The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSpecial Report (109) (!J( UO':) -UJV?/- 70/. ~S/.()o5 Davis Wetland Delineation Report and ButTer Reduction Plan Parcel # 901 251 005 February 2004 Prepared for: Linda Davis 6503 Beaver Valley Road ChimacumWA, 98325 '\ \"... \\ ".'\. ~\\ 85650th Street Port TO\\'Ilsend, Washington 98368 360 385-6432 dixie@cablespeed.com :'\ r"--h-'"-~-I ! JAN 2 6 2005 I Davis Wetland Delineation Report and Buffer Reduction Plan Parcel # 90] .251 005 February 2004 Contents Introduction Description of Site Applied Methodology Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual Soils Vegetation Hydrology Classification Streams and Streamside Wetland Definitions Determining Wetland Edges Findings Soils Vegetation Hydrology Classification Buffer Reduction Jefferson County Unified Development Code Wetland Buffer Definition Standard Buffer Requirements Reducing Buffer Widths Buffer Reduction Plan Revegetation Requirements Storm water Control Summary References Appendix Sheet #1 Location Map and Soil Survey Of Jefferson County Of Washington Sheet #2 Findings Map ~'T<"' ",'N.~,~d Sheet #3 Aerial (CREP Buffer, Septic and Site Plan) & Jefferson CounW~dtic~f~a~ ~a~.:\,."",.\' Wetlands Rating Field Data Form U;i} r:';':-->':~':'-"':--#I Data Forms, Routine Determination W A State Wetland Delineation ~anl\a~AN 2 6 2005 I ; \ I \ ~ i ! , t' Davis Wetland Delineation Report And Buffer Reduction Plan Parcel # 90 I 251 005 February 2004 Introduction At the request of Linda Davis a wetland delineation was conducted on February 3, 2004. A large wetland associated with Chimacum Creek is located on the subject parcel. The creek flows along the western boundary. The proposed building site is on the eastern boundary and adjacent to Beaver Valley Road (Highway 19). The goal of the wetland delineation is to determine wetland locations and associated buffers that would restrict a building site location. All wetlands and streams within Jefferson County are subject to requirements outlined in the Jefferson County Unified Development Code (UDC) dated January. 1, 2001. Land use restrictions wiII apply to all future developments associated with this parcel. Description of Site, . Legal Description: Parcel #901 251 005 S 25, T29N, Rl W, 36 acre parcel . Location: 6503 Beaver Valley Road (Highway 19), South of the Chimacum intersection approximateJy 3 miles (Appendix S~eet #1: Location Map) . Soils: CbB Casey fine silt loam, and Se Semaihmoo muck, (nearby is 8th Swantown gravelly sandy loam), (Appendix Sheet #1: Soil map) . Slopes: 0 to 15% slopes The majority of the 36-acre parcel consists of flat pastureland that is actively grazed by sheep and llamas. Over 6 acres, directly adjacent to Chimacum Creek, have been planted in native trees and shrubs as part of a federally funded agricultural restoration program (CREP Conservation Restoration Enhancement Program). Additional enhancements to the wetland include a large agricultural pond that has been recently excavated. The pond will eventually be planted with trees and shrubs. A drop of approximately 3 feet in topography defines the wetland edge. .._'o~,~. .~-- . , 1 , I ~ JAM 2 6 2005 I ! Davis Wetland Delineation Reporl File Numbcr 2004-8645 1 ; 1 I Olympic Wetland Resources. Inc. 2/04 A large barn is located near Beaver Valley Road on the portion of the property that is elevated from the low-lying valley. The proposed building site will also be sited on this raised terrace, Upslope and on a separate parcel (901 251 012) a site septic system has been installed to accommodate a single-family residence. This system was completed and inspected by Janet Welch (Permit #01-204 November 26,2002). ~ r Applied Methodology The following resources were consulted for this project: . Jefferson County Critical Areas Map \Vetlands (1995) and ESA Maps (Stream and Wetlands) . Aerial Photographs (Soil maps pre-1975, and 2000, included in Appendix) . Jefferson County Unified Development Code (January 1,2001) . Soil Survey of Jefferson County (U.S. Soil Conservation Service 1975) . National Wetland Inventory Map . Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual . National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9) Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual Fieldwork to determine the actual wetland boundaries was conducted according to the methodology outlined in the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual (Department of Ecology #96-94). Chapter 173-22 of the Washington Administrative Code requires that all wetlands within the State of Washington be delineated using this manual. The methodology outlined in the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual requires examination of the three parameters for a positive wetland determination: hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and p-ydrology. F<or an area to qualify as a jurisdictional wetland it must have a positive indicator from all three parameters. All wetlands identified using this methodology may be federally regulated, regardless of size. Soils A hydric soil is a soil that forms under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding lasting long enough during the growing season to result in an anaerobic upper layer. Hydric soils favor the growth and regenerationofhydrophytic vegetation. The indicators for this type of soil include low chroma, mottles, gleying, and high organic content within the upper 32 inches of the soil profile. Holes were dug on the site and soil colors (including value and chroma) were recorded in the top 16 inches. Soil colors were analyzed using the Munsell Color Charts (1992). Vegetation Wetland plant species must constitute greater than 51 % of the total vegeta~io~-P!