Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGEICO OFFICE BUILDING - PDP - PDP130039 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTSeptember 20, 2013 Steve Allen Local Geico Office 115 E. Harmony Road Fort Collins, CO 80525 RE: Ecological Characterization Study (ECS) Letter Report for the proposed Geico Agency Building at 2024 E. Harmony Road in Fort Collins, Colorado Steve: This letter ECS Report is submitted in response to the City’s request for an ECS report for the proposed Geico Agency building development at 2024 E. Harmony Road. The 0.23-acre development site is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of E. Harmony Road and Timberline Road. The current development proposal calls for the construction of a 4,900-square foot, two story office building on the east side of the parcel with driveway and associated parking in the western portion of the project area. Ecological characteristics of the property were evaluated during a field review of the property on September 18, 2013. The following provides a summary of ECS information required by Fort Collins Land Use Code under 3.4.1 (D) (1) items (a) through (k). ECOLOGICAL STUDY CHARACTERIZATION CHECKLIST (a & i) The proposed Geico Agency office development site has low ecological value and supports no natural habitat features. The entire property was previously developed, but former buildings and landscaping have been cleared. Currently, the site is mostly bare except for patches of weedy species (see attached Photos 1, 2 and 3). Existing vegetation cover is dominated by annual and perennial weedy species including kochia (Bassia scoparia1), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), green foxtail (Setaria viridis), common mallow (Malva neglecta), purslane (Portulaca oleracea), knotweed (Polygonum aviculare), and puncturevine (Tribulus terrestris). Woody species are restricted to Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia) vines and black raspberry (Rubus occidentalis) canes along the south edge of the irrigation ditch, a few Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila) seedlings near the south property boundary, and one relatively large (15-inch diameter) Siberian elm at the northwest property corner. The City Forester or a private arborist will need to evaluate the health of the one large Siberian elm to determine if it should be retained. Siberian elms are classified as a nuisance species in Fort Collins, but any tree, in this type of setting, provides some wildlife habitat value for perching, foraging, and possible nesting by urban adapted songbirds. The Geico Office building project site does not support any significant areas of native vegetation or other unique habitat features. There are no unique habitat features on the development parcel, and because of surrounding roadways and development, features of ecological value within 500 feet of the project area consist solely of mature trees associated with adjacent landscaping and the irrigation ditch (Dixon Canyon Lateral) along the north property boundary. Development of the Geico Agency building parcel would not result in any impacts to onsite or nearby natural resources beyond those that have already occurred from previous developments on and adjacent to the property. Wildlife habitat value on the property has been degraded by past development, clearing of structures and landscaping, and by adjacent developments and roadways. Urban-adapted birds such as mourning dove and house finch may occasionally use the site for foraging for seeds. The few trees on or near the project area may 1 Scientific nomenclature follows USDA, NRCS Plants Database. Available online at: http://plants.usda.gov/java/ S. Allen 9/20/13 Page 2 of 3 also be used for perching, nesting, and foraging by urban-adapted songbirds. No bird nests were located in the one Siberian elm tree on the property during the September 18, 2013 field survey. (b) There are no wetlands on the property, but there is a thin strip of vegetated wetlands supported along the north bank of the irrigation ditch (Dixon Canyon Lateral). This wetland is dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) and Emory’s sedge (Carex emoryi), which are very typical of irrigation ditch wetlands in the region. The irrigation ditch and associated wetlands have relatively low wildlife habitat value since the open portion of the ditch is isolated from other natural features and by the fact that it runs underground at the east edge of the project area and approximately 560 feet northwest of the project area. Project development would have no effect on these wetlands. (c) The project area does not provide any significant views of natural features or other areas of scenic value. (d) As indicated under (a & i) the project area supports no native vegetation or significant trees. (e) There are no natural drainages on or near the project area. (f) There is no suitable habitat for any threatened, endangered, or other sensitive species on or adjacent to the project area. No other sensitive or ecologically important species are likely to use the property since its surface has been disturbed and supports no native habitats. (g) Past removal of native habitat has eliminated the potential for any special habitat features on the property. (h) There are no wildlife movement corridors within 500 feet of the project area. The Dixon Canyon Lateral, along the north property boundary, does not create a suitable wildlife movement corridor since it runs underground at the east edge of the project area and approximately 560 feet northwest of the project area. (j) There is only one issue regarding the timing of property development and ecological features or wildlife use of the project area. If the development proposal includes removal of the one Siberian elm on the property or if construction occurs near an occupied bird nest in this tree during the songbird nesting season (April through July), these activities could result in the loss or abandonment of a nest and would be in violation of the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. (k) Since the entire project area has been previously developed and has now been cleared, project development would have no impact on natural habitats or important habitat features, other than the one existing tree on the property. Although this tree would not be classified as significant by the City, since it is a nuisance species, it does provide some perching, foraging, and possible nesting habitat for urban-adapted songbird species. If removal of this tree is required for project development, appropriate plantings of landscape trees should be included with project development to mitigate the loss of its habitat value for urban-adapted songbirds. Because tree removal or construction near trees during the nesting season could result in the loss or abandonment of a nest, it is recommended that tree removal or construction near songbird nests occur outside of the nesting season (April 1 – July 31), or trees on or adjacent to the project area be surveyed to ensure lack of nesting prior to removal or construction activities during the nesting season. This mitigation recommendation would preclude the possible incidental take or disturbance of active songbird nests. Based on the fact that the Dixon Canyon Lateral is not suitable as a wildlife movement corridor, is abutted by existing residential and commercial developments, and supports only minor amounts of vegetated wetlands, typical of regional irrigation ditches, there is no ecological need to create a wildlife or wildlife habitat buffer setback for this section of the Dixon Canyon Lateral. A vegetated water quality buffer, or water quality detention area would be appropriate for treating surface water runoff from impermeable surfaces (parking lot) prior to any release into the Dixon Canyon Lateral. S. Allen 9/20/13 Page 3 of 3 Steve, if you have any questions or require additional information regarding my evaluation, please give me a call. Sincerely, INC. T. Michael Phelan Principal Senior Wildlife Biologist attachments: Photos 1, 2, and 3