Loading...
Canyon Park Commons (CPBC Ph. 7) Fall 2011 Critical Areas Mitigation Monitoring Report CRITICAL AREAS MITIGATION PLAN FALL 2011 MONITORING REPORT CANYON PARK COMMONS BOTHELL, WASHINGTON CITY OF BOTHELL PERMIT NO. CAAP 2005 -00005 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT NO. 200500908 DOE ORDER NO. 5214 Prepared Fora Canyon Park Development, LLC 22020 17` Ave. SE, Suite 200 Bothell, WA 98021 Prepared By: TALASAEA CONSULTANTS, INC 15020 Bear Creek Road NE. Woodinville, Washington 98077 425 - 861 -7550 2 February 2012 Canyon Park Commons Fall 2011 Monitoring Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. PROJECT OVERVIEW 1 B. REQUIREMENTS. 2 C. SUMMARY DATA 5 D. FIGURES ...................................................................................................... .............................. Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2: Site Overview Plan Figure 3: Vegetation Transect and Photo -point Locations Figure 4: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point Locations Figure 4a: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point 1 Figure 4b: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point 2 Figure 4c: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point 3 Figure 4d: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point 4 Figure 4e: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point 5 Figure 5: Spring and Fall 2011 Monitoring Photo -point 1 Figure 6: Spring and Fall 2011 Monitoring Photo -point 2 Figure 7: Spring and Fall 2011 Monitoring Photo -point 3 E. CONCLUSIONS 8 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Baseline Assessment Vegetation Transect (9 September 2009) .... ..............................3 Table 2: Spring 2011 Vegetation Transect Data (3 May 2011) ..................... ..............................3 Table 3: Fall 2011 Vegetation Transect Data (26 October 2011) .................. ..............................4 Table 4: Catalog of Woody Vegetation at Canyon Park Commons (26 October 2011) ..............6 2 February 2012 Copyright © 2012 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 864M Fall 2012 Monitoring Report Page i Canyon Park Commons Fall 2011 Monitoring Report A. PROJECT OVERVIEW CITY OF BOTHELL PERMIT NO. CAP 2005 -00005 CORPS PERMIT NO: 200500908 DOE ORDER NO. 5214 Permittee: Canyon Park Development, LLC 22020 17` Ave SE, Suite 200 Bothell, WA 98021 Mr. Roger Belanich Consultant: Talasaea Consultants, Incorporated 15020 Bear Creek Road NE Woodinville, Washington 98077 Ann Olsen, Project Manager Field Survey: Conducted on 3 May and 26 October 2011 by Martha Moritz Project Summary Originally, Canyon Park Commons, hereafter referred to as the "Commons ", was part of a larger permitting effort that has since been separated into three different projects. The Commons was constructed separately from the other two projects. No -name creek flows through the eastern portion of the Commons site. Critical area impacts included: 1) 607 sf of wetland fill and 2) removal of two concrete culverts and installation of two new box culverts over No -name Creek. Mitigation for the impacts on the Commons project included: 1) 4,010 sf of wetland creation, 2) 8,403sf of wetland rehabilitation adjacent to No -name creek, and 3) 29,449 sf of buffer enhancement. This report represents only the constructed mitigation areas on the Commons site. Site Location The site is located in Bothell, WA on the east side of Bothell Everett Highway (SR 527), north of 214` St. SE (Figure 1). The mitigation areas are located behind a Red Robin restaurant along 20` Ave SE and are distinguishable by the hatch patterns on Figure 2. Driving directions are located on Figure 1. Project Timeframe Construction of the mitigation areas began in the summer of 2007 and was completed in the summer of 2009. Monitoring is required by the City of Bothell for five years (2015) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the Department of Ecology (DOE) for ten years (2020). This fall 2011 concluded Year 2 of the monitoring period. Performance Standards Future monitoring will be compared to the baseline conditions to evaluate the performance standards of the project (see Section B). Maintenance Recommendations During the semiannual maintenance reviews, several maintenance items were observed. The following maintenance items were completed in 2011. • Invasive weed species, including: Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius), poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), bittersweet nightshade (Solanum dulcamara) and birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus) were removed, including the root systems and disposed off -site at an appropriate dump location. 