<.':~<.':!lt ~2~ m meet the qualification as a site dominated by hydrophytic vegetation. 'Domif1an~e o~pl~nt;! I ! JAN 2 6 Davis Wctland Delincation Report File Numbcr 2004-8645 2 Olympic;Welland ResQurccs, Inc. 2104- I ,. t L species is detemlined by calculating actual aerial cover within a 30-foot radius for trees, a 10-toot radius for shrubs, and a 6-foot radius for the herbaceous layer at each data point. Commonly occurring plant species have been rated by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFW) National List of Plant Species Tbat Occur in \Vetlands: Northwest (Region 9) as to their frequency of occurrence in wetlands and non-wetlands. During the fieldwork, each species was recorded and given a rating based on indicator status and percent cover. Hydrology Wetland hydrology is defined in the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual as "areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season." Areas must have seasonally inundated or saturated soil at least 12.5% of the growing season. Indicators of hydrology include visual observation of inundation or soil saturation, water-stained leaves, cracking of the soil surface, and/or sediment deposits. Positive signs of hydrology are often absent during the summer and fall months but can be inferred if there arc positive indicators of hydric soil and hydrophytic vegetation. Classifica tion Wetland categorization was determined using the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) Wetland Rating System (publication #93-74, August 1993), which assigns a numerical value to any given wetland according to wetland size, quality of surrounding buffers, vegetation diversity, wetland types, and habitat value. Wetlands are rated as entire systems and quite often exceed project boundaries ratings; range from Class I to Class IV. Class I is the highest quality wetland and is not replaceable. It therefore receives the largest buffers and highest protection. Streams and Streamside Wetland Definitions According to the DOE Washington State Wetland Rating System, Western Washington (Second Edition DOE Manual), a stream channel is defined as "'a seasonal flow of water that is predominately in one direction and there is a defined bank or series of banks containing the water. " Oftentimes, stream and streamside wetlands are intermingled. If a stream has wetland characteristics, no matter how small, then the entire system is rated as a wetland. Both streams and wetlands have associated buffers as defined by the Jefferson County Critical Areas Ordinance. The larger buffer is the one that is applied. Streams types in Jefferson County are determined using the criteria set forth in the Chapter 222-16-030 WAC. This system categorizes streams according to connectivity of larger bodies of water, fish bearing potential, use by humans, and whether the stream flow is seasonal or perennial. The ratings range from Type 1, the highest quality, to Type 5, a seasonal non fish-bearing stream. JAN A ~ L b Davis Wetland Delineation RCp0l1 File Number 2004-8645 3 > , - ....' .: ' Olympic WetliuldResourccs, Inc.2!()4 j Determining Wetland Edges Wetland edges were determined by establishing two data points: one \vithin the wetland which contained positive indicators of all three of the wetland requirements: soils, hydrology, and vegetation, and another data point outside the wetland, where one or all of the requirements were not present. Measurements were taken \vith a Chainman II hip chain. Findings The Jefferson County Critical Areas Map indicates that the majority of the parcel is within wetland boundaries with the exception of the northwest comer. Findings indicate that the barn and proposed building envelope are located in this comer of the site and are upslope and outside the actual wetland. The wetland edge is clearly defined by a distinct drop in topography and vegetation change, which can be observed on the aerial map (included in the Appendix, Sheet # 3). The wetland is a low quality Class II wetland (23 points) due to the lack of species diversity or any structural components. This wetland is large and has been mapped throughout Chimacum Valley. There is a hydrological connection to Chimacum Creek which has been rated as a Type 2 fish-bearing stream. The proposed building site is completely within the 100-foot buffer of the Class II wetland. It is over 800 feet from Chimacum Creek and is therefore not directly restricted by the buffers of the creek. This building permit will require a buffer reduction approval by the Department of Community Development. The wetland was flagged with orange plastic ribbon labeled "Wetland Boundary," tied to fence posts at points 20 to 40 feet apart along the western wetland edge near the proposed building site. The wetland edge is contiguous with the drop in topography and vegetation change. Flagging is labeled with alphanumeric codes (AI through A3). The data point locations, wetland edges, and buffers are indicated on the Findings Map in the Appendix (Sheet #2). Soils Jefferson County Soil Survey (page 49) lists soils on site as ebB Casey fine silt loam, and Se Semaihmoo muck. Semiahmoo muck is classified as a hydric soil on the Jefferson County Area Hydric Soil list (January 1991). This soil is common throughout Chimacum Valley and along Chimacum Creek. Semiahmoo muck consists of very poorly drained organic soil overlying a hard mineral soil formed by glaciers. Upslope from the wetland on the terrace near Beaver Valley Road, soils are mapped within the Casey Series, which is a somewhat poorly drained soil formed in a glacial lake or of marine sediments. Data points and soil test pits confirmed the presence of hydric soils; soils were low- chroma the entire depth of the soil test. At Data point # 1 the soil layer was black (10YR 2/1). At Data point #2, upslope and to the north of Data point # 1, s<?ils c9J()!