Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWetland and Buffer As-Built Report - SEP Determinations - 6/5/1998 WETLAND and BUFFER MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AS-BUILT REPORT SETTLE INN RV PARK Parcel #42024-43-00100 SE quarter SW quarter SE quarter of Section 24, Township 20N, Range 4W This report has been prepared to meet the requirements of Mason County's Interim Resource Ordinance(#77-93) by Bra J. Murphy of MOSS & MURPHY ENVIRONMENTAL P.O. Box 1058 Gig Harbor, Washington 98335 (253) 858-5340 ME#8271 June 5, 1998 L CONTACT: Mery Settle 1401 Deegan Road E. Shelton, WA 98584 II TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0. Introduction 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Mitigation Goals 1 2.0 Site Description 1 3.0 Installation Sequence 2 4.0 Monitoring Methods 2 5.0 As-Built Conditions 3 5.1 Buffer Mitigation Area 3 5.2 Wetland Area 3 5.3 Invasive Exotics 3 5.4 Potential Problems 4 6.0 Assessment of Success 4 References Figure 1: As-Built Site Plan Table 1: Plant Materials Installed Appendix A: Photo Documentation Appendix B: Monitoring Data 1. INTRODUCTION and MITIGATION GOALS 1.1 Introduction The original wetland report for the Settle RV Park was completed by Moss Environmental in April, 1997. It was verified that Mason County issued a stop work order on March 13, 1996 for violations of filling and alterations to the on site wetlands. The following As-built report covers mitigation that will offset development impacts to approximately 4,000 square feet of the on site Wetland. 1.2 Mitigation Goals Theoverall f restoration i r n ove al oal o thisproject s to provide functionally restored gP J P Y wetlands to compensate for recent impacts to these areas. The restoration plan includes removal of fill that was placed in these areas and the planting of native trees and shrubs in order to reestablish the wetland vegetation community. The specific goals and performance standards are detailed in Table 1. Table 1: Goals and Performance Standards Overall Goal: to restore approximately 2,000 square feet of wetland perimeter along the eastern edge of the existing wetland,and to restore approximately 2,000 square feet of seep wetlands along the southern portion of the wetland. The desired restored vegetation community is a facultative/forested wetland. GOAL PERFORMANCE STANDARD 1. At least 4,000 square feet of wetlands will be Hydric soils,hydrophytic vegetation,and wetland restored on this site. hydrology will be present throughout the designated restoration areas. 2. To restore a multi-layered forested wetland with At least one species of native evergreen trees and three native plant species similar to those present prior to the species of native shrubs will be established in the disturbance. restored wetland. 3. To restore water quality remediation within the Native herb vegetation should attain at least 80%cover. wetland area. Native shrub vegetation should attain at least 45% cover. Native trees should attain at least 45%cover. Soils should be saturated within the restored wetlands for at least two weeks with the rate of flow slow enough to prevent erosion and provide opportunity for nutrient uptake. 4. To avoid invasion of non-native species into the Less than 10%of the mitigation area should be covered restored wetland. with undesirable invasive or weedy species. Invasive species that are potential problems on this site include reed canarygrass(Phalaris arundinacae). Weeds on the 1994 Washington State Noxious Weed List should be removed from the mitigation area. 2. SITE DESCRIPTION The project site is located in the south half of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 24, Township 20N, Range 4W of the Willamette Meridian in Mason County, parcel #42024-43-00100. The site consists of approximately 10 acres in total. The northern four acres have historically been used for receipt of landfill material; the southern half of the site is lower and contains several springs and an existing wetland system that drains toward the west flowing off-site and entering into a seasonal creek that flows north along the west boundary in the easement for Highway 101. A brief historyof the site is contained in the April 23 1997 wetland restoration report. P P 3. INSTALLATION SEQUENCE It was anticipated that the mitigation project was to be installed in May or June of 1997. Actual planting occurred mainly in the early fall of 1997 with additional plantings in the early spring of 1998. Ideally, plants should be installed in the early fall or early spring in order to give them an opportunity to establish root systems prior to the summer dry season. However, it is important that the restoration occur as soon as possible. i i Oct. 1, 1997 Stake restoration area. Install silt fencing around perimeter of existing wetland to be undisturbed as shown on the grading plan. i i Oct. 2-5, 1997 Grading plan as indicated on Attachment 2, will be completed. The grades will be overexcavated by 12 inches to allow for the placement of purchased topsoil. i Oct. 6-8, 1997 Purchased topsoil will be placed to a depth of at least 12 inches throughout the restored wetland areas. Oct. 9-10, 1997 Native plant materials will be installed according to the planting plan as shown on Attachment 3. June 30, 1998 Silt fencing will be removed from the perimeter of the existing wetland. i i 97-4-1005mit/bj m/smh/6/23/98 1 i i i 4. MONITORING METHODS Moss Environmental provided on-going consultation and site visits as necessary during the installation process. Minor alterations were made to the planting plan due to plant availability. This as-built assessment documents existing conditions, including the changes noted above and volunteer plant materials and invasive exotic plant species that are present on the site. Two 50-foot permanent monitoring stations were established; one along the wetland restoration area and one along the seep wetland restoration area of the mitigation project.