥ z 0 k CDI Zz §b/(D L2 _2 u. §$Bwƒ)` coon. #7\m§ 00 �CA�\] z(77w /bj fL in _ u �� 0c ■ W j 2 LL § ) , ® L_SS [0 � 3 w m -m c3�.0 a uJ c w .U-2 1O � rn� ac y � C L m c d... N C O L D Q C-0 O L >, �ami�.EyaEi E 7 LU d �O N N O N N V O _� O m-0 C O d m a� me mor- .Eca`��� m E O y k p'D m E CD O m N N N _I x?��mn10 L)iacin O f/! O N CO cm Q a m co)'D am O W O W M Z .- N f') V C O Q U N rn i� 0 ai O '7 M 'a U) C C C X U Z gL) N c Q N Z a O .0 m far- rn¢� �z a) N Lf) G i ' O LM Wa)V a C I p�C LCs I _ c LL Lu R. N = Z c� a1 zof a o LLI M s O m O ) r � /f 4.. i..f... �I C p N G N mC ;_ C CN ._0 N m o m� O N Z � f ) LL a F LLI m L1 HZci 0 QwWxa ooaaa CO TOO1cZ 00a W m) U) b 0 o � O p CL voE Wx J _m fn O C) N LO l Io1 iL Q „3�gv j m Q C N I I c X M O lL J n t Ln d O'D Coo W E o o 0 0 0 ° o o' F- b LU LU LL LO Z W U y C U) � 9 o Ji s L � w G Photo 1 was taken from the driveway entrance to the property from Black Point Road. It looks east along the north property line showing the driveway, parking area, and north end of the existing home. Photo 2 was taken from the same location as Photo I and looks southeasterly across the property. It shows the existing home and the detached garage that will be replaced with a new home with attached garage. Photo 3 was taken from the same location as Photos I and 2. It looks south along Black Point Road. The property continues to the right (west) of the road but is not included in the current proposal. 1157 31 Ave., Suite 220A DATE: 3/11/21 Photoplate 1project Name: 2190 Black Point Longview, WA 98632 DWN: JB Road *53l� (360) 578-1371 PRJ. MGR: JB Client: Mike and Rhonda Burell Land Services Fax: (360) 414-9305 PROJ. #: 3409.01 Jefferson County, Washington V Photo 4 was taken from the northwest corner of the existing home. Photo 5 was taken from the same location as Photo 4 and shows the current configuration of the home and garage. The home will be expanded into this area and the garage will be fully attached to the new home. Photo 6 was taken from the same location as Photos 4 and 5. It looks at the landscaped area west of the home and garage. This area slopes gradually down from Black Point Road, which lies beyond the ornamental tree in the background. There are no native plants in this terraced landscaped area. a Photoplate 2 DATE: 3/11/21 1157 3 Ave., Suite 220A Project Name: 2190 Black Point Longview, WA 98632 DWN: JB Road ��^ (360) 578-1371 PRJ. MGR: JB E "1090 Cr7� PROJ. #: 3409.01 Client: Mike and Rhonda Burell Land Services Fax: (360) 414-9305 Jefferson County, Washington I-l�i.ilis ��• I � .. Photo 7 was taken from near the northeast corner of the home. It looks east across the maintained lawn toward Hood Canal. The patio with the built in fire pit is in the right background. Photo 8 was taken from the same location as Photo 7 and looks south along the front of the existing home. The new home will lie within the existing footprint and the deck will be expanded slightly to the south and parallel to the home. Photo 9 was taken from the same location as Photos 7 and 8. It looks westerly along the driveway and parking area back toward Black Point Road. The new home will be expanded into this area, which is currently composed of impervious gravel parking. �a DATE: 3/11/21 Photoplate 3 1157 3 Ave., Suite 220A Project Name: 2190 Black Point Longview, WA 98632 DWN: JB Road (360) 578-1371 PRJ. MGR: JB Eco vgical PROJ. #: 3409.01 Client: Mike and Rhonda Burell Land Services Fax: (360) 414-9305 Jefferson County, Washington Photo 10 was taken from near the southeast corner of the property where it meets the existing concrete bulkhead. The maintained lawn ends at the bulkhead. Photo 11 was taken from near the northeast corner of the property at the bulkhead. It looks south along the bulkhead with the small concrete patio and fire pit visible on the right. Photo 12 was taken from the same location as Photo 11 and looks westerly along the north property line. It shows the north end of the existing home and the driveway/parking area shared with the adjoining north property. Photoplate 4 DATE: 3/11/21 1157 311 Ave., Suite 220A Project Name: 2190 Black Point Longview, WA 98632 DWN: JB (360) 578-137PRJ. MGR: JB Road o ogica 414-9305 PROJ. #: 3409.01 Client: Mike and Rhonda Burell Land Services Fax: 360 ( ) Jefferson County, Washington Photo 13 was taken at the high tide line during the February 12, 2021 site visit. It looks south along the beach, which is composed of cobble and gravel over a sandy substrate. Photo 14 was taken from the same location as Photo 13 and looks southwesterly toward the onsite section of bulkhead. Photo 15 was taken from the same location as Photos 13 and 14. It looks northwesterly to show the existing steps to the beach. The roof of the existing home is visible above the bulkhead on the left half of the photo. �d DATE: 3/11/21 Photoplate 5 f� 1157 3 Ave., Suite 220A Project Name: 2190 Black Point �- Longview, WA 98632 DWN: JB Road �owl.—^ (360) 578-1371 PRJ. MGR: JB Ecological Fax: 360 414-9305 PROJ. #: 3409.01 Client: Mike and Rhonda Burell Land Services ( ) Jefferson County, Washington Land Services 11573 d Ave., Suite 220A Longview, WA 98632 (360)578-1371 Fax: (360) 414-9305 Photo 16 was taken of the area where Test Plot 1 was conducted. Lawn grasses and creeping buttercup dominated this area but it was not wetland because it lacked positive indicators for hydric soil and wetland hydrology. Photo 17 shows the soil profile at Test Plot 2 which is consistent with all three test plots conducted in the lawn area. The soil is not hydric because of the high matrix chroma in the lower layer (light brown on the left). Photo 18 was taken of the area where Test Plot 3 was conducted. Once again, this area was dominated by lawn grasses, but the herbaceous plant species included hairy cat's ear and dandelion. There was no wetland identified within the mapped wetland area as shown on the Jefferson County Critical Areas Map. DATE: 9/24/21 Photoplate 6 DWN: JB Project Name: 2190 Black Point PRJ. MGR: JB Road PROJ. #: 3409.01 Client: Mike and Rhonda Burell Jefferson County, Washington APPENDIX A WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM —Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: 2190 Black Peinl Road City/County: Brinnonfiofferson Sampling Date: B"124121 Applicant/Owner: Mike and Rhonda Su Fell State: WA Sampling Point: TP 1 Investigator(s): J at Section, Township, Range: s'i9_T_2S_N. R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc ): horeline Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope Subregion (LRR): MLRA 2 Let: 47.850893 Long:-1?2.902999 Datum: NAD 83 Soil Map Unit Name: Coastal Beaches NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time 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 Areawithin a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: This property is located at the base of a steep, forested bluff, which is undeveloped. The shoreline side of the property lies east of Black Point Road and is developed with a single family home and lawn to the top of the concrete bulkhead. Hydric soils are mapped across the lawn area of the property so three data forms were conducted in the lawn east of the home Test Plot 1 is located near the landscaping at the northeast corner of the home No wetland conditions were present in this area VEGETATION —Use scientific names of plants Dominance Test Worksheets Tme tratu (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover SDecies7 Status 1. — Number of Dominant Species 2. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 3. — Total Number of Dominant (B) 4. Species Across All Strata: 50% = 20% _ — = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species aVjpA1§hrub Stratum, (Plot size: _� 100 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) 1• Prevalence Index worksheet: 2• Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3• OBL species x1 = — 4• FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = — 50% _ —, 20% _ = Total Cover FACU species x4 = F}erb_StraWm. (Plot size: 10' diameter) UPL species x5 = 1. mawedgrasses' 50 ves FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Fianerncufus renens 50 Yes FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 3• Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4• ❑ 1 — Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. — ® 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 8. �. ❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting ❑ 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9 — ❑ 5 - Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10 ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. 50% = 50, 20% = 20 100 = Total Cover _ 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Wood1fn r tum (Plot size: _) 1. _ 2 Hydrophytic 50% _ , 20% _ =Total Cover Vegetation Yes ® No ❑ Present? % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Remarks: The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC species 'mowed grass assumed FAC US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 Project Site: 2190 Black PoInl Rosd SOIL Sam iin Point: TP 1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-5 10YR 3/3 100 sandy loam 5-12 10YR 4/3 100 sandy loam 12-16 10YR 2/2 100 sandy loam 'Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1) F1 Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must e present, ❑ Sand Gle ed Matrix S4 Y Y ( ) ❑ Redox Depressions FB P ( ) unless disturbed or problematic. l Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: The soil profile contained no depleted matrix colors or redoximorphic concentrations so none of the hydric soil indicators are met. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) ❑ Surface Water (A 1) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) ❑ High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (B11) ❑ Water Marks (B1) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) ❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Iron Deposits (135) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ❑ Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) ❑ Drainage Patterns (1310) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (03) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Saturation Present. Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Hydrology was not present and there was no evidence of wetland hydrology Yes ❑ No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM —Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: 2190 Black Paint Road City/County: Brinnonlieftersan Sampling Date: 8124121 Applicant/Owner: Mike and Rhon Bur II State: WA Sampling Point: TP 2 Investigator(s): J. Badletl Section, Township, Range: S14T25N,R2WVVM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Shoreline Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): MLRA 2 Let: 47 650771 Long:-122.903037 Datum: NAD 83 Soil Map Unit Name: Coastal Beaches NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time 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, transacts, important features, etc Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ❑ H dric Soil Present? Is the Sampled Area y Yes ❑ No ® within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: This property is located at the base of a steep, forested bluff, which is undeveloped The shoreline side of the property lies east of Black Point Road and is developed with a single family home and lawn to the top of the concrete bulkhead Hydric soils are mapped across the lawn area of the property so three data forms were conducted in the lawn east of the home Test Plot 2 is located near the landscaping at the southeasteast corner of the home No wetland conditions were present in this area JEGETATiON — Use scientific names of plants Dominance Test Worksheet: Tree Stratum Plot size: Absolute Dominant Indicator ( ) % Cover Soecies� Status 1- — — Number of Dominant Species 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A) 3- Total Number of Dominant 2 (B) 4. Species Across All Strata: 50% _ , 20% _ = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 100 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) 1 _ Prevalence Index worksheet: 2• — — Total % Cover of: Mul112ly, b_v 3• OBL species x1 = 4 FACW species x2 = . 5- FAC species x3 = 50% _ , 20% _ = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb giratum (Plot size: 10' diameter) UPL species x5 = 1. rnowadttrasses' 50 ves FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Ranynwa us rams 50 Les FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. TdIdium rep 10 no FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4• ❑ 1 — Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5• — ® 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. — ❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting ❑ 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9• ❑ 5 - Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. 