~,9i.911.QL 1M N 2 \} 2005 Olympic Wetland Resources. Inc, 2/04 Davis Wetland Delineation Report File Number 2004-8645 4 change and were still black the entire depth oftl1e soil pit. Soil type and colors were distinctively difIerent at Data point #3, which is on the elevated portion of the property, and near the proposed house site. The soils were sandy with a higher chroma of dark brown (lOYR 2/2 and lOYR 3/2 no mottles). Vegetation Vegetation was mostly dormant during this delineation. Diversity of species is low, consisting of grazed pasture grasses and non-native herbaceous species. The only areas where there was tree or shrub layer was near the Chimacum Creek. Due to the extensive grazing, ground disturbance, and seasonal dormancy, species identification was difficult. Below is a partial list of vegetation found on the site including the indicator status. Scientific Name Common Name Status Layer Wetland Plants rostis ca illaris (A.tenuis) 'Festuca arundinacea Phalaris arundinacea Ranunculus re ens FAC Grass FAC- Grass FACW Grass FACW Herb FACW Herb Pu Ie dead-nettle I NI Herb Dune Tansv NI Herb Lamium ur ureum Tanacetum hi innatum UPL Upland Species, FACU Facultative Upland Species/Non Wetland. FAC Facultative Species, fACW Facultative Wetland Species, OBL Obligate Wetland Species, NI No Indicator Assigned The qualifier of + or - further defines the status of the species. Plants classified according to the Fish and Wildlife Service; 1988,1993 Update Hydrology Water only needs to be present 20 days of the growing season for an area to qualifY as a wetland. The growing season is defined by the Jefferson County soil survey as March 12 to November 25. Hydrology must be present for 12.5% (20 days) of these 258 days. The growing season is also defined by soil temperature at 19.7 inches below the soil surface being higher than biological 0 (50C or 400F). Hydrology was present in the recently excavated pond at about 12" below the top grade. Hydrology was not present in any of the soil test pits that were dug to 16 inches in depth but all soils were moist. When there are positive indicators of wetland soils andwetlan~. .. '._ .. vegetation, then hydrology can be assumed. ,..- "-' , ,'.-- ... ,- .-....., -,>-----.-,."""""",,,---' 2 6 2005 Olj;mpic Wetland Resuurcc$.lnc. 2i04 Davis Wetland Dclineation Reporl Fife Numbcr 2004-8645 5 Western Washington has been experiencing record drought conditions this year and rainfall has been below normal for the past 4 years. Rainfall average for Port Townsend is 18.4 inches. Averages for the years 2000 to 2003 have been 13.37", 17.75", 14.41" and 15.61" respectively. Classification of Wetlands and Streams All wetlands have been rated according to the DOE rating system. This wetland classifies as a Class II wetland with 100-foot buffers. All buffers are measured perpendicular from the delineated edge (Jefferson County Unified Development Code, Jan. L 2001, 3-30 Buffers Table 3-4). Chimacum Creek has been previously classified and mapped as a Type 2 stream, which will also receive I 50-foot buffers. The proposed building site is over 800 feet from Chimacum Creek and will not be affected by creek buffers. Buffer Reduction In order to accommodate a feasible building site, this project will require the reduction of the standard 100-foot buffer by more than the allowable 25% (see 3.6.9 (6) below. Primary goals are to define a building area with the least degradation or impacts to the wetland and buffers. Jefferson County Unified Development Code (January 2001) Section 3.6.9 (2) Wetland Buffer Definition: A designated area adjacent to a wetland that protects, and is integral to the wetland ecosystem. Buffers provide shading, input of organic debris, and coarse sediment, room for variation in the stream or wetland boundaries, habitat to wildlife, and protection from harmful intrusion necessary to protect the public from losses suffered when the functions and values of aquatic resources are degraded. 3.6.9 (5 Hi) Standard Buffer Requirements Buffers shall remain naturally vegetated except where the vegetation has been disturbed, invaded by highly undesirable species, or would substantially benefit for the increased diversity of introduced (native) species. Where buffer disturbance has occurred during construction, replanting with native vegetation shall be required. Minor pruning of vegetation to enhance views and removal of undesirable species (e.g, alders) may be permitted by the Director on a case-by-case basis. -"""""._----~--<,~-,.,,_.-:: ,I JAN 2 (} 2005 Davis Wetland Delineation Report File Number 2004-8645 6 O1ympic Wetland Resources, Inc. 2/04 3.6.9 (6) Reducing Buffer Widths: l1le Administrator may reduce the standard wetland btffJer width, when the project applicant demonstrates both of the following to the sati.