2 February 2012 Copyright © 2012 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 864M Fall 2012 Monitoring Report Pagel Canyon Park Commons Fall 2011 Monitoring Report • The irrigation system was activated by 15 June 2011 and deactivated by 15 October 2011. • The one -year warranty replacement plants were installed in March 2011. • Mulch rings were hand - weeded where needed, in order to clear weedy overgrowth from the bases of the installed native vegetation. • Trash and debris were removed from the site when observed and disposed off -site at an appropriate dump location. B. MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The mitigation area is being measured for success according to the requirements outlined in the approved Canyon Park Phase VII Critical Areas Mitigation Report dated September 5, 2006. The following performance standards were approved by the Corps, DOE, and the City of Bothell. • Performance Standard A : In the created wetlands, and the enhanced existing wetlands and buffers, at least 15 species of desirable native plant species will be present in the mitigation areas at the end of Year 5. Woody plant coverage must be at least 10% by Year 1, 30% by Year 3, and 50% by Year 5. Woody coverage may be comprised of both planted and recolonized native species; however, to maintain species diversity, at no time shall a recolonized species (e.g., red alder) comprise more than 35% of the total woody coverage. • Performance Standard B: Percent survival of planted woody species must be 100% at the end of Year 1, and at least 85% for each subsequent year of the monitoring period. • Performance Standard C : After construction and following every monitoring event, the mitigation areas will contain at least 17 habitat features per acre (1 piece /2,500 sf) including down woody material (logs, rootwads, etc.) and snags. There will also three bird nest boxes installed on three snags. • Performance Standard D: Herbaceous coverage of vegetation in mitigation areas shall be at least 30% by the end of Year 1, 50% by the end of Year 2, and 85% by the end of Years 3 and 5, excluding those areas of the site that may have sparse herbaceous vegetation due to dense shade from woody species coverage. • Performance Standard E : Throughout the five -year monitoring period, a combination of native or naturalized woody and herbaceous vegetation that is predominantly FAC or wetter will cover the wetland areas. Wetland areas will also exhibit evidence of saturated soil conditions (i.e., signs of ponding, water marks, water - stained leaves, or redoximorphic features in the soil) and will remain inundated or saturated to the surface for at least 10% (14 consecutive days) of the growing season, defined as April through mid - November. • Performance Standard F : After construction and following every monitoring event for a period of five years, exotic and invasive plant species will be maintained at levels below 20% total cover in the mitigation areas. These species include: Scot's broom, Himalayan and evergreen blackberry, reed canarygrass, purple Ioosestrife, hedge bindweed, Japanese knotweed, English ivy, Canada thistle, and bittersweet nightshade. Vegetation Sampling Data Three vegetation sampling transects (VST) were established during the baseline assessment within the mitigation areas (Figure 3). Transect 1 (VST1) measured 65 -feet in length, Transect 2 February 2012 Copyright © 2012 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 864M Fall 2011 Monitoring Report Page 2 Canyon Park Commons Fall 2011 Monitoring Report 2 (VST2) measured 50 -feet in length, and Transect 3 (VST3) measured 60 -feet in length. All of the transects are 10 feet wide. Percent areal cover of shrubs and trees was evaluated in each transect through the use of line- intercept sampling methodology. Using the line- intercept methodology for the three transects, a tape was extended between two permanent markers. Shrubs and trees intercepted by the tape were identified, and the intercept distance was recorded. Percent cover by species was then calculated by adding the intercept distances and expressed as a total proportion of the tape length. Herbaceous coverage was visually estimated through the mitigation areas. A portion of Transect 1 intercepts the edge of the wetland creation area and percent cover of emergent vegetation is noted in the fall transect data (Table 4). Percent survival will be determined by recording the species and quantity of all shrubs and trees within each of the vegetation sampling locations. The following tables display the data collected during the baseline assessment and both the spring and fall 2011 performance monitoring events. Table 2: Baseline Assessment Vegetation Transect Data 9 Se tember 2009 Tran sect # Percent Percent Herbaceous Percent Percent Woody Cover* Cover* Survival Invasive Cover VST -1 3 40 100 0 VST -2 3.6 NA 100 0 VST -3 10 NA 100 0 Average 5.5% 40% 100% 0% Required ** 10% Year 30% Year 100% Year <20% 30% Year 3 50% Year 3 85% Years 2 -5 50% Year 5 85 0 /6 Year 5 *Includes desirable species only, invasive plants as defined by the WA State Noxious Weed List are not included. * *Success criteria as required by all of the agencies. Table 3: Spring 2011 Ve etation Transect Data 3 May 2011 Tran sect # Percent Percent Herbaceous Percent Percent Woody Cover* Cover* Survival Invasive Cover VST -1 24.0 92.0 86.6 5.0 VST -2 27.2 75.0 108.3 5.0 VST -3 34.7 70.0 196.0 1.0 Average 28.6% 79.0% 130.3% 3.6% Required ** 10% Year 30% Year 100% Year <20% 30% Year 3 50% Year 3 85% Years 2 -5 50% Year 5 85% Year 5 *Includes desirable species only, invasive plants as defined by the WA State Noxious Weed List are not included. * *Success criteria as required by all of the agencies. Table 4: Fall 2011 Ve etation Transect Data 26 October 2011 Tran sect # Percent Percent Herbaceous Percent Percent Woody Cover* Cover* Survival Invasive Cover VST -1 33.8 * ** 90.0 86.6 5.0 VST -2 53.8 90.0 108.3 10.0 VST -3 35.7 100.0 196.0 0.0 Average 41.1% 93.3% 130.3% 3.3% Required ** 10% Year 30% Year 100% Year <20% 30% Year 3 50% Year 3 85% Years 2 -5 50% Year 5 85% Year 5 *Includes desirable species only, invasive plants as defined by the WA State Noxious Weed List are not included. * *Success criteria as required by all of the agencies. * ** Percent Emergent Species Cover for VST -1 was 36.6% 2 February 2012 Copyright © 2012 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 864M Fall 2011 Monitoring Report Page 3 Canyon Park Commons Fall 2011 Monitoring Report Hydrology Monitoring Hydrology monitoring is required to ensure that the created and enhanced wetland areas on the site maintain the necessary hydrology post- construction for a period of five years. As outlined in Performance Standard E, "Soils must be inundated and/or saturated to the surface for at least 10% (14 consecutive days) of the growing season defined as April through mid - November. A combination of native or naturalized woody and herbaceous vegetation that is predominantly FA C or wetter needs to cover the wetland areas. Wetland areas should also exhibit evidence of saturated soil conditions (i.e., signs of ponding, watermarks, water - stained leaves, or redoximorphic features in the soil)." A series of five hydrology photo points were established in April 2010 to establish baseline hydrological conditions. The hydrology photo -point locations are shown on Figure 4. Photos were taken at these established locations once weekly for a period of four weeks (28 March- 14 April 2011). The photos for each photo -point are provided in Figures 4a -4c. At the time of the fall monitoring visit ponding was still present in the wetland areas and the soil was saturated to the surface. In addition, a number of different species of native, obligate emergent vegetation were present throughout the wetland areas. We analyzed the general patterns of precipitation for the monitoring period between 28 March and 14 April 2011, using both the NRCS methodology and the combined methodology described by Sprecher and Warne (2000). The WETS table used to compare precipitation patterns against the normal range of precipitation was Everett Jr. College. In general, the precipitation for the monitoring period was determined to be normal for the water year. It appears that the mitigation wetland areas on the site have adequate hydrology during a "normal" water year to sustain the installed vegetation including facultative or wetter species throughout the growing season, thereby satisfying Performance Standard E. C. SUMMARY DATA On 3 May and 26 October 2011, Talasaea Consultants conducted the spring and fall performance monitoring events for the stream, wetland and buffer mitigation areas. The following is a summary of our findings. Wildlife There are numerous species of songbirds heard during these and previous site visits. Bird species observed include: red wing blackbird, mallards, Canada geese, American robins, crows, and Bewick's wrens. A large number of Pacific chorus frogs are regularly seen and heard throughout the site. Fresh water invertebrates and lamprey eels were also seen in No -name Creek. We expect that once the vegetation becomes more established, a moderate number of additional wildlife species will be attracted to the site. Due to the surrounding retail and commercial complexes, it expected that mainly birds, amphibians, fish, reptiles and small mammals will be attracted to the site. Performance Standard C states that "After construction and following every monitoring event, the mitigation areas will contain at least 17 habitat features per acre (1 piece/2,500 so including down woody material (logs, rootwads, etc.) and snags. There will also be three bird nest boxes installed on three snags ". During the site visit, numerous snags, rootwads, tethered logs and ramp logs