1701 121ST ST SE 2025-02-03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Wetland name or number A L 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce shoreline erosion? L 4.1. Distance along shore and average width of Cowardin classes along the lakeshore(do not include Aqu"bed) Choose the highest scoring description that matches conditions in the wetland. �>%of distance is Scrub-shrub or Forested at least 33 ft(10 m)wide points=6 Q>Y.of distance is Scrub-shrub or Forested at least 6 ft(2 m)wide points=4 �>Y.distance is Scrub-shrub or Forested at least 33 ft(10 m)wide points=4 4 ®Plants are at least 6 ft(2 m)wide(any type except Aquatic bed) points=2 Plants are less than 6 ft(2 m)wide(any type except Aquatic bed) points=0 Rating of Site Potential: If score is:--_,_6=M ✓ 0-5=L Record the rating on the first page L 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the hydrologic functions of the site? L 5.1. Is the lake used by power boats with more than 10 hp? C Yes=1 No=0 ✓ 0 L 5.2. Is the fetch on the lake side of the unit at least 1 mile in distance? Yes=1 No=0 Fj 0 Total for L 5 Add the points in the boxes above 0 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:_2=H —1=M ✓ 0=L Record the rating on the first page L 6.0.Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? L 6.1.Are there resources along the shore that can be impacted by erosion? If more than one resource is present, choose the one with the highest score. E]There are human structures or old growth/mature forests within 25 ft of OHWM of the shore in the unit points=2 2 C]There are nature trails or other paths and recreational activities within 25 ft of OHWM points=1 Other resources that could be impacted by erosion points=1 There are no resources that can be impacted by erosion along the shores of the unit points=0 Rating of Value: If score is: ✓ 2=H _ _1=M _0=L Record the rating on the first page NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Wetland Rating System for Western WA:2014 Update 10 Rating Form-Effective January 1,2015