~raction of the Adm inistrator: t. Standard wetland buffer width averaging as set forth in this section is unfeasible. ll. The project application includes a buffer enhancement plan using native vegetation, which substantiates that an enhanced buffer will improve thefunctional attributes of the bl{ffer to provide additional protection for the functions and values. Buffer Reduction Plan Buffer reduction will be applied to allow the applicant to build a single-family residence on the elevated area outside the wetland but within the 1 OO-foot buffer. The property is within an agricultural area with an established barn and a recently installed and inspected off-site septic system. A 6-acre native plant enhancement was established along Chimacum Creek in 2003. This enhancement is part of a federal and state funded Conservation Restoration Enhancement Program (CREP). Through tllis program 550 trees and shrubs per acre have been introduced to the site. In addition to the CREP program other enhancement projects are underway on the subject parcel. The newly excavated agricultural pond introduces an open water component that will eventually have native trees and shrubs planted around the perimeter. It will be protected from grazing. Revegetation Requirements The proposed building site is highly degraded and has no native vegetation. A building permits application should be accompanied with a simple revegetation plan to re-establish native trees and shrubs along the wetland edge. This could be part of the revegetation that is currently underway for the agricultural pond. The revegetation plan should be designed to re-vegetate areas that were disturbed during the building process and further protect the wetland. Stormwater Control All storm water from the project will be directed away from the wetland. Sediment or runoff from the project should be minimized with the use of straw bales or sediment fences. This will be required during the entire building process and will continue to be required until the vegetation becomes established and can act as a natural filter. Davis Wetland Delineation Report File Number 2004-8645 7 , ! " ..' lAM'" (' '''H'''' ,. , . i · f~ n .r: {) LUU') OlympicWethi~d Resources. Inc. 2i04 Summary This report presents findings from the wetland delineation conducted on parcel #901 251 005 in Chimapum Valley owned by Linda Davis.and James Rueff. Findings reveal a 100v quality Class If wetland that is associated with Chimacum Creek. Chimacum Creek is rated as a Type 2 fish bearing stream. The potential building site is well outside the creek buffers. The proposed building site is entirely within the 100-foot buffers of the Class II wetland. This parcel is part of a federally funded restoration project along Chimacum Creek. In 2003 over 6 acres were fenced and planted with 550 trees and shrubs per acre. This will greatly increase the structural diversity and habitat value of the wetland. In addition to this federal project Davis and Rueffhave excavated a pond that creates open water year- round. The pond will eventually be planted in native trees and shrubs. An approved septic system for single-family residence was installed in 2002 on an adjacent and uphill lot across Beaver Valley Road. A buffer reduction plan is included with this delineation report. Both the wetland and associated buffers have been in agricultural land and have been altered by construction and grazing. The intent of the plan is to minimize further degradation to the wetland during construction. Due to the extensive vegetation restoration projects the site will change from a flat site with exclusively pasture grasses to a site with diversity of vegetation and structural layers. If Best Management Practices are used during and after construction and if stormwater from impervious surfaces is directed away from the wetland the site will not be impacted. The final authority over this wetland determination and buffer reduction rests with the governmental agencies; restriction will apply to any development near the wetlands or buffers associated with this parcel. If there are further questions or planning requirements tor this project please do not hesitate to call. f)..!/ ). JG.,,'~ f/i / 'I ;/fti- /'<---- ",../ Dixie Llewellin Principal Biologist, Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. Certified for Wetland Delineation, 1987 Manual. Wetland Training Institute, June 1995. tAN 'j " \)'t LO t. . Davis Weiland Delincation Report File Number 2004-8645 8 Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. 2/04 References Buckingham, et aI., 1995. Flora of the Olympic Peninsula. Northwest Interpretive Association and the Washington Native Plant Society, Seattle, Wash. Cooke, Sarah Spear, 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington and Northwest Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, Wash. Cowardin, L.M.V. Carter, F.C.Goblet, and E.T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of Wetland and Deep Water Habitats of the U.S. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Hitchcock and Conquest, 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation, 1987. Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. July 1994 update, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. Jefferson County Unified Development Code. January 2001. Leonard, William P., 1993. Amphibians of Washington and Oregon. Seattle Audubon Series. MacBeth, Div. of Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., 1992. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993. Wetlands. Pojar, Mackinnon, 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Reed, Porter, 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands, Region 9. 1993 update. Washington State Wetland Department of Ecology, March 1997. Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual, #96-94. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1994. Keys to Soil Taxonomy. Pocahontas Press. U,S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1975. Soil Survey of Jefferson County. Communications: Kevin Russel, Jefferson County Department of Community Development NRCS, Al Latham j JAN j) {:: ~ u Appendix Sheet #1 Location Map and Soil Survey Of Jefferson County Of Washington Sheet #2 Findings Map Sheet #3 Aerial (CREP Buffer, Septic and Site Plan) & Jefferson County Critical Areas Map Wetlands Rating Field Data Form Data Forms, Routine Determination W A State Wetland Delineation Manual I ;~ M 1) ~ {;nnK \~n}i L_ \.,; L\,jvJ Title: Location and Soil Map Parcel #90 1 251 005 i Scale: iShoof , k, Indicated Olympic Wetland Resources1lntl 856 50th Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 360 385-6432 dixie@cablespeed.com Client: Linda Davis 6503 Beaver Valley Road Chimacum, WA 98325 ----------] Febmarv 2004 ! '" #1 !JGb#;-;~~~~~45 ----1 i TOPO! map printed on 05/0B/021Tom "puget.tpo" and "Untitled.tpg" 122042'00" W 122033'00" W WGS84122017'OO" W Z fC'" V-D<"".. '< .:?