(Figure 1). Plantings within each monitoring plot were counted, percent cover, native volunteer species were recorded. In addition, soil stability characteristics and hydrology were recorded. 5. AS-BUILT CONDITIONS The following variations were made to the original plan: • A few changes were made due to plant availability in the wetland area. Additional plantings of Douglas fir, Western Hemlock and red Alder were planted in the restoration areas. 5.1 Buffer Mitigation Area Tree and shrub plantings were installed per the planting plan in the wetland restoration area, although some changes were made due to plant availability.. Medium-sized bark mulch was placed around the plantings in the buffer mitigation area (see Attachment 1). 5.2 Wetland Area The restored wetland areas appear to be successfully planted with plants that are shown in Table 1. Some additional plantings were planted that were not called for in the initial Restoration report. Some plants may need irrigation during the dry summer months. The seep area is revegetating well with a grass and clover mix in the herbaceous layer. Plants of both wetland areas are shown as a total number used in Table 1. Some of the additional plantings may not do well where they were planted.(i.e. skunk cabbage which 97-4-1005mit/bjm/smh/6/23/98 2 was planted may be topographically too high in one or two plants. This was noted and not changed as they were additional plantings and are not required in the plan). 5.3 Invasive Exotics At the time of the site visit in October, 1997, and in late April, 1998, there were no invasive exotics in the mitigation area, although Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius) can be found north and west of the migitation area. This, of course, will be continued to be monitored in future monitoring visits. 5.4 Potential Problems At this time, the mitigation effort appears to be successful. Potential problems include invasion by invasive exotics, including Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) and possibly Scot's broom. Additional potential problems could come from erosion associated with the wetland buffer and their slopes(seep area). At the time of the site visit, however, there appeared to be no serious erosion problems throughout the buffer area. 6. ASSESSMENT OF SUCCESS The Settle RV Park wetland restoration and buffer mitigation project has been successfully installed. Plant materials appear to be in good health and thriving in the buffer and wetland areas. A total of four tree species, four shrub species, and 3-6 herb species were installed in the wetland and buffer areas. There are no invasive exotics in the mitigation area at this time, however, this will have to be watched in the future. Irrigation will most likely be required during the summer months. TABLE 1: AS-BUILT PLANTS INSTALLED SPECIES COMMON NAME IND STAT ORIGINAL NUMBER REASON SPECS INSTALLED FOR CHANGE Trees Thuja plicata Western red cedar FAC 40 30 Alnus rubra Red alder FAC 0 20 additional plantings Pseudotsuga menzesii Douglas fir FACU 0 35 additional plantings Tsuga heterophylla Western hemlock FACU 0 1O additional plantings Shrubs Cornus stolonifera Red osier dogwood FACW 84 35 Rubus spectabilis Salmonberry FAC 84 20 Ribes sanguineum Red flowering currant NR 84 60 Salix sps. willow FACW 0 35 Herbs Juncus ensifolius Three-stamen rush FACW 0 165 Ranunculus repens Creeping buttercup FACW 0 100 Tolmiea menzesii Piggy back plant FAC+ 0 >10 97-4-1005 mit/bj m/smh/6/23/98 3 REFERENCES CITED Moss Environmental, 1996. Wetland Buffer and Restoration Plan, for the Gibbens Single Family Residence. Moss Environmental, 1996. Wetland Delineation and Analysis Report for the Gibbens Single Family Residence. Shannon Wilson, Inc., 1996. Wetland Mitigation Report for Graham Town Center. 97-4-1005 mi W j misniW6/23/98 4 GARY YANDO,DIRECTOR P�oN.STgTFO o A o DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVE T u _ o T i PLANNING - SOLID WASTE- UTILITI Zoo N Y oy BLDG. I • 411 N. 5T'j ST. • P.O. BOX 57 � SHELTON, WA 98584 • (360) 427-967 rasa . August 17, 1998 Mery Settle 1401 E Deegan RD Shelton, WA 98584 RE: Wetland and Buffer Mitigation Monitoring Program asaregquf bt_. Mason County for previous violation which occurred in the site. Parcel #42024-43-00100 Dear Mr. Settle: The Mason County Department of Community Development has reviewed the Wetland and Buffer Mitigation Monitoring Program As-Built Report that was prepared to meet the requirements of the Mason County Interim Resource Ordinance (#77-93) by Moss & Murphy Environmental dated 6/5/98 . The report meets the requirements for restoration and monitoring of the wetland which was filled and degraded in the later part of 1996 and early 1997 . Mason County DCD staff met with you on the site this spring and summer and verified the removal of the fill and establishment of the new plantings for the restoration project. I At this time, the violation has been resolved to the point where applications for further development may be submitted to the County for review. Staff recommends that you and/or your representative contact Michael MacSems of the Permit Assistance Center to schedule a pre-application meeting once a complete proposal has been developed meeting the current ordinance requirements. If a complete application with site plan is received prior to the pre-application meeting staff will be better able to assist you with their department 's requirements for development. If you have j any questions please give me a call . Thank you. i I Sincerely, Grace Miller, Planner DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I I CC: Gary Yando, Director DCD