HomeMy WebLinkAboutJohnson Cabin Project MEP2008-00001 - HMP Habitat Managment Plan - 12/31/2007 TO BE KEPT IN THE
PARCEL FILE
October 20, 2010
RECEIVED
Mason County Building Department/Permitting
PO Box 186 OU 2 112010
Shelton, WA 98584 M C C D - PLANNING
RE: 300 E North Bay Road
Parcel#122174400020
ATF Building Permit/Habitat Management Plan
BLD 2008-2007 0000-7
MEP 2008-00001
To Whom It May Concern:
This is written notification of the continued monitoring of the Buffer Enhancement Areas for the above-
referenced property. Enclosed are photographs of the site, which show growth of the native plants
within the buffer enhancement areas (see attached). This year we removed geranium robertianum
(Herb Robert) and a morning glory vine.
We will continue to monitor as explained in paragraph 8.0 Page 10 of the TWC's Habitat Management
Plan for one (1) more year. Next fall we will send in a culminating report with pictures. Please contact
me if you have any questions.
Regards,
Heather Rasmussen
206-718-8735
Enclosures:
Pictures (7)
F
R i •
s
A \
tv
46 ,
40 V �►
r
° 00
AF
.S9 V, — iL
h
IK
\ ; ♦. R , \
'A -
_ 114, ,r
.°� �
•
,t
y�
41
No
All
ate_ 1
•4 �Af ♦ .. a
��� xt"'1R���.,,_�fir � , • � � �?� '�+' •� % �,� � - 9f+k-.
•, ~ fs," r e y' � ,ems, w�� 1,f�� v �iR t �Y,
+yam.
•:arF -� '_. ' !; {�k jtfy y � ✓ `•V ^, val`y�,�Px�y, 4Jr
S Am
74
L
,�i� f
I
(fir .1 S _ !'� �c�" •�am
1 1
4-
let
44�
'
�i { l >A{)y` �w +$�, ��Fi � ✓ � Ivy i;��j� r+r/r0
r-
s:
" 1 't A L�• •' dkly • r i �} it> '. �F�� r rf '3�'y
.:2. fir kll ♦'h1 � ,r. ! � �r t rJ�Gio 'xj'1 . "d.
*��k
g� `fitWkw ?•. �, r
Nj
� r
a
•
i ff
elf A �� �f i'),r ,Y �7•- r 5
-r" - .tJr,
` r
I V,
T ,�*
alp.rs r� •.a ��"-.
t / �ry �: ♦ h �., - .� - . '+#� •���e�'� yr .
� � .,� �� ,,,.�y�,, , °�`y►� '+14 �'� � Y ��,� � tea.
�.s
` . A
t
top
ItA
•r `'
.44
4 v'.
c r. " , w► a z
17
.l �.• .�. .� �' 1 w �. � r r Dot� ,� •�►~ '. �''� l �e .Y
y r �
1 • }t
r r* Ar '► �� + �• � gym.
t ir
41
Omop
tt
� � � , � ��i� iL t 1,��•� Y�/! • ' / . '' ter.. }
AI
411
J NI
OwEr
AVI
iIiliImi:
u-
s- -
.t
Z
_- �.,i.� (.lei
jq
A�
October 20, 2011
TO BE KEPT IN THE
Mason County Building Department/Permitting PA RCEL FILE
00 Box 186
Shelton,WA 98584 Q, "
RE: 300 E North Ba
i ing Permit/Habitat Management Plan
BLD 2008-2007
ME P 2008-00001
91
To Whom It May Concern:
This is the culminating report for the monitoring of the Buffer Enhancement Areas for the above-
referenced property. Enclosed are photographs of the site, which show growth of the native plants
within the buffer enhancement areas (see attached). We continued to keep track of the geranium
robertianum (Herb Robert)and the morning glory vine and also removed some blackberry vines and two
small scotch broom plants by the road.
We feel that we have successfully facilitated the growth of the native plants over the past two years as
owners of this property as explained in paragraph 8.0 Page 10 of the TWC's Habitat Management Plan.
We enjoy the natural setting of the property and have no plans to make changes to the landscaping. We
enjoy harvesting huckleberries,salmon berries,and even salal berries(which we were glad to find edible
after our daughter tried them) and feel that the growth of the native plants has provided privacy and
acted as a noise buffer. Please contact me if you have any questions.
Regards,
H after Rasmussen
206-718-8735
Enclosures:
Pictures(6)
• r .lit � ,cam "'x.a�� w i � ( � a •+1'
7
few
APO
"aE 7
^ "�i q �r.� a �,., ,.. ►.. / (-y._• �., to ... 3 r�� - d
10
`J' .fit-- s- .► ., �+ � � '
9 +--- -. r-- •v
�� �� J• -.. ,�� ', ai�. � q� �� - sue � +i`S:.`p���j _�ir ��5� � •�`�'` � - �';
w� '• f +1'°Ar~ �'� s *� �.�, `�f� 1 Vim-{ � r </, � r
Y
49kr'4,' it
Avm
,!. '1 '� /► .r- i<'��`'r � '`r 1R• '`a�.Y` i'4. � ,� r <� a � �♦` .(. � a f" Y
M4 "�� iy -.�'�•�r s �r .�+ fi r';•�
t
."R �-s"` "•''' � -ter`#��,K. �} �}� _t � �°�� �`�+¢! ' �'` ° � 4A
r�54� Y p+� �.•NY.�'[ ���6 �j h� �.