~. /~~:~/:\. ~\-:~:~_,'\s L~ 0' . ,,' Z ""L~U 'X:~.~.. ,)., ,.' " ~.~ ',>> " ,~. g o~<.:?/'<'j '. \,,/' ./~'-'~, . I ';~ \L ^;~' k .~'~.'tJtf?i g // ~ }~~:"'~iJ. ~rt..rawn~""nd~~tir(;enl~k /:~~~..\.. \~'-{""\ -?// &. ~ ." ""~l.r' -,.-r "'m.'..."...... "".' '\....:.:...'.... traabi.y.......l..-..... <!'Ni.:".."...?'...aq..a.'.t.".......".1..oo v :~. f,.;' stan ~'C / [ '- ._~-~ \Hrs.' , ';;, ~-.; ''''J~, \' ~- IT \. / V ~"; 'D ~~~~1 0 . ' I;~: . 'j ii,.. !.. f"":;,' '-~.' , :.-,.\.}~: ul;i~}t ~, :.'" .....;j~, i klil-;.d'J :t;,., ,"; i-"y \. .?:.--;;: '''>..5'~, . . i" ,:"" z 0&.., ~~i~i~:~a~~,'~-: ::-- \;~i. i l (<.~.;' ".I! / '.'~~':~<;.i;~<~' '..."".'-' '.f I < Z o ~,/;~~h ~~~J~~~~~L.fTIJ"i ~ ~- ~', f \' ,\ 9 ~::.\ 'f;,AtJ$tiil , ... \~, -".J ~ h ,:, J ':~>\:r"".~~ _. ~l~:e ;i,{~ fJ~-~;> -7 ~~ ~> _n\~~ ,,~ \ Q/ " r o,nt / .~' """, .." '~....:.' lpolu 101a8, . '>'fj 1 /# : ~;;: v....~ I "" :.~~')> . _ ~ca ~ l; > Z -....AJty/,.~J:- -. {-,~"""" -f ' ~ D >". -.;.:- -2Mbk : fJ~t(ir~V!~, y;,' \. \,: ~~-~...,: 'IG alecV o ~ ?F-\", j).' c\por;t ','- ~ .. ;., r;: .ae~~""V~I1I.<:"~LUdlo .'~;f::_.-~~,_ ~'>.. '. Posse$~!oijc ~ ;/ (', ~~j~~a ..,' ,.~.~. >t'an~iI{eC \~\ ,! !}; v Jand1 ,"" ""...,,:1' ,-" /. , A'>'" [\\ l\;' '''Cf\_:;:Y-'iT>i~ - _lo~_ ~h~ne?'-( \ p{.~r ~A;~eL~ - \. ---l~:/ , '-, '. )\',\''';'<'' .j. ltl: ,."'0::,.y-/.J.. / Ntrl!:!'"t\' u':,\ ,,;' >:.(~-~f-~\~~<'t,<._, ot,__._: W ',' \ - -'no' --~-) Uc:Eglon ~ _ ?_ ~,-;, z,.r'.,.:--...."0..~.N::; .f;. 'ie..... . '.~--F-...-. --.' ,..... .' .'. -.<I.mb....,..le-::-.,-.: '.-'.~. .~......._',...... _ '\" /'i''1~' 0". jJ '" ! 1 '-~" . . ~'i,~~n~~r~~ch:;,;;]'//j ~!/}~.... /~( I <~" '" ~d . 9. .' ~r " '.' '.,., "./ ,'t'iot.;.h \~..,x,' '. . rd'" .r.--'....: ~'/ <~? _./) J ~': )\' ~(l-'./"'v..,: >,..~"" ~ ,a~e/~:. :)ri> I .( f (/(1 !>~ o~~~::.....~; Subject Property -----_.~----------; TNt !.MN V 19" 122042'00" W 122033'00" W o 5 10 15 miles I .'. I . " ... I .', I . '. .. , I .'. I ," .. . I , o 5 10 U ~ D~ Printedli:om TOPO! @l999WildflDwerProduclions(www.!opo. i II / I Jefferson County Soil Survey Map Jefferson County, Washington 1975 Soil Survey Page 49 ebB Cosey fine silt loom StB Swantown gravelly loom Se Semiohmoo muck Findings Map Parcel #901 251 005 ! Stole: IShoot ; As Indicated 856 50th Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 360 385.6432 dixie@cablespeed.mm I rlfle~ Olympic Wetland Resources, Inti \W ~ ! ~ r--------- f \~;\// \V : ; , . . , . ' :------~_.__._.. (Iiell!: Linda Davis 6503 Beaver Valley Road Chimacum, WA 98325 ------1 February 2004 iloh#: "004 864- ~ ~ ~ ~ - .....~)' #2 i \ i i i i i i \ ; --------------------.------------\ \ \ \ \ \ .,.------------ ____-----.'"1 ..------- l , i , i , \ " \ \ \ , , i \ i i \ '4 \k \ \~ \ \--0 , \,0 \." \ 0 , \"~ \" ' \ ~ \~ \ \~ \"6 \e.\) \cP i i \ , , ; , \ , Barn , i \ i i i i , , i , , \ \ , i i i 1 i , i L-------------------- \ _.--------~-_.-._~-- ------------ --- ....... \\\11 ., ". ~;: 'Ji! , , 'W -------. , , "~ --- \~ koL \\ DP~l~~/--/-\ '., \ \ ...._U;\" __ ..,~ \ '.'-- \. ; \ ,~\\ ,i \~ \ i;: \\\// \y/ \ \ ,\ ~ !! \\W '~v/ \~~\I/ 'Jjf \ i \ \ \ \ \ l \\\l/ it! \ ! -... i.: \~ ~ ~ , \~\l/ 'v ,-1 jJ:~ ~-oj, '\; . \W! \ \ ." \ i I All wetland locations I t and sizes are approximate, to establish exact points ii.'~' a formal survey is required T , ! iii. L...-.__._._________._______.__..__~~~_.__.__.__._._._; ~ Delineated Wetland Edge : 100' Buffer From Wetland Edge i o Flagged delineation markers . Data Points i I ! ...m.__...m__~_~__ ....--j Tille ':, Olympic Wetland Resources, loe Aerial with CREP Buffe~ and Septic Site , Jefferson County \\etland Map 856 50th Street Parcel #901 25] 005 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Glen! Linda Davis 360385-6432 6503 Beaver Valley Road dixie@coblespeed.wm Chimacum. WA 98325 Smie: Shoo1 k, Indicated February 2004 Joo #; ,.,{)~. 4 0(.'4- .:.,. lJ -f>' ) -t~tt- l . RueffIDi'k; Pr"ptrly !oQ!2'i:~C~l Leg,md S(>i.:.Jt1~Hr rO.;WJfGS o OO~2":.2<:'(>~ Pma~-,n StJl!''':'!"1S '~:;l::~.~'-j::: r/ !.~-3= ,N !}v;oS / fir"" , r-/ T ~?'-' :: ~Yi:SK~ / ,--/ [."fel r-/ {'it;'"; I I /'" {-or< / . "''Vol~nds <}');'~X:")l a I I JAN h. \...1' OR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. etferson County does no! attest to the accuracy of ~he dfita contained herein and mak-cs no whrranty with respect to it; corredness or vajidity. 0313 com3!ned in this map IS limi~eu t~y tt,e rnetho9 and 1:Kcurac}('of its ':{JH~_~!~n. Man Feb 02 09:14:41 200~ t . #3 Wetlands Rating Field Data Form Bac:tground Information: CK-l{lY\P {t.. ~of~D.1 ff:;:uI.t:aLI~WGl.NM 1(;6(. Dtk.z/04- Nomeof''Io'edIDd(lfbown}; ~VA-t J t:f ~J...-is<lictiorI o(...claad; ~V\J Cr:xJA.l7I1 (J)(z,pS ()f= . ,... rltTAL ' ' j. ~G/N~ LocalioIl: I...S<<tiolI:_o(ms~Scctioo:Z.~ TllWIIIhip:~~ SoI.m:es oflnfonn<<flon: (Cbedc a11lOUfCec tftal: apply) S~ ~ USGS TopGMap:2S- NWlIDIp~Acri&I Pbolo:,t;, Soils PI1:VeY.L OIlier:~Deocribe: ~ (0 C. rU7\Utz.. -AflB'r5 rntrP WlIoAIherJeldO&lamnis~_Catqocy"-= Jl 23 PaNTS Q.1. HIGh QualIty Naf.uraI Wd8nd Clrde"'-s Aaowcr lbio qooestioo> if)'OG......1Idoquole iIdonD&licu oc expcrieaoo to do 10. If aatfillll_wilhllac~to_lIac~ Tbeu.,iflbe--.