were observed throughout the mitigation areas. Additionally piles of rocks and solitary boulders were also observed, which provide habitat and cover for various small mammals and reptiles. Various sized rocks and pebbles were placed in the bed of No name creek to provide fish rearing habitat. Bird nesting boxes were installed on the snags. This site contains well over the required number of habitat features per acre thereby satisfying Performance Standard C. 2 February 2012 Copyright © 2012 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 864M Fall 2012 Monitoring Report Page 4 Canyon Park Commons Fall 2011 Monitoring Report Water Quality and Site Stability Since the creek was returned to the improved channel many emergent plant species have established around the wetland edges. No -name creek appears clean and clear. There were no signs of erosion or any scouring of the restored creek banks. The banks of the creek appear stable. Native herbaceous vegetation is becoming established throughout the site and no signs of erosion or rilling were observed in the mitigation areas. Water quality in the creek and wetlands appeared good; no signs of oil sheen or other surface films, abnormal color or odor, or turbidity were noted. Fresh water invertebrates and lamprey eels have been observed in No -name Creek since construction completion. A sampling of the benthic macroinvertebrate populations was taken during the spring monitoring event. The sampling location was the same as spring 2010 and was just downstream of the log weir at the outflow of the pond area in the southern section of the site. The following species were observed: caddisfly larvae casing, blackfly larvae, scuds and amphipods. The presence of caddisfly larvae indicates that the levels of oxygen and temperatures of the water are good and can support populations of the aquatic macroinvertebrate species most sensitive to pollution. Photo - points A series of photographs representing panoramic views of the mitigation areas were taken at three locations during both the spring and fall monitoring events (Figures 5 -7). These photographs document general appearance throughout the site, as well as providing a qualitative representation of the success of the mitigation areas. The locations of these photo - points are shown on Figure 3. Vegetation Summary Overall, the native shrubs and trees within the mitigation areas are healthy and thriving. All the trees and shrubs appeared noticeably fuller this year. New signs of growth were recorded in Year 2 of the monitoring period. The average percent cover increased to 41.1 % by the end of the growing season. This percent average exceeds the requirements for the end of Year 3 (30.0 %). Installed native rose, salal and snowberry shrubs are reproducing rhizomatously. Douglas spirea, salmonberry, black cottonwood, Scouler's willow, and red alder were all volunteering throughout the site. During the spring monitoring event, the average percent woody cover for the three transects was measured to be 28.6 %. By the end of the growing season, the average percent cover had reached 41.1 %. The next performance standard for percent woody cover is for the end of Year 3 and is required to be above 30.0 %. This exceeds the requirements for percent woody cover outlined in Performance Standard A. A portion of Transect 1 runs along the edge of a wetland creation area. The emergent species coverage along this portion was measured to be 36.6 %. The wetland edges are beginning to naturalize and the following obligate emergent species were observed: slough sedge (Carex obnupta), cattail (Typha latifolia), small - flowered bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus), hard - stemmed bulrush (Scirpus acutus) and soft rush (Juncus effuses). Native, herbaceous vegetation is also beginning to establish throughout the remainder of the site. Average herbaceous cover for Year 2 of the monitoring period was visually estimated to be 79.0% during the October site visit. This well exceeds the requirements outlined in Performance Standard D for herbaceous cover (50.0% by the end of Year 3). The percent survival calculated during both the spring and fall monitoring event produced an average of 130.3% for the three transects. The one -year warranty replacement plants were installed in March 2011. The percent survival is well above 100.0% in some areas due to the reproduction occurring by some of the native species. The percent survival is well over 100.0 %, thereby meeting the requirements for Performance Standard B. 2 February 2012 Copyright © 2012 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 864M Fall 2012 Monitoring Report Page 5 Canyon Park Commons Fall 2011 Monitoring Report In the stream, wetland and buffer areas, 23 species of desirable native plant species were recorded during the monitoring events. This meets