HomeMy WebLinkAboutWILMARC MEDICAL - PDP - PDP160033 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTJune 29, 2016
Craig Russell
Russell + Mills Studios
141 S. College Ave., Suite 104
Fort Collins, CO 80524
RE: Ecological Characterization Study (ECS) Report for the Eldon James Corporation Project Area
Craig:
This letter report is submitted to satisfy the requirements of Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code of the City of
Fort Collins regarding the submittal of an ECS Memo for the Eldon James Corporation project area (project
area) in Fort Collins, Colorado. The report was prepared in accordance with Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use
Code of the City of Fort Collins regarding the preparation of an ECS Report. The proposed development would
be a 90,000 square-foot office and manufacturing facility. The project area is located near the northwest corner
of the Lady Moon Drive/Precision Drive intersection in the southeast 1/4 of the northwest 1/4 of Section 4 (T. 6
N., Range 68 W.). The project area location is depicted on Figure 1. Existing commercial development and
undeveloped land (fallow cropland) currently surround the project site (see Figure 1).
Ecological characteristics of the project area were evaluated in the field on June 27, 2016. Based on City of Fort
Collins Planning Staff comments on the proposed project, the primary focus of the field survey was evaluating
wildlife use and the extent of wetlands in the unnamed ditch to the north of the project area (see Figure 1).
Observations recorded during the field evaluation included: major vegetation communities and wildlife habitats
present in the project area. Wildlife presence and habitat use was based on on-site observations and habitat
presence in conjunction with the known habitat requirements of potential wildlife species. Existing habitats were
also evaluated regarding their ability to support populations of threatened, endangered, and other sensitive plant
and wildlife species.
The following provides a summary of information required by Fort Collins Land Use Code under 3.4.1 (D) (1)
items (a) through (l).
ECOLOGICAL STUDY CHARACTERIZATION CHECKLIST
(a & j) The entire project area was formerly farmland that is no longer cultivated and has been left fallow or
disturbed by grading activities. The site is characterized by bare areas from current grading and road building
activities or is vegetated by smooth brome (Bromus inermis1) and weedy species such as cheatgrass (Bromus
tectorum), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola), kochia (Bassia scoparia), and Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense).
Weedy and non-native grassland habitats are not designated as requiring special habitat protection or
development setbacks in Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code.
Wildlife habitat value of most of the project area is very low because of past clearing of the site, dominance by
non-native and weedy grass and herbaceous species, and surrounding roadway and developments. Mice,
voles, cottontail rabbit and urban-adapted songbirds are the only species possibly establishing resident
populations in the project area.
(b) No evidence of wetland hydrology, hydric soils, or wetland vegetation found in the project area. The
unnamed ditch to the north does support wetlands and contained flowing water at the time of the field survey.
1 Scientific nomenclature follows USDA, NRCS Plants Database. Available online at: http://plants.usda.gov/java/
C. Russell
June 28, 2016
Page 2 of 3
Characteristic wetland plants supported in the unnamed ditch wetlands are: narrowleaf cattail (Typha
angustifolia), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), Emory sedge (Carex emoryii), mountain rush (Juncus
arcticus), showy milkweed (Ascelpias speciosa), and narrowleaf (coyote) willow. At the time of the survey,
current road building activities had constructed a filled road crossing and approximately 508 feet of newly
constructed ditch channel scraped bare of wetlands. Current grading activities have also cleared areas of
vegetation immediately adjacent to the wetland ditch channel. The perimeter of currently undisturbed ditch
wetlands and the newly constructed ditch channel were circumscribed with a handheld GPS unit (accuracy ± 6-
12 feet) to determine the approximate size of remaining wetlands and the wetland area lost to recent grading
and road fill activities. Total ditch length was determined to be 1,154 feet and the bank to bank width containing
wetlands ranged from 22 feet at the west end to 15 feet at the east end. Estimated wetland size for the
undisturbed west and east ends of the ditch was determined to be approximately 0.18