- to ~ Ia, II> aad Ie... III NO, <<*let lIoc NaIuraI ~ pc-opmof' DNR. . ILK.........., ~ Is tIIele~ni<boe.... ""'-- -- ~~ to~<< JordcoIocYolllac wedaad.. Wio:Mod by .,. ..doe fOllow8c CCIIlditioes? C-*'< taly cfIMces ll>ot..,.lIne .... JlIoce is doe tat S .s.-b. llie iqlecIaol............ cder...... pnIbtlXy "'- tCIbili...s -.11be wcdlIlId llOOI}lIIoal..;u be dole: to "**"c _ _ equilillcMa ll>ot..,.......- & hip q;..Jity-w.d. 1a.1 u,m..- WIlcnbod > 12% iaIpcrWM. . 1t2. WcodMcI is diIcIaed -.1_lIow is *It obolno:tod. I&). WcllODd IIts I>e<a Jl1Idod. filled, Jaued. 1a4. Wllcriswcdlnd is~bydilra. weirI,<<c. laS. WcodMcIispood. 106. Olbor~of~(1iIl"") 2Ll.1l1be ~alElixl...-eO(oaIy""""""'" pIIaIs_~ .......,. wilh ao.......lhNb<< fOc=cd ~ Is Ibe .... of'loedIaooows pIIaIs, Sp/aopIm, 8Dd 40ep cqoaic &Oils> 1/2 acre? YES; CaIqpry I IIIbc_of~pIIaIs, ~8Dd4oeporpaic YES: Caleca<Y 11 aoits ~1I21iXe? NO: Goton.1. Q.2l>. Matve feraled wecIaM. 2b.l. Does 50% ollbe C<Mrof"!'P<< bal'-..py CCII>Sist_~ YES: CaIepy J In:CS older.... 1O)'C&l$<< """"*- _ oIdcc... SO ycm? NO: Go to 2b.1 N.. lbc_oflnlol isoftClllllOla__aee, ___ be wed .. a ......... b- ate (100 cuiofaaoe). 21>.2. Does 50% oflloc _ _""* c:a.apf CODIiot of ewrcr- lnloI oIdcc YES: Go to 2b.3 dwl SO)'Olll1, AND is lIac Ilnoc:IoaI di-.ity ofllac bal IIi&b .. NO: GotoQ.1 ~ by..~ layecol_2O'-49'taII,.. (/-20', taII,"""a~~ 21>.3. Does < 2S% oflbc",,* -.....~O< YES: CaIqory f the Ibrub ~ DlXtSist of..........excuc &om die list... n. 191 NO: Go to ().1 Q.2c. Eoturiae wetIaHI. 2d. 10 lIac w6llIliII04.. Nm-t. WiIdIik It.cfi.tF. ~ Pad:, YES: Caqory I ~~Raetvc,~"-~ SQtePad:,<< NO: Go to 2c.2 EducaCioaal. EaMroarDcatd 0< SdeaIi&~~.wcr WACm-lG-fSI? 2<:.2. II lIac wcdmd > $ a=c; u..uu~_ YES: CaIqory I ~ If....... ~ pddooIof IIIl "*"- ~ Iba!.... 1) &co.l!II.a 600 foetaport 8Dd 1Iaot_~by....m..1batF de] OIl a Mcott Low ToIe,<< 2) aopaIed by Ii<lal d>aImok .. are &co. CllIlIIOG foet wide; I &!Iliac ~......... to 1lc~........<&!allItiD& lbc wcdaDd ..... - oc.. tbc 1O'dImd 1-$ aa-es; ......................................................... YES: Go 10 2c.3 or is tbc we:lImd < I acre? ..................................:....................... YES: GoI02cA i tl> Are lliere populztioas I)( ClOIHlati", plonts whicl> ...., <:u<mlIfy pIU<:llt, rover IDOrC: tbaI> 10% ,,(the wetIaad. tOO appear to be invading oW"'~? BricfIy cl<oaillc any """~...., plIt1l !JO!llI!Iliom: tOO __tioo 1OIIllOC(1): -<l.As-rOff...E. Ic.lo lliere evi<IcDcc of~ dislud>on<:es whkh...... risibly dcpdcd -quality. E>i<Ia= I)(die ~ of_quaIily io.clude: diRcI {1Il1lIaIIcd} NIIOif lium roads or pIltiIIg Iols; pmeaoe. or Ilirlork ericboe. of _ 4uqoc; 00)' I&oeno; lIac ~ 0( oq;aak c:Io:micols; oc Ii..-:l:...... BrielIy doac:ribe: cu.~Eic:oIoGbI ~: DoNlIac wedaad: .... at !eat I~ ""'" of O<paic toiIi docper l!wl16lrdes . """ the welIaad;. relttiYOly uaadisluIbod; OR (If die &nsM:r is NO IIecauie die -u..d is diIlIIrbed loriefIy deocribe: I8cIiclIIots o( ~ may iDcIGcIo: -r- Wedaad IIts I>e<a pjed. fiUed.1ogged; - Olpaio toils OIl die ...-face are dried-out 1O<m-l!II.a baI( oflbe )'OAt; Y. - W~ rooet.eo dimct -...-.nasoft'Erom....<< ~_.J; . OR :ll"toQ.2 0: tok YES: to to Q.2 NO: P-a.Ic Cat. 1 C<lOtaCt DNR line & f~ das~l!wll acre; YES; 00 Ci> 2l! OR ....~of..~1)'It.ea>; Yco:Goto2c OR. .... eel .... bcld(/ YeI: Go to 2d %a......... 1'_ he.,. oflllc kec fiIlIowiac coaditioac met fOr lIac ..... of""'" aoil? 2&.1. Are SpbapIm. _ a COClIIllOIl JtllUlId <XIVC<'(>3O%) &lid doe <mer of i1tvaive ~ (aoc Table 3) is &co. tbaI> 10%1 klbc..... of sphIpIm IIlOUCI &lid dc:cp oq;aak toils > 112 acre? YES: CaIqory I II tbc _ofsp/lqnwnmooseo &lid dc:cp orpnic toils ~1/2 -=re? YES: 0IIq0ry II NO: Go Ci> 2a.3 2a.2. Is lbcte.. __ of.xpoic IOil wbicll bas &It cmc:q<II! cIaa wilh.!eat """ ~ &om Table 2,&lId_ofillvasive rp:cieI iI < 10%(_ TaWe 3}! II lbc .... o(~ planlo """ dc:cp 0<pIi<: toils > 112 aae1 10 lbe .... ofloc:rbaccoui piau and dc:cp orpaic ooiIs If+lflocn:! 2<:.3. Does lIoc welIaad ~ at least 3 I)(!be foIIowinc4 c:riteri&: ....... - miaimum cxi&ting evideAce of......... rdIIIod disIuz'-'" as diI:iac. ditdlia& filling. adtivalioo, crazing....lIac ~ of I.IOl>- IIAliYC plaut opecieo (ree cuidaDce for defioitioc); - ~ wala..........,QoQ wilh tidal WtwaIer<<1i<lal /iabwwler. - _!eat 1.5% of lbc wetIaAd IIts a 100 bufl'er of ~ po:stllre. open _. iluub 0< f<<est; YES: C&lqo<y J YES: CaIqo<y D NO:OoIOW YES: Caqocy 1 NO Cal>egocj D - bas.!eat 3 oflbe followiog falun:s: low IIlIrIli; IliP -.II; tidal d1macIs; 1agooa(1);woody debris; <<~ li-cs&watct' 'JI'dIaad. 2c.4. Does Ibe -'aa<l1DCCI aU oftbc bIr criteria Cll:Ider 2c3? (aboYC)1 YES: Caqory D NO: m Q.U. Eel er-.... Kdp Bed<. 2d.1. Ateecl&tai bed$1'ft*'UI? ..............................................._ YES: CIlico<Y 1 NO: F to 2d.2 2d.2. Are lhrir fIoaWIg or ll<lll-f1octias kdp bcd(1) I""'I""l wilh .-bD YES: c.tepy I SO%macro aIgr.I <:OVer inlbe l1IOlIlh of Aucuotor ~......_....... NO: c.tepy D cu. Category IV welHncM. 3a. 10 Ibe wcdInd: lea l!II.a 1 acre Illl1. ~y isolatod IlId. COllIprioocI of""" YCgelIlod cIaa lINt is ~ (> lIO%",,*"""" by...1pOcics &om To&Ic 3 <t>eF 19)<< Table 4 (page 20) 31>. Ii !be wedaad: lea _ two acteI ""'" lIydroloska11y ioo~ wilh_ ~ cl.ai. and > 90% of~ ........ in my c:oaDalioclof IpOcics &om Table 3 (page 19) k II lIac wcdInd exca.Wled fulm IpIIIIlIIIlll & pood -nor _ J aac wilhaula ...-faoe -... COImOC:lioa 10 ~ lda,-riwn;orClClli;:f~"--' ond bas <0.1 """,I)( . -, ", . " JAN 2 0 DATA FORM I Routine Wetland Determination (W A State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Co s Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: CftfnJ.A()..vY{ VttLt;f:;'-'1 Date: z.. 03 04- .