Y
ff
WIN
Y.
t
If. { � � �.� %L Rr ♦. n q. � 1 �11 51� ��. �k�� 1 / Sr'
PC'11
�� �„`•'�'"i�/� �� � .r'r.. f " � �, i�`i t�'r..�e� .1 ":�AatJ19�'.� a � ys��� �'`.��� ..q��. I! - I�_ ._,e. ", r
#Lvc,&( # ll.ZM qqowzz
IQ III
I
"pia►^F � ,�" '• �'� ' /"., r
i a.
Jr
00
rd-
JIM
7W�' •• �-,��'�y��, f� v
MOM
Y
Co
Jim VIr
.• +tea -
s. �� ti
14 Coal c
�oli�
i/_ � �� K �' �. III n��'►� , .. ; :�:
1 r
y, all
OL
101,
OAP
A
4 � ' T r � 1. �\`• I `,� � ` .' "� '� . �•.+ �
IQ / '
try "°Rl��• � �� � �i�� I � •`'
` d` 7.
of 1
/�
!
+Ka
• r l� }
•
``tom _ •��i� _ "�''� •' '� � �, �� t _`
��� _ }ram. �� ��i�� 11�►��, �` _
VAL
iil
. .�
a .. �� r �' � " •� �� ���j♦���-dam' � `y/
y4
�, Am
r ''" ' ' •. '""!:
Ak
ah
1 r 7r tee ' •I � _ J
1 • . i fit
1" --� vl�; ti.r « rqn_. I r 4 •11Y f,l;`•N I
.�- W dA - w •: t
� � • oar '' ' + �a .ir � .. ��' J • � � -
j 0 t `'
to `�' � �'J. r1��' �2♦ Yi�i, '�` t♦(,r
' � r I 1 *.v y.l f! � wry 4♦ •�, _ ' a�. I
jr
♦ SSA ,, � P.:
fir- K'��� '/i'11 G�/ �,til";'� i �► � �n. •a �. _,�, . .��a,4 '� . �,:�°_'
f � ,,,"��T►1�� 'I +i/.< 1st cif` � ,all ,� its;� • i� ��''a�'" •I+s` s - '« �"= .- '�i ",
�a # �' �I'r aJi�, l y s ' `f aP S 4� `� !e✓I 1, I � ..� "�, I�� 1 ►� •L.. r�j ,..,. ..�` •,p �". 3„ • 1 `� � '.,., - >��
4 .yea"
� �[`; 1.:.0.`r A1' � Y•!5��.�8r�.:it t - . _ _ � �, a'6 t +` it
�! ,^ r ii..`� �! - r «'' -
Ia
r
_ 4 '
of
It
a
r� a 4p < i
A
THE WETLAND CORPS 4w" f
Wetland Delineation • Habitat Management Plans • Riparian Restoration • Mitigation • Biological Evaluation
JOHNSON CABIN PROJECT
Parcel 122174400020
300 East North Bay Road
Allyn, WA
Mason County
Prepared for:
Jack Johnson
PO Box 1119
Belfair, WA 98528
Prepared by:
Lee Boad and Heather Lane
December, 2007
THE WETLAND CORPS
Wetland Delineation • Habitat Management Plans • Riparian Restoration • Mitigation • Biological Evaluation
JOHNSON CABIN PROJECT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.........................................................................................2
3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION......................................................................................4
4.0 APPLICABLE SETBACKS........................................................................................5
5.0 SPECIES INFORMATION.........................................................................................5
6.0 POTENTIAL PROJECT IMPACTS ..........................................................................7
7.0 MITIGATION MEASURES........................................................................................7
8.0 MONITORING..........................................................................................................10
9.0 CONCLUSION...........................................................................................................10
REFERENCES..................................................................................................................11
Figgres
Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Site Map
Figure 3. National Wetland Inventory Map
Figure 4. Mason County Soil Survey Map
Figure 5. DNR Water Resource Map
Appendix: Wetland Rating Form
1 1 1
The Wetland Corps of
Wetland Delineation • Habitat Management Plans • Riparian Restoration • Mitigation • Biological Evaluation
TWC 16
Page 1 of 12
1.0 Introduction
At the request of Jack Johnson, a Habitat Management Plan has been prepared for the
completed work at 300 East North Bay Road in Mason County, Washington (Parcel:
122174400020). The work included the expansion of an existing deck, installation of two
landscape block walls, the establishment of a concrete walkway, and the establishment of a
gravel walkway/runoff control feature. The entire property is collectively encompassed by
regulated estuarine wetland buffers and shoreline buffers. All completed work has occurred
within regulated buffers. No displacement of wetlands or marine habitat have occurred.
Project mitigation includes the revegetation of an area occupied by both the shoreline buffer
and wetland buffer, which has been altered by past vegetation removal and maintained as an
open grass area. The site is mapped in Section 17 of Township 22 North, Range 1 West. All
field work and reporting associated with this project has been conducted by Lee Boad.
