7200 HARDESON RD 2016-01-01 MF Import

t' Table 3. Exisling and Post-Project Comparisons Existing (ft) M �. „ Total stream length Stream in culvert ~ Net open stream channel � w 3,050 Gi�1�] 2,SOtl Post-Project (ft) 2,800 360 2,440 ,., Wetlands. In terms of wetlands, the restoration project would create a minimum of i,y about 0.25 acre of wedand (assuming that 2 feet on either side of the stream develops as wetland along the entire 2,800-foot channel). Phase 1 of the restoration would occur before � wedand impacts occur to the balance of the channel, therefore, mitigation would be i�i provided prior to wedand impact. w Additional wedand is likely to c!evelop within the,tlatter portions of the stream i^� corridor, particularly that shown in Figure 3. It is possible that between 0.5 and 1.0 acre of wetland could develop. Overall, the new corridor would comprise an area of about 3.8 acres �a that would be vegetated primarily with willow and aldcr. The function of this riparian �! corridor, in ternu of wildlife habitat, would be similar to that of the wetlands affected by the project and would exceed it in area by a Factor of about 40. r� � k1 "� � Augmentation of low stream ttows, a typical wetland function, would be enhanced by the restoration project. Specifically, the overali low gradient of the restored stream would enrnurage in6ltration and should delay delivery of water to downstream areas. Monitoring I'rogrnm �� Monitoring would be conducted for a total of two years. It would consist of a spnng `~ and fall site visit by an individual qualified to evaluate whetl�er installed bioengineering � features and vegetation are alive or dead. A brief letter report would be submitted to the F,,; City of Everett following each of the fail monitoring efforts. The projected level of effort is approximately one ro two man-days per monitoring period. The monitoring schedule is , presented in Tabie 4. .� V 16 