~ Applicant/owner: UN OA M It (S \/,A. I L'-1., /2.tt't1J . feSV3'f>t=A f{t::YL FILL....."' C.<.I-<Wlfr;( l!.4Vf W~ _ . ll~ 4o'~~ InvestiO'ator(s): . Dc . e> Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ~ no Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes ~ Is the area a tential Problem Area? es ~ VEGETATION etvV Dominant Plant S ies Stratum Indicator Domi~ant PlaneS des Stratum Indicator H Me.. H- ATe Ii- HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL. FACW. & FAC: I 00% Check all indicato~~ thai apply & explain below: Regional knowledge of plant commun.ities Physiological or reproductive adaptations Technical Literature . . Hydroph}'tic vegetation present? Rationale for decisionlRemarks: ::L ..,( Wetland plant list (nat' I or regional) )<. Morphological adaptations -;z:- Wetland Plant Data Base -;z- no OTHER_ ~ Vt4E::'\1:'fn()AJ PD~ HYDROLOGY no Water Marks: no es no Drift Lines:, es no no Oxidized Root (live roots) yes no Channels <12 in. es no FAC Neutral: yes no Water-stained Leaves: 'yes no "ei-^1. . Depth to free water in pit: 'j}QW1"\ Inches Depth to saturated soil: SV~ inches Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial hotoara hs: Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decisionlRemarks: Other: Other: ~ no DATA FOR,l\f I Routine Wetland Determination (W A State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Co s Wetland Delineation Manual) ProjecuSite: ctf1fflAeJ..t11 V t'tLL.f:::'-'J Date: Z 03 04- Applicant/owner: UNOA M\t(S 'A-. ,J.>..t. l?.Mo ". le503 13t=AV'EK. \h ILL......", C~W1f\cU1V{ W~ _ . /I · qo.,,,,~ Investiaator(s): . au 6 Do Normal Circumstances exist on e site? ~ no Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes jiQ) Is the area a tential Problem Area? es <:.SliQJ VEGETATION County: ::JE~<i:.bN State: WA [fIR: 5ZJ -:r 2<"1 g 1 \IV Community ID: Transect ID: Plot ID: J>l\m Dominant Plant S ies Suatum \ Indicator Dominant Plant~S des Stratum Indicator CltPtr~ f/NttlwJ:; {U:jJt:...td.:> ~ H PItL Ftt-L HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 100/0 Check all indicator~ thai.apply & explain below: Regional knowledge of plant communities Physiological or reproductive' adaptations Technical Literature . Hydrophytic vegetation present? Rationale for decisionlRemarks: .::L ~ Wetland plant list (naCI or regional) )< Morphological adaptations ~ Wetland Plant Data Base --:;z- no OTHER _ ~ HYDROLOGY I Is it the growing season? Based on:AtlL S'bu..:R:fL1P 4 Dept. of-inundation: - 0- inches I Depth to free water in pit: - 0 -inches Depth to saturated soil: ~OlL.-~~ inches Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial hotolrra hs: Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decisionlRemarks: ~ no Water Marks: 'es no Drift Lines:, es no Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. es no FAC Neutral: yes no es no no yes no Water-stained Leaves: 'yes no Other: Other: ~ no .JAN {~ ~-, " v' h_ \J DATA FOR1\1 I Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetfand Delineation Manual or 1987 Co s Wetland Delineation Manual) ProjecUSite: ctffff1ACUr1 V fQ..L4:;'i Date: Z. 03 0+ .. Applican.Uowner: UNOA :PA\t/S Vt't J->-l. R..r:Yto . ~ 50 3 7JtEt-\Xf.:YL lh_ ./ C tftn? ftr. (j.,-fYl '1i~2 ~ Investio-ator(s): . Of..}. f3 Do Normal Circumstances exist on e site? ~ Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes Is the area a tential Problem Area? es VEGETATION Dominant Plant S cies Stratum lA:n1 ( J M fUZpu R..e/fY'\ tJm !3r P /N/V1t ," A/eLNPINftCE:i4 HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 3.3<7b Check all indicatory; that 'apply & explain below: Regional knowledge of plant communities Physiological or reproductive adaptations Technical Literature ' Hydrophytic vegetation present? Rationale for decisionlRemarks: LE>5 1Itt\N 51 % ~ .,( HYDROLOGY I Is it the growing season? Based on: ( S bll Dept. of inundation: Depth to free water in pit: - 0-- inches Depth to saturated soil: '- 0 ~ Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial hotoo-ra hs: Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decisionlRemarks: 501t3 inches mOl>" County: 3E..fi13e..-S()1'-l State: W A SrfJR::52,) r 2&f f2.l W Community ID: Transect ID: Plot ID: J>l\m- Indicator Domiriant PlanfS Stratum Indicator les t N:t ~ v~ Pt5flJf1..0tv S"i>tL - VE:~C:.~ WlINtmtr'L yes Wetland plant list (nat'! or regional) )<. Morphological adaptations ~ Wetland Plant Data Base ')(.... @ OTHER no Water Marks: 'es no Drift Lines:: es no Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. es no FAC Neutral: yes no Sediment De sits: es no Drainao-e Patterns: no Local Soil Survey: yes no Water-stained Leaves: 'yes no Other: Other: yes ~ Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. Dixie UeweHin, Principal Biologist RE: Planting Plan Review ,Parcel # 901 251 005 Linda, Thank you for the opp0t1unity to review your revegetation project associated with the buffer reduction plan. The planting plan is very clear and the choices of species and numbers of trees and shrubs are appropriate for the site. Adding these native plantings should vastly improve the structural layers and habitat value of your open pasture and further screen and protect the wetland. The plan includes 80 trees and approximately 240 shrubs (in a phased planting as shade is established). If you have any fU11her questions about this plan or need help locating any plant species please feel free to call. Sincerely, '22/ ;;/>-A} 1{7' / // -$ . II . //// / ~/~~~:f~, / ~/~ Dixie L1ewellin, Principal Biologist Ce11ified For Wetland Delineation, 1987 Manual Wetland Training Institute, June 1995 ,JAN ~~005 Davis Planting Plan Evaluatioll Dcct:l1lber 23_ 2004 y lCl,~-D~ \Jl~VL The prlmary goal of this planting plan lS to lmprove