Findings are based on a recent site review as well as a review conducted in 2004 prior to site
modification.
2.0 Proiect Description
The deck addition consisted of approximately 70 additional square feet, most of which is
constructed as a walkway along the northeastern side of the cabin connecting with the
preexisting deck area located on the southeastern side of the cabin which faces Case Inlet.
Photo 1. Deck addition
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com
Habitat Management Plan
Mason County, Washington
TWC 16
Page 2 of 12
The westernmost landscape block wall is 18" high and spans approximately 16 feet. The
easternmost wall is a maximum 28"high and spans for approximately 25 feet. Approximately
15 cubic yards of fill was placed behind the walls to elevate a preexisting lawn and parking
areas to the same elevation as a gravel parking area. Collectively, the two walls occupy
approximately 41 square feet of wetland buffer. Placed fill occupies approximately 600 square
feet of wetland buffer.
Y
Photo 2. Western block wall
Photo 3. Eastern block wall
PO Box 2854,Belfair, WA 98528 cell: 360-620-0618,Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Habitat Management Plan
Mason County, Washington
TWC 16
Page 3 of 12
The concrete walkway occupies 144 square feet of shoreline buffer, beginning at the deck and
ending approximately 7 feet from the existing bulkhead, which represents the extent of
ordinary high water associated with Case Inlet.
r.<J
Photo 4.Concrete walkway
The gravel walkway/runoff control feature consists of a 34' wide swath of surface rock placed
just landward of the existing bulkhead. It collectively occupies approximately 450 square feet
of shoreline buffer.
PO Box 2854, Belfair, WA 98528 cell: 360-62070618,Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com peoplepc.com
Habitat Management Plan
Mason County, Washington
TWC 16
Page 4 of 12
Photo 5. Gravel walkway/runoff controle feature.
3.0. Property Description
The site is approximately '/z an acre in size, bordered to the east by the Case Inlet shoreline and
to the west by North Bay Road. Private ownerships of similar size border the parcel to the north
and south. The site is encompassed by a forested community of western red cedar with
interspersed wetlands, and upland areas, many of which have been used for buildings, parking,
and lawn. The general landscape topography slopes downward from the west at a gradient less
than 10 percent to the low bank natural shoreline associated with North Bay.
The shoreline designation for the area is Urban Environment per the Mason County Shoreline
Master Program. The properties to the north and south are not developed and are well forested.
The shoreline buffer for this site is determined by a line starting at the roof eaves of the
residence and connecting to the 100-foot setback point on the properties to the north and south.
Prior to the recent addition, a cabin with a deck area collectively occupying 732 square feet,
and a 100 square-foot storage shed were present within the property. The features nearest to
the shoreline were the cabin and deck, the cabin 44-feet and the deck 35 feet from the
shoreline.
The wetland community in the immediate vicinity of the project area is contiguous with the
estuarine wetland associated with the mouth of Coulter Creek. This overall complex includes
forested wetlands supported by groundwater seepage as well as estuarine wetlands supported
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618,Office:360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Habitat Management Plan
Mason County, Washington
TWC 16
Page 5 of 12
by the tidal regime. Given the presence of tidal water regime within the overall complex, the
entire wetland was rated as an estuarine wetland under the Wetlands with Special
Characteristics portion of the state rating form (See attached rating form). Due to the overall
size, relatively undisturbed nature, and habitat characteristics, the wetland in the vicinity of the
project area meets criteria for a Category 1 Wetland. As the subject property, as well as the
surrounding properties, is less than one acre in size, the buffer of 250 feet for this wetland has
been assigned based on High Impact Development.
4.0 Applicable Setbacks
This project site is within the jurisdiction of Mason County. The applicable FWHCA setback
for this project is as follows:
Habitat Type Buffer Building Setback
Saltwater Shoreline 44 feet(roof eaves)measured back to 100'to north and south 15'
7-7--77--7-
-Category 1 Estuarine Wetland 250' 15'
5.0 Species Information
The following descriptions relate to species of importance or with a listing status with potential
relevancy to the project area.
Puget Sound Chinook(Oncorhynchus tshawytsha)-Threatened
Listed as threatened since March 24, 1999, adult Puget Sound Chinook spawn in several rivers
and streams flowing into Puget Sound. No significant spawning areas exist in proximity to the
project site. The portion of the property most significant to Chinook is the nearshore area, as it
represents migration and foraging habitat. Chinook have been documented in both Coulter
Creek and Sherwood Creek. These fish are assumed to be of hatchery origin and not managed
as a wild stock by state or tribal fisheries managers. No modifications to the shoreline have
occurred that would cause any loss in shoreline habitat.
Surf Smelt( ipomesus pretiosus)
Surf smelt spawn year round on high intertidal beaches of sand and gravel. Juvenile surf smelt
rear in nearshore areas while feeding on plankton. Surf smelt are the food source for a variety
of other marine species such as Chinook salmon. The renewal of fine beach sediments is
important to surf smelt habitat.
