HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008.07.09 - Email from Richard Mraz of Ecology to John McDonaghWetland 3rd Party review
Pat lolavera
Page 1 of6
From: John McDonagh
Sent: Wednesday, JulY 09, 2008 3:05 PM
To: Pat lolavera
Subject: FW: Wetland 3rd Party review for Hastings Road site
Earu b
From : Mraz, Richard A. (ECY) [mailto: rmra46 1@ECY.WA'GOV]
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 12:59 PM
To: John McDonagh
Cc: Judy Surber; westech@westechcompany.com; wdploggy@olypen.com; Lund, Perry (ECY)
Subject: FW: Wetland 3rd Party review for Hastings Road site
Hello John,
I attach my previous e-mail to provide context for this further discussion. I first became involved with
this site inAugust 2007 as 3rd party reviewer of a delineation and rating by Mr. David Loggy' You
recently proviled me with urroth.t field review, conducted by Westech Co.,_o_f.the site in question on
Hastings Road. This latest investigation occurred in February and March of this year and found none of
the ovJrt hydrologic evidence described in the e-mail below. As a result, Westech's rating was a
Category IV (similar to Mr. Loggy's conclusion) since the wetland did not score as high for hydrologic
storage, water qualrty or habitat functions.
As I discussed in the earlier e-mail, when one visits a wetland, it must be rated based on the conditions
present at the time of rating. As noted below, when I visited the site, there was sufficient evidence of
iong-term inundation to reach certain conclusions about depth and duration of inundation. Extensive
algil mats were present. Algal deposits are most often seen in seasonally ponded depressions,
inlerdunal swalds, tidal areal, hke fringes, and low-gradient stream margins. They reflect prolonged wet
conditions sufficient for algal growth and development, generally 2 to 3 months.
In his revised report, it was suggested by Mr. Loggy that the hydrology for the site-was atypical.
Rainfall data fof the previous 5 years do not appear to indicate that the unusual hydrology was
precipitation driven. It was also suggested thifrecent ditch maintenance may have recently introduced a
iurg" .rolu-e of water into the site.
Based
on the recent series of investigations, including a bnef visit
thai I conducted on April4, 2008, the hydrology I observed back in2007 may, in fact, be atypical.
It does appear that a large volume of water (the evidence of which I noted) may occasionally enter and
reside in ftris wetland. Il certainly happened some time in2007. Whether this was a unique event or
will occur with some regularity is difficult to say. As I suggested below, "one option to confirm this
possibility would be to monitor the wetland and collect hydrology data over the next several years".
i{o*"r,'"t, I acknowledge that this may not be practical and may work contrary to both the property
owner's and the City's interests.
The source of the seasonal ponding in this wetland is likely a large "slug" of water that enters the
depression after moving through a series of ditches that connect with other wetlands. The timing and
frequency of such utt oc"*tett"e is difficult to predict and may (as Mr. Loggy suggested) be a result of
rprt "u*
maintenance activities. During my most recent observation I noted that the upstream, offsite
drainage ditch was holding a large volume of water (almost bankfull) while the onsite ditch had only 2-
71912008
Wetland 3rd Party review Page2of6 ,
4" of water and the ditch in the wetland was only saturated at the surface.
The primary hydrologic inputs into this system are manipulated and unpredictable. The current
prevailing evidence appears to indicate that seasonal ponding is less frequent than the conditions
observed in August 2007. To know for certain, the site would have to be monitored for evidence of
seasonal ponding in 5 out of l0 years (question D 1.4 on the rating form). However, I will concur that
the "normal" conditions that exist in this wetland are accurately represented by the Category IV rating
provided by Dr. Shea and Mr. Loggy. I agree that the soils on the fringe of the wetland do not exhibit
characteristics of seasonal ponding. I would note that it is likely the wetland will continue to
occasionally contain water of sufficient depth and duration as that which caused algal mat
formation. The City should consider this possible condition is reviewing any "downstream" proposals or
proposals to alter this wetland.
Please let me know if you have any questions or require clarification of these statements.