buffer function by planting appropriate native trees and shrubs. Secondary goals include improving habitat value for wildlife and creating pleasing aesthetic surroundings for our home. The planting areas have for many years been affected by farming activity. The lower site (around the pond) has been part of the large hayfield/pasture, grazed by cattle and horses. The higher elevation site and the area we propose to build upon has been used as a farm staging area- heavy equipment and materials storage, animal transfer from pasture to barn- all activities which compacted the soils and created a poor environment for native plants. We are proposing to return these two areas to a more natural state. The plantings around our pond and house will be done in three stages. First, efforts will be made to plant the trees that will be the backbone of the landscape effort. Choice of plants is somewhat dependent upon availability. In addition we must consider that the area involves two distinct zones- the lower, wetter area around the pond has deep, rich peat soils, moist most of the time within a foot of the surface. The higher house site has better drained, sandYI rocky, compacted soils. We plan to incorporate approximately 40 trees and 100 shrubs consistent with the density guideline which the conservation district used in planting 6+ of our acres by the Chimacum creek. Pond trees will be natives or close relatives. We feel that shore pinel willoWI western red cedarl crabapple I aspenl hemlock, and spruce will do well in the area. Shrubbery for the pond area will include red osier dogwood, highbush cranberry, black twinberrYI pacific ninebark I mock orange, bog blue berry, and ground covers kinnikinnik and crowberry. In the higher zone of the house site we have a slightly different criteria for choosing trees. Between the proposed house site and Beaver Valley Road we need trees that will be a noise and privacy screen- fast growing f stat~.lY.".~,,_.,__ dense I and mostly, evergreen. Again, shore pirieahd c-edar,' with the addition of Douglas Fir and coastal red~ood wi be our first choice of evergreens. Crabapple I aspenl vine maple, and Indian plum will fill in to become lower story trees. Shrubs for this area will be red flowering current, thimbleberry, beaked hazelnut, rhododendron, and nootKa rose. We may also try salal and Oregon grape as the growing trees provide some shade. One area of particular concern for erosion control is the small slope that exists between the two sites. This is represented on the map by the reference to the wetland edge. Willow, red osier dogwood, ninebark, and twinberry will be planted to bind the soil. Many choice plants will be more likely to survive if given some shade and wind protection. We will need to let some pioneer plants create shelter for the more fragile species. Future additions to the landscape will include ferns, trillium, false lily-of-the-valley, red columbine, tiger lily, blue-eyed grass, sedges, scurpus bulrush and other aquatic pond edge plants. We are hopeful that the shade of our growing plants will eventually cause the pasture grasses to become less dominant in the pond area. Until that natural control happens, we will need to carryon a fairly aggressive hand weeding program. We have high hopes that this mix of plants should furnish food and home to both local and migrating birds. Nesting boxes may be placed strategically to encourage the shy ones. Our planting schedule will take advantage of the Spring plant sale sponsored by the Jefferson County conservation District (usually occurs in February.) Additionally we can transplant larger trees and shrubs from a holding garden on our land. This must be done in early winter. We will begin our plantings in the pond area. The house site will be planted within one year of completing the building of the house. A silt barrier of straw bales will surround the building site to mitigate erosion and runoff of bare soils. Please refer to the site map for more specific planting plans. I. ; ~ 1 Placement of individual trees and shrubs mustrellra~Ji-'.~ somewhat flexible within the soil and moisture zqnes. , . , I ~ kJ ') f' ! vf\1\ t. D 7innt; dJ\L Planting Plan Trees Shore Pine SP j,i,- Highly adaptable, use both sites 16 Spruce S ","'0" Pond site 4 Willow W Good soil binder for slopes and around pond 9 Douglas Fir F N::Y Soil tolerant, drought resistant 11 Western Hemlock H 1;;w Dense canopy, fairly dry to wet sites 1 Good for pond site, give some wind Western Red Cedar C 61 protection among willows and shore pines 11 Coastal Redwood RWia Blend with other evergreens for road buffer 4 Crabapple CAt> Good for both sites; small, under story 5 Aspen A Both sites 7 Vine Maple VM Under story, fall color, both sites 7 Indian Plum IP ii I Upper site 5 80 T Shrubs and Ground Cover Red Osier Dogwood h'Mt#" Slope and Pond area 11 High Bush Cranberry Slope and Pond area 10 Black Twinberry Slope and Pond area 15 Pacific Ninebark Slope and Pond area 12 Mock Orange Both Sites 6 Bog Blueberry Pond Area 12 Kinnikinnik Groundcover, upper site, and slope 40 Crowberry Good groundcover, both sites 25 Red Flowering Currant Soil binding, upper site 12 Thimbleberry Upper site 3 Beaked Hazelnut Upper site onlv 10 Rhododendron Upper site only 5 Nootka Rose Upper site and slope 5 Salal Use to help shade out grasses and weeds 15 Oregon Grape Upper site 3 Ferns Both sites 20 Bog Cranberry Groundcover around pond 25 Red Elderberry G.6 Pond fence edges 8 237 T Note: The plant chart allows for mortality through over planting. JAN 2 6 2005 , " 1 '", ~ I~ I ~;: . Barn 1\ ~ \ '1, {; ,~ 6' "" ~~ ., ~ : : .. :..l"'-c.\~ ~V'.llJa:... pu.-'1tt....-5cY" -?tcrw\.l wo:.wv- ~ , . Delineated etland Edge