The Washington Administrative Code Hydraulic Code Rules now include consideration of surf
smelt habitat in the permitting of in-water construction activities, which this proposal is not.
Identified surf smelt spawning sites have been given "no net loss" protection. Construction of
bulkheads and other such shoreline armoring can bury spawning habitat, increase erosion at the
base of the bulkhead, and prevent the renewal of fine beach sediments. No bulkhead
PO Box 2854,Belfair.WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618,Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Habitat Management Plan
Mason County, Washington
TWC 16
Page 6 of 12
construction or shoreline armoring has occurred or is proposed. This area is not identified as a
surf smelt spawning site.
Bull Trout(Salvelinus con uentis)- Threatened
The Coastal-Puget Sound distinct population segment (DPS) of bull trout is the only
anadromous (utilize fresh and marine habitats) population of bull trout within the continental
United States. Bull trout within this DPS rear in natal streams and then migrate to the saltwater
environment to mature. Bull trout require clean cold water associated with mountain streams
and need an unobstructed passage both upstream and downstream. These habitat requirements
have made the bull trout very susceptible to habitat change and degradation. Bull Trout are not
documented in proximity to the project site. Given that Bull Trout are not present, no impacts
to Bull Trout are predicted to result from this project.
Bald Eagle(Haliaeetus leucocephalus) - Threatened
Habitat areas associated with Bald Eagle include uneven aged coniferous stands with some old-
growth components. Nests are typically constructed in larger trees with dead or broken tops
providing an unobstructed view of nearby water. Snags and trees with exposed lateral limbs, or
dead tops are used as perches and defense stations. The northern portion of Case Inlet as well
as the Sherwood Creek watershed support important nesting and roosting habitat due to
proximity to marine foraging areas and presence of intact forested habitat. The project site is of
sufficient distance from these areas to avoid any impact to Bald Eagle associated with
completed construction activities.
Marbled Murrelet(Brach ramphus marmoratus)-Threatened
Marbled Murrelets are typically associated with coastal habitats and nest in old-growth forests.
Murrelets may fly as far as 50 miles inland to nest, however the average distance is roughly 5-
miles from nest to sea. It is only during the summer breeding months that they are commonly
found inland. During non-nesting seasons they live at sea. Murrelets require tall mossy trees
in coniferous old growth forests with thick branches where they can construct a cup nest 20-40
meters above the forest floor.
Murreletts have been documented laying eggs on rocky ground habitats only when a sufficient
forest is unavailable.
There are no documented nesting sites in vicinity to the project site. No potential nesting sites
occur within the project area. Given the lack of use of the site and no removal of habitat
suitable for nesting, this project has had no adverse impact on Marbled Murrelet.
Northern Spotted Owl (Stria occidentalis caurina)-Threatened
Spotted owls require a large amount of land for their nesting and hunting grounds; pairs may
occupy up to 58 sq. km. They are territorial and do not migrate, but they may shift their ranges
slightly in response to seasonal changes.
PO Box 2854,Belfair,WA 98528 cell: 360-620-0618,Office:360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Habitat Management Plan
Mason County, Washington
TWC 16
Page 7 of 12
Suitable spotted owl habitat includes trees relatively large in diameter in the stand, multi-
layered forest canopy with a moderate to high canopy closure in overstory, midstory, and
understory, large, tall, live trees with cavities, broken tops, mistletoe, or platforms of branches
capable of holding accumulated organic matter suitable for use as a nest. Dead standing trees
and fallen decayed trees supporting abundant populations of prey species are critical to spotted
owl populations. The site currently maintains some forested components; however, critical
habitat features that would support spotted owl are not present. The road noise and residential
use surrounding the project site limits potential for optimal spotted owl habitat to transpire over
time. Spotted owls are not documented within or in proximity to the site. Given the above
referenced circumstances, no impacts to spotted owl or their habitats are predicted to have
resulted from this project.
6.0 Potential Proiect Impacts
Vegetation Disturbance
Vegetation disturbance has included both native shrubs such as sword fern, evergreen
huckleberry and salal as well as non-native herbaceous species such as creeping buttercup and
reed cannarygrass. No overstory tree removal has occurred. The majority of non-native
species were located within areas of the landscape block walls and associated fill. Prior to the
walls and fill these areas had been used for vehicle parking, utilities,and lawn.
Native communities were located throughout the area of the gravel walkway along the
bulkhead and in proximity to the cement walkway. The lawn area between the cabin and the
shoreline consisted of interspersed native plant patches as well.
Noise Pollution
An increase in noise from construction activities likely occurred during daylight construction
hours. Species utilizing the project area have likely become locally adapted to human caused
noise based on the presence of the adjacent road and proximity to the Allyn UGA.
Temporary Increase in Sediment and Turbidity
The work had potential to temporarily increase turbidity and suspended sediment within the
project area. There are no indicators of erosion impacts such as sediment deposits or
inadvertent drainage channels within the project area.
7.0 Mitigation Measures
7.1 Recommended Best Management Practices
Best Management Practices for this project are as follows:
• Minimize amount of erodible soils at any given time to the maximum extent feasible.
• Do not apply any chemicals when there is a possibility of rain.
• Comply with all permits and requirements of the local governing authority.