Rick Mraz
Wetlands,/Shorelaods Specialist
SLorelarrds and Environmental
Assistance Pro{lram
Southwest Regional O(ice
500)407-6nt
r-ra4Ol@ecv.wa.{lov
From: Mraz, Richard A. (ECY)
Sent: Friday, August 3L,2007 9:21 AM
Toi 'Suzanne Wassmer'
Cc: Judy Surber; Lund, Perry (ECY)
Subject: RE: Wetland 3rd Pafi review
Suzanne
The primary issues on which the rating hinges are the extent and duration of ponding within the wetland.
lhe supplemental work by Loggy cites rainfall values and infers ponding characteristics within the
wetland. The report notes that rainfall levels in recent years cannot be cited as having caused increases in
the wetland hydrology. The suggested cause is recent dirch maintenance, which is purported to have
innoduced additional water into the subject wetland. Also, the possibility of a blockage of oudlow was
mentioned. 'fhe presence of a recently maintained ditch provides an interesting aspect to this situation. It
could be argued that when the ditch was regularly maintained, the subject wetland was larger in size. Once
ditch maintenance lapsed, the wetland hydrology diminished. However, soils in the areas of the most
landward extent of the mats also evinced hydric character. These features are less temporal and suggest
that such pondingas was observed during my visit is a normal circumstance.
Given the information provided, it is not possible to conclusively assert that the hydrology that I observed
is alypical. When one visits a wetland, it must be rated it based on the conditions present at the time of
rating. I acknowledge that Mr. Logy did not encounter the conspicuous algal mats during his visir
However, this does not change my conclusion that the wetland at the time of my inspection was larger than
the delineation. I make this assertion based not only on the presence of algae mats but the presence of
71912008
Wetland 3rd Party review Page 3 of6
hydric soils. The algal mats and amphibian population, which indicate larger areal and longer duration
inundation may reflect the new normal circumstances.
If legal ditch maintenance has re-established a certain level of hydrology to this system, then this can be
considered the new normal circumstance. One option to confirm this possibility would be to monitor the
wetland and collect hydrology data over the next several years.
it{hile the wetland is a Category III, it is a very low function III (32 points total,wf t habitat points). It
could benefit significantly from enhancement. I note that Port Townsend's Critical Areas Ordinance
allows for buffer reduction when enhancement is implemented. This wbtland seems to be a candidate for
that approach.
Please let me know if you have any questions or require clarification of these statements.
Rick Mraz
Wetla"ds,/Shorelaods Specialist
Shorelands and Enwironmental
Assistance Pro5lram
Southwest Re5ional Of{ice
500\407-on|
rmra40l@eca.wa.{lov
From: Suzanne Wassmer [mailto:swassmer@cityofpt.us]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28,2007 9:30 AM
To: Mraz, Richard A. (ECY)
Subject: RE: Wetland 3rd Pafi review
OK, thank you!
please see attached. ln addition to the Loggy report I have included a couple of pages from owner Carol Wise,
and a letter from the former resident of the property who apparently lived there 60+ years.
Suzanne
Original Message----
From: Mraz, Richard A. (ECY) [mailto: rmra461@ECY.WA.GOV]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28,2007 9:15 AM
To: Suzanne Wassmer; JudY Surber
Cc: Lund, Perry (ECY)
Subject: RE: Wetland 3rd Pafi review
Hi Suzanne,
I will be glad to review the additional materials prepared by Loggy Soil and Wetland Consulting.
Sending the information by e-mail would be best and would allow me to provide the quickest reply.
Rick Nkaz
Wetlaods/Shorelaods Special ist
Shorelaodt and Enwironmental
Assistance Pro{tram
71912008
V/etland 3rd Party review Page 4 of6
Southwest Re6lional O{{ice
360j407-O?, |
rmra4Ol@ecu.wa.{tov
From : Suzanne Wassmer [mailto : swassmer@cityofpt. us]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28,2007 9:09 AM
To: Mraz, Richard A. (ECY); Judy Surber
Cc: Lund, Perry (ECY)
Subject: RE: Wetland 3rd Pafi review
HiRick,
This email is in regards to the Gammage Estate site that you visited with us June 20, 2007.
Attached is a recent letter sent to the owner of the property that gives some explanation about what has
happened since the site visit.
The owners of the property are questioning the Category lll rating.
We're wondering if you are available to review materials prepared by Loggy Soil and Wetland Consulting.
His report discusses how the neighboring property could have affected the Gammage Estate and wetland
rating.
lf you are available, please let me know your schedule and the best way to forward materials to you (email,
fax, mail?)
Thank you!