the requirements outlined in Performance Standard A. Salmonberry was found volunteering within the mitigation areas as was anticipated due to the existing wetland areas adjacent to the north end of the property. The following table lists the summary of the native tree and shrub species found within the Canyon Park Commons mitigation area. Table 5: Catalog of woody vegetation at Canyon Park Commons (26 October 2011) Scientific name Common name Acercircinatum Vine maple Alnus rubra Red alder Amelanchier alnifolia Serviceberr Betula papytKera Paper birch Corpus sericea Red -osier dogwood Cor lus cornuta Beaked hazelnut Gaultheria shallon Salal Mahonia a uifolium Tall Oregon grape Malus fusca Western crabapple Oemleria cerasiformis Indian plum Physocarpus capitatus Pacific ninebark Picea sitchensis Sitka spruce Po ulus balsamifera var. trichocar a Black cottonwood Pseudotsu a menziesii Douglas fir Rosa nutkana Nootka rose Rosa p1socarpa Clustered rose Rubus s ectabilis Salmonber Salix lasiandra Pacific willow Salix scouleriana Scouler's willow Sambucus racemosa Red elderber S iraea dou lasii Douglas s irea Symphoricarpos albus Common snowberry Thu a plicata Western red cedar At the time of the fall monitoring event, the site had recently been maintained and the percent cover for invasive weeds was low (3.3 %). This meets the requirements outlined in Performance Standard F. Several invasive weed species including: reed canarygrass, Himalayan blackberry, Scot's broom, poison hemlock, bittersweet nightshade, and birdsfoot trefoil were found on site during this year's maintenance inspections. These weed species were removed, including the roots systems and disposed off -site. 2 February 2012 Copyright © 2012 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 864M Fall 2012 Monitoring Report Page 6 Canyon Park Commons Fall 2011 Monitoring Report D. MAPS The following maps are attached to assist the agencies in locating the commercial property, the location of the mitigation areas on the property, and to show the locations of the permanent vegetation transects and photo points. Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2: Site Overview Plan Figure 3: Vegetation Transect and Photo -point Locations Figure 4: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point Locations Figure 4a: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point 1 Figure 4b: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point 2 Figure 4c: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point 3 Figure 4d: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point 4 Figure 4e: Hydrology Monitoring Photo -point 5 Figure 5: Spring and Fall 2011 Monitoring Photo -point 1 Figure 6: Spring and Fall 2011 Monitoring Photo -point 2 Figure 7: Spring and Fall 2011 Monitoring Photo -point 3 E. CONCLUSIONS The spring and fall monitoring events for the mitigation areas at Canyon Park Commons were conducted to record the health and growth of the vegetation, to ensure that proper hydrological conditions exist in the mitigation areas, and to evaluate wildlife usage of the site. A diverse collection of woody and herbaceous vegetation is present in the mitigation areas. The installed woody vegetation is healthy and coverage is expected to continue to steadily increase over the 10 -year monitoring period. The fall monitoring event concluded Year 2 of the required performance monitoring period. Nonetheless, the site is currently exceeding all of the requirements for woody and herbaceous cover for Year 3. Percent survival exceeded 100.0% in some areas of the site due to natural plant reproduction. The average percent survival for Year 2 was 130.3 %. Invasive weed coverage was low at the time of the fall site visit (3.0 %) due to the recently completed maintenance work. Emergent species in the mitigation wetlands have established quickly and we expect that the vegetation will continue to perform well due to the wet conditions found year round in and along the created and enhanced wetland areas. No- name creek appears stable and is providing water to the riparian wetland areas and will provide habitat as the shrubs and trees continue to grow and shade the water. Adequate hydrology was exhibited in the mitigation areas as recorded during the second year of hydrology monitoring that occurred from 28 March- 14 April 2011. The installed plant material is healthy and is expected to continue to flourish in the wetland and buffer areas. Productive colonization by desirable native species will continue to improve habitat quality and species diversity as the site matures. Wildlife was observed throughout the site. We expect that the mitigation areas will provide increased ecological value to the North Creek watershed. 2 February 2012 Copyright © 2012 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 864M Fall 2012 Monitoring Report Page 7