PO Box 2854,Belfair, WA 98528 cell: 360-620-0618,Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Habitat Management Plan
Mason County, Washington
lVVC 16
Page 8 of 12
7.2 Buffer Restoration
To compensate for the non-permitted work within regulated buffers, it is recommended that
two areas be enhanced with native vegetation. The areas are identified in Appendix B as
Buffer Enhancement Area A and Buffer Enhancement Area B. The buffer enhancement areas
collectively occupy approximately 1600 square feet. The following species may be used within
the enhancement zone:
Shrubs: salal (Gaultheria shallop)
evergreen huckleberry(Vaccinium ovatum)
sword fern (Polystichum munitum)
nootka rose(Rosa nutkana)
salmonberry(Rubus spectabilis)
Pacific Willow(Salix lusida)
Hooker willow(Salix hookeriana)
Scouler willow(Salix scouleriana)
Sitka willow(Salix sitchensis)
beaked hazelnut(Corylus cornuta)
Indian Plumb(Oemleria cerasiformis)
oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor)
Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitatus)
California black currant(Ribes bracteosum)
western thimbleberry(Rubus parviflorus)
red elderberry(Sambucus racemosa)
Use a minimum of 5 different species from this list.
Ferns: sword fern (Polystichum munitum)
PO Box 2854,Belfair, WA 98528 cell: 360-620-0618,Office:360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Habitat Management Plan
Mason County, Washington
TWC 16
Page 9 of 12
f� d
M gg
ty j
f � f
Photo 6. Buffer Enhancement Area A
3�
Photo 7. Buffer Enhancement Area B
Native Planting Guidelines
Plantings should be installed within the identified mitigation zone to achieve a density of 3-5
feet between each shrub and fern. It is recommended that 1-gallon potted plants be used to
PO Box 2854, Belfair. WA 98528 cell: 360-620-0618,Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Habitat Management Plan
Mason County, Washington
TWC 16
Page 10 of 12
maximize plant survival. This will eventually provide a moderately dense shrub community
similar to what exists throughout the surrounding area.
Supplemented plants yield the highest survival if planted during winter dormancy. The
optimum time for planting is during February and March. Invasive species such as Himalayan
blackberry should be removed from the restoration zone and continuously prevented from
becoming established. It is recommended that they be uprooted verses cut off.
8.0 Monitoring
Monitoring of the site will be required as a condition of permit approval. Monitoring will
begin the first fall following project completion and maintained on an annual basis for three
years. The information gathered will provide the following: 1) condition of newly installed
plants within the Buffer Restoration Zone; 2) the use of the site by wildlife species; 3) any
unforeseen effect on the shoreline or associated buffer caused by the completed project; 4) any
occurrence of exotic species within the Buffer Restoration Zone; 5) any corrective measures
that may be deemed necessary to provide desired conditions. This monitoring will be in effect
for the duration of three years. The information gathered will be provided in an annual report
and submitted to the Director of Mason County Department of Community Development.
9.0 Conclusion
The completed work includes the expansion of an existing deck, installation of two landscape
block walls, the establishment of a concrete walkway, and the establishment of a gravel
walkway/runoff control feature.
Compensatory mitigation includes approximately 1,600 square feet of buffer enhancement
through revegetation using native species. No impacts to water quality, shoreline habitat, or the
use of the site by listed species are predicted to have resulted from this project.
Mitigation Measures, Restoration Measures, and Best Management Practices have been
identified to avoid and compensate for impacts associated with the completed work. A site
map in Appendix B shows locations of project components in relation to the property.
I trust this information is sufficient for your needs at this time. Thank you for choosing The
Wetland Corps as your habitat consultant.
Lee Boad
Senior Ecologist
PO Box 2854,Belfair,WA 98528 cell: 360-620-0618,Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Habitat Management Plan
Mason County, Washington
TWC 16
Page 11 of 12
Attached: Appendix A: Site Vicinity Map
Appendix B: Site Plan
Appendix C: WDFW Priority Habitat and Species Map
Appendix D: National Wetlands Inventory Map
PO Box 2854,Belfair, WA 98528 cell: 360-620-0618,Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
REFERENCES
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service document FWS/OBS-79/31. 84 pp. Washington, D.C.
Hitchcock, L.C. and A. Cronquist, 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest.
University of Washington Press.. 730 pp.
Hruby, T., 2004. Washington State Weiland Rating System for Western Washington-
Revised Washington State Department of Ecology Publication#04-06-025.
Munsell Soil Color Charts, 1998. GretagMacbeth. New Windsor, New York.
Pojar, J. and A. MacKinnon, 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Lone
PinePublishing. 528 pp. Vancouver, British Columbia.
Speare-Cooke, S., 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of
Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society.
417 pp.
US Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Pierce
County Area, Washington. September, 1977.
US Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. 1978.
Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997. Washington State Wetland
Identification and Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication#96-94,
various pagination. Olympia, Washington.
Washington State Department of Ecology, 1993. Washington State Wetlands
Rating System, Western Washington Second Edition. 61 pp.Ecology
Publication#93-74. Olympia, Washington.