Suzanne
Original Message-----
From: Mraz, Richard A. (ECY) [mailto:rmra461@ECY.WA.GOV]
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 B:41 AM
To: Judy Surber
Cc: Suzanne Wassmer; Lund, Perry (ECY)
Subject: Wetland 3rd Party review
HelloJudy,
I vwite to summarize my review of the wetland delineation and rating for the Gammirge
Estate site. These comments are offered in consideration of our site visit, conducted
onJnne 20,2007 and anoffice reviewof awetlanddelineationandratingreportmade
by Loggy Soil and Wetland Consulting. The reportis dated September 25,2006.
I will address the delineation first and in doing so I will refer to Figure 2, the
location/description map in the delineation report. During our site visit, I located
many of the te st holes reported on Figure 2 and dug additional holes in areas that were
identified as outside the delineated wetland.
In general, I found that the wetland was larger than indicated on Figure 2. I assert this
because several of the areas where I dug tests holes ouLside of the delineated wetland,
met the three wetland pirameters, which are: presence of hydrology, hydric soils and a
dominant hydrophytic vegetation community. Specific areas where the wetland is
underrepresented are as follows:
West-northwest of test hole #6 - this area displayed hydric soils: 10YR 2l2 wrth 2-
20% distinct redoximorphic features (7.5YR 3/4). Ttre soil was saturated at a depth of
8" at the time of investigation. Algal mats were present on the surface and suspended
in the vegetation at a height of 8-10" above the surface. This area was vegetated
719t2008
Wetland 3rd Party review
primarily with reedcanarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), but also contained
areas of Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana, FAC). The wetland extends further west and
northwest at least 15-20 feet.
East of test hole #3 - This area displayed hydric soils: 10YR 2/1. The soil was
saturated at a depth of 8". Algal mats were present on the surface and suspended in the
vegetation at a height of 1' above the surface. Vegetation was similar to the area
west of test hole #6 but a greater percentage of Nootka rose was present.
The area vegetated primarily with Nootka rose and generally west-northwest of test
hole #8 may also be primarily wetland. There is litde if any change in contour and
elevation from this area to the reedcanarygrass-domianted wetlands west of test hole
6. The area is so densely vegetated with this thorny rose that we could not investigate
the soils without sig'nificantly more time .
Areas where I concur with the delineation are as follows:
Test hole #12 is accurate.
Testhole #10 is accurate.
Regarding the consultant's rating of the wetland, several changes are necessary that
affect the rating score. The evidence of ponding is greater than represented in the
rating. This factor affects the water quality, hydrologic and habitat functions scores.
The presence of algal mats at 8-12" above the surface indicates that significant ponding
occurs within the wetland. In consideration of the extent of the algal mats, it is
apparent that at least 1/4 of the total area of the wetland is seasonally ponded (Question
D 1.4 on rating form). The height of the mats demonstrates that the wetland stores
water at depths between 0.5 f-eet to 12 feet (Question D 3.2 on rating form). In
add.ition, during our visit at least a dozen very small pacific chorus frogs were seen in
the lowest area of the wetland. These frogs have a life history that requires
approximately three months of ponding (avg. 37 days for egg laying and harch + 2-2.5
month larval stage).
In consideration of the above indicators, another hydroperiod exists (Question H 1.2)
that is seasonally flooded or inundated. The habitat score is also increased in
consideration of question H2.4. Based on analysis of NWI and GIS mapping,
combined with our exploration of adjacent properties, there are three wetlands within a
U2mtrebutthe connection between them are disturbed.
Regarding the habitat score, I noted errors in the addition in that section. Explanation
of these errors is complicated and I have provided details in a phone conversation with
you. The result of these errors is that, with the addition of another hydroperiod and
notation of other wetlands in the area, the habitat total is 9 points, which is the amount
repor[ed by the consultant.
Page 5 of6
71912008
Wetland 3rd Parly review Page 6 of6,
The ultimate result of the additional points for water quality and hydrologic function, in
combination with the correction of scores for habitat function, is that the wetland scores
32 points and is a Category III.
Thank you for the opportunity to assist the City of Port Townsend. I hust that this
review and conclusion is useful for your purposes. If you have any questions or require
clarification of,these statements, please contact me.
Rick lvkaz
Wetla"ds/Shorelands Specialist
SLorelands and Environmental
Assistance Pro5lram
Southwest Regional O(ice
5001407-o?pt
rmra4Ol@ecu.wa€ov
7/912008