50% = 55, 20% = 22 110 = Total Cover 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1- 2 Hydrophytic 0 0 50 /o = , 20 /o = — Total Cover Vegetation Yes ¢?j No ❑ Present? % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC species 'mowed grass assumed FAC US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 Project Site: 2190 Black Point Road SOIL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc' Texture 0-7 10YR 2/2 100 sandy loam 7-16 10YR 4/3 100 sandy loam Point: Remarks 'Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 'Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (FB) unless disturbed or problematic Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: The soil profile contained no depleted matrix colors or redoximorphic concentrations so none of the hydric soil indicators are met HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) ❑ Surface Water (A 1) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) ❑ High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (B11) ❑ Water Marks (81) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) ❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ❑ Drift Deposits (B3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Iron Deposits (135) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (86) ❑ Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (89) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) ❑ Drainage Patterns (B10) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Hydrology was not present and there was no evidence of wetland hydrology. Yes ❑ No 19 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: 2190 Black Point Road City/County: Brinnon/Jefferson Sampling Date: W24121 Applicant/Owner: Mike and Rhonda Burell State: WA Sampling Point: TP 3 Investigator(s): J- Bartle Section, Township, Range: S 14 T_25_N. R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc): Shoreline Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): MLRA 2 Let: 47-650754 Long: • ,22.902864 Datum: NAD 83 Soil Map Unit Name: Coastal Beaches NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks ) Are Vegetation ❑, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ❑, significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ® Nc Are Vegetation ❑, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ❑, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks ) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS —Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, important features, etc. LN Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Hydric Soil Present. Yes ❑ No ® Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: This property is located at the base of a steep, forested bluff, which is undeveloped. The shoreline side of the property lies east of Black Point Road and is developed with a single family home and lawn to the top of the concrete bulkhead. Hydric soils are mapped across the lawn area of the property so three data forms were conducted in the lawn east of the home Test Plot 3 is located near the center of the lawn No wetland conditions were observed in this area. vClaC i A i ium — use scieminc names oT pianTs Dominance Test Worksheet: Tree Straturn (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status 1- Number of Dominant Species 9 (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3-- Total Number of Dominant 1 (B) 4. Species Across All Strata: 50% _ , 20% _ = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species SanIInQ/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: � That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) 1• �• Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by, 3- OBL species x1 = — 4• _ _ FACW species x2 = 5 FAC species x3 = — 50% _ , 20% _ — = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10' diameter) UPL species x5 = v 1. mowed grasses 100 Yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Trifollum rMpens 15 no FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Taraxecum nff/crnala 10 no FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4• ❑ 1 — Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5• ® 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. — ❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 T — 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting ❑ 8, data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9• ❑ 5 - Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10, :. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 50% = 62.5, 20% = 25 125 = Total Cover Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Woody, Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1. — 2 Hydrophytic 50% _ , 20% _ — =Total Cover Vegetation Yes El No ❑ Present? % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 dominance by FAC species Remarks: The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% 'mowed grass assumed FAC US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 Project Site: 219tt91agK 'ol84ad Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc' Texture Remarks 0-4 10YR 2/2 100 sandy loam sod included in this laver 4-12 10YR 4/3 100 sand 12-16 10YR 4/2 100 sand no redoximorphic features 'Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sand Gle ed Matrix S4 Y Y ( ) ❑ Redox Depressions F8 P ( ) wetland hydrology must l e present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: The soil profile contained a depleted matrix below 12 inches but does not meet the hydric soil criterion because it lacks redoximorphic features HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) ❑ High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (B11) ❑ Water Marks (B1) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) ❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ❑ Drift Deposits (B3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Iron Deposits (B5) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ❑ Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) ❑ Drainage Patterns (810) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Saturation Present. Yes ElNo ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Hydrology was not present and there was no evidence of wetland hydrology. Yes ❑ No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2 0