Washington State Department of Ecology, 1999. Methods for Assessing
Wetland Functions for Reverine and Depressional Wetlands in the
Lowlands of Western Washington. Ecology Publication#99-115. Olympia,
Washington.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 1993. National List of Plant Species that
Occur in Wetlands Region 9-Northwest. Resource Management Group
PO Box 2854 Beh'&,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618-Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com
(lapozone .. ,
Approximate Parcel
Location
r -
Ot
N
( mile " , -- .�I �' . 'Alin tl'
1 C
FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP
Project Name: Johnson Cabin Project
Location: Allyn,Washington
Project: TWC07-W91
Client: Jack Johnson
THE WETLAND CORPS Date: 12/07
JACK JOHNSON MASON COUNTY WA PAGE
LAN -ANDSCAPING PLAN
' TACOMA CITY LIGHT R/W CABIN REMODEL PLA,h,
ob r,�a i ONVEVAY
<� r C fASENOYt A.r. 37477 '
�J TwEs. &.SMFB 17
44
IMSIM A 1 S Cl��iAf�4rpLpp4I(M'A"pAL I�
r�iOW AREA 45 0 rr. {"truYOFF coo►x
0 / uwmwc r�l
y tt' $ GWS AWA 11,
TMMS, M- HES
Buffer
Enhancement
Area B
iRFFSi, fl=.SNFS ,EK�STING 5"C�5
NORTH cwW INO • �1C Y S
JOR r kQRrtt MY WIGHWAY vAttrc
WA SON COUM" WASHCTON
T J
AK °ARCEti M122174400020 rzmN.:tAery � -. I�' �cwwaE to
/t
�� � t y CxSThG .9G BJ.lglCati
M s. BUSHES I t
r r',
^ 11 MOM tl CASE INLET
cci eau Se�C 5p. Ft.
r I
t � -NFFS, flUSMFS tt^. QA1:AM, 5J
PROPAAE tAN Buffer Ia
Enhancement
TABLE OF CONTENTS: �
Area A
WAGE 1: SITE PLAN, LANDSCAPING P AN ea..r_ *"*Ay
PAGE 2. CABIN FLOOR FLAN, ELEVA'r10NS
PAGE 3. TYPICAL SECTION, ELEVATIONS iF*F5, easy 7
SITE PLAN, LANDSCAPING PLAN
__,_..... __.SCALE i INCH - 20 FEET
--T%4ap Legend r ;
UPlNAME ' TPEF-- t
• CONUS CrtiCa
CONUS States 100K u ''
C1 Approximate c. %
Lower 48 Welland Polygons Parcel Location
tsturin•and Marine t7e•pwat•r
Estuarine and Marine*•hand
i, 342
treshwa0tr EmaryentlNeUand r s
f re%hwster ForastedtStrrub Wetland
Freshw E2USA,ate+Pond %' 1
Other
Rlverine WashingtonPUBHH
r
1 ' 3oz
Allyn,
a•
r
f
2
m • I
PSSC
T N
71
(] 0.-)5 mile ryw rr
122'49'30"W
Figure adapted from NWI Figure 3 National Wetland Inventory Map
Mapper website Section 17 Township 22N Range 01W
FIGURE 3 NWI MAP
Project Name: Johnson Cabin Project
Location: Allyn,Washington
o4or Project: TWC07-W91
Client: Jack Johnson
Date' 12i07
THE WETLAND CORPS
e
S r
�u
f '�K4 rt
� t
a
� f
Approximate
Parcel Location
a -
's
Y ff +•
t
f
Soil Onsite Conditions based on Mason County Soil Survey
Subject Site Soils:
Ac - Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes. The Alderwood series consists of brown, well-drained,
upland soils. They have developed from mixed gravelly glacial till dominated by acid igneous rock. The imbedded gravel is
mainly granite and quartzite. Rainfall is 45 to 60 inches a year. The native vegetation is a dense forest consisting almost
entirely of Douglas-fir and a dense understory of salal, Oregon-grape, vine maple, and huckleberry. Northeast of the Hood
Canal the understory is mainly rhododendron.Alderwood soils occupy the extensive rolling glacial moraines,and they are the
dominant soils in the eastern part of the county. The Alderwood soils are associated with the somewhat excessively drained
Everett and Indianola soils and with the moderately well drained Kitsap soils. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30
percent slopes (Ac).-This soil varies more in depth, but otherwise it is similar to Alderwood gravelly sandy loams, 5 to 15
percent slopes.
Everett gravelly loamy sand,5 to 15 percent slopes(Ee).-This soil is.similar to Everett gravelly loamy sand,0 to 5 percent
slopes, but its profile is more variable and the thicknesses of the surface soil and subsoil are slightly less. The Everett series
consists of somewhat excessively drained, pale-brown gravelly soils. They occur as inextensive gravel ridges on the glacial
moraines or,more commonly,as fairly continuous outwash channels between ridges of Alderwood soils.They have developed
upon assorted glacial till and outwash material. The rainfall is 45 to 60 inches a year. The vegetation is mainly drought-
resistant madrone, manzanita, and kinnikinnick. Everett soils are droughty because the loose gravel and sandy subsoil and
substratum offer little resistance to downward movement of water.The capacity of the surface soil to hold available moisture is
low. Everett soils are in the eastern half of the county, in association with the Alderwood soils. They also occur in intricate
patterns with the Kitsap and Indianola soils.Compared to the Grove soils,the Everett soils have a paler surface soil and subsoil
and,in development,were dominated more by acid igneous parent rock.
FIGURE 4 SOIL SURVEY
Project Name:Johnson Cabin Project
Location: Allyn,Washington
Project: TWC07-W91
Client: Jack Johnson
THE W ETL_A.N D CORPS' Date: 12/07
Approximate
parcel
!��t 706528 70882 {170552 524 -h 70882 -F 7 �28 locations 17Qt372:
... F =
(5
1 5 8 7 00 1708502 170 + 1706608�' 170 7 0 17
�+
f.
� $Puget,Svu ad�
get gnu ad s'
0 a 05684 F + 68+4 705585 1705888 _ 78 170578:
F
�J`f0 58 5680 2 1705854 1705666 705868 " {17 5750
+
$Lake Ande rsv nL,Jr � 1705752
' f `'
SOIIs
STREAMS Hydric Soils MANSPORTATION
Stream Water Type 1-°(Ha:-:tde; Highly Unstable Paved Road
Highly Erodible
Stream h•pe nk—uawn(Ea-t s:de, i �Un;�b:e& 09 U1ilaved Road
L• y Erodible
/ Stream Water Type: IV-es:side, �� No Data or Gravel Pirs .1,�Road(Surface Unbiow )
Stream Type U-A-nanv(n'es:side, - Ab UIdoneil Road
Otphailed Road
Trail
FIGURE 5 DNR STREAM MAP
Project Name: Johnson Cabin Project
Location: Allyn,Washington
.A*O Project: TWC07-W91
Client: Jack Johnson
THE I Nr E 1 L- N D CO R 1'; Date: 12/07
Note: No streams mapped within project
vicinity.
WETLAND RATING FORM—WESTERN WASHINGTON
Name of wetland(if known): Johnson Cabin Project
Location: SEC: 17 TWNSHP:22N_ RNGE:2 W_ (attach map with outline of wetland to rating form)
Person(s)Rating Wetland: H. Lane Affiliation: TWC Date of site visit: 12/26/07
SUMMARY OF RATING
Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland
I II III IV
Category I= Score> 70 Score for Water Quality Functions
Category II= Score 51 -69 Score for Hydrologic Functions
Category III= Score 30—50 Score for Habitat Functions
Category IV= Score<30 TOTAL Score for Functions
Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland
I X II Does not apply
Filial Category(choose the "highest"category from above") I
Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated.
Wetland T Wetland Class
Estuarine X De sessional
Natural Heritage Wetland Riverine
-Bog Lake-fringe
Mature Forest Sloe X
Old Growth Forest Flats
Coastal Lagoon Freshwater Tidal
Interdunal
None of the above
Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below?
If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the
regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland.
Check List for Wetlands that Need Special Protection, YES NO
and That are Not Included in the Ratio
SPl. Has the wetland been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or
Endangered plant or animal species(TIE species)? X
For the purposes of this rating system,"documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate
state or federal database.
SP2. Has the wetland been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered
plant or animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the X
wetland is on the appropriate state database.
SP3. Does the is,etland contain individuals o Priority species listed by the WDFW or the state? X
SP4. Does the wetland have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the
wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or X
in a local management plan as Navin ial significance.
To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the
Hydroseomorphic Class of the wetland I * rg ated
The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands in to those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions
needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key
below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands.
• Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington
Wetland Name: Johnson Cabin Project Date: 12/26/07
1. Are the water levels in the wetland usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)?
— YES—the wetland class is Tidal Fringe
If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt(parts per thousand)?
YES—Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO—Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine)
If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is a
Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second
editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine
wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions,and this separation is being kept in this revision. To
maintain consistency between editions,the term"Estuarine"wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the
characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed(see p. �.
2. Is the topography within the wetland flat and precipitation is only source (>90%)of water to it.
— YES—The wetland class is Flats
If your wetland can be classified as a"Flats"wetland,use the form for Depressional wetlands.
3. Does the wetland meet both of the following criteria?
The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water(without any vegetation on the
surface) where at least 20 acres(8ha)are permanently inundated(ponded or flooded);
At least 30%of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)?
YES—The wetland class is Lake-fringe(Lacustrine Fringe)
4. Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria?
X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual).
X The water flows through the wetland in one direction(unidirectional)and usually comes from seeps. It may
flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a Swale without distinct banks.
X The water leaves the wetland without being impounded?
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and
shallow depressions or behind hummocks(depressions are usually<3 ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep).
NO—go to 5
5. Is the wetland in a valley, or stream channel,where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river? The
flooding should occur at least once every two years, on the average,to answer"yes". The wetland can contain
depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding.
NO—go to 6 YES—The wetland class is Riverine
6. Is the wetland in a topographic depression in which water ponds,or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year.
This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland.
NO—go to 7 YES—The wetland class is Depressional
7. Is the wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depressional and no stream or river running through it and
providing water. The wetland seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched,but
has no obvious natural outlet.
No—go to 8 YES—The wetland class is Depressional
8. Your wetland seems to be difficult to classify. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine
floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. Sometimes we find
characteristics of several different hydrogeomorphic classes within one wetland boundary. Use the following table to
identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland.
NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10%or more of the total area
of the wetland being rated. If the area of the second class is less than 10%classify the wetland using the first class.
HGM Classes Within a Delineated Wetland Bound Class to Use in Rating
Slope+Riverine Riverine
Slope+Depressional Depressional
Slope+Lake-fringe Lake-frin e
Depressional+Riverine along stream within boundary De ressional
Depressional+Lake-frin e Depressional
t ater-'idal at as ES
If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes
within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating.
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below
and circle the appropriate answers and Category.
Wetland Type—Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate
criteria are met.
C1 Estuarine wetlands? (see p.87)
Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?
X The dominant water regime is tidal,
X Vegetated,and
X With a salini eater than 0.5 t.
NO
SC I A Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge,National Park,National Estuary Reserve,Natural Area
Preserve,State Park or Educational,Environmental,or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332- Cat. 1
30-151?
YES =Category I go
SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions?
NO=Category II Cat. I
X The wetland is relative y un sturbed(has no diking ditching,filling,cultivation,grazing,and has
less than 10°/a cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native parting spp,_are only species Cat. H
that cover more than 10%of the wetland,then the wetland should be given a dual rating(Utt)
The area of Spartma would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh
with native species would be a Category 1. Do not,however,exclude the area of Spartma in
determining the size threshold of 1 acre. Dual
X At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 R. buffer of shrub,forest,or un-grazed Rating
or un-mowed grassland I/II
X The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels,depressions with open water,
or contiguous freshwater wetlands.
C2 Natural Heritage Wetlands(see p. 88)
Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural heritage Program/DNR as
either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened,Endangered,or
Sensitive plant species.
SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This
question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHPIDNR.)
S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site
YES Contact WNHP/DNR(see p. 88)and go to SC 2.2 NO X
SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened
or endangered plant species? Cat I
YES =Category 1 NO X
C3 Bogs(seep. 88)
Does the wetland(or part of the wetland)meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use
the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the
wetland based on its function.
1. Does the wetland have organic soil horizons(i.e.layers of organic soil),either peats or mucks,that
compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See A endix B for a field key to
identify organic soils)? YES=go to question 3
2. Does the wetland have organic soils,either pests or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over
bedrock,or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash,or that are floating on a lake or
pond? YES=go to question 3
3. Does the wetland have more than 70%cover of mosses at ground level,AND other plants,if
present,consist of the"bog"species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation
(more than 30%of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)?
YES=Is a bog for purpose of rating NO=go to question 4
NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that
criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hold dug at least 16"deep. If the pH is
less than 5.0 and the"bog"plant species in Table 3 are present,the wetland is a bog.
4. Is the wetland forested(>30%cover)with sitka spruce,subalpine fir,western red cedar,western
hemlock,lodgepole pine,quaking aspen,Englemann's spruce,or western white pine. WITH any of
the species(or combination of species)on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant
component of the ground cover(>30%coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? Cat. I
YES=Category I NO=Is not a bog for purpose of rating
6 Fo* sted Wetlands(see p. 96)
Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish
and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats?. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland
based on its function.
Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least two three species forming a
multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings;with at least 8 trees/acre(20 trees/hectare)
that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height(dbh)of 32 inches(81 cm or
more).
NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees
in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW
criterion is and"OR"so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter.
Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80—200 years old
OR have an average diameters(dbh)exceeding 21 inches(53 cm);crown cover may be less than
100%;decay,decadence,numbers of snags,and quantity of large downed material is generally
less than that found in old-growth. Cat. I
YES=Category I NO=X
C5 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons(see p. 92)
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
The wetland lies in a depressional adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated
from marine waters by sandbanks gravel banks,shingle,or,less frequently,rocks
The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish(>0.5
ppt)during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon(needs to be measured near the
bottom)
YES=Go to SC 5.1 NO X not a wetland in a coastal lagoon
SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?
The wetland is relatively undisturbed(has no diking,ditching,filling,cultivation,grazing)and has
less than 20%cover of invasive plant species(see list of invasive species on p. 74).
At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub,forest,or un-grazed
or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I
The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre(4350 square ft.)
YES=Category I NO =Category II Cat. II
C6 Interdunal Wetlands (see p. 94)
Is the wetland west of the 1889 line(also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or
WBUO)?
YES=Go to SC 6.1 NO X not an interdunal wetland for rating
Ijyou answer yes you wiU still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.
In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:
. Long Beach Peninsula--lands west of SR 103
. Grayland-Westport--lands west of SR 105
. Ocean Shores-Copahs—lands west of SR 115 and SR 109
SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger,or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger?
YES=Category II NO =go to SC 6.2 Cat.II
SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre,or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre?
YES=Category III Cat. III
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
Choose the "highest"rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. 1.
if you answered NO for all types enter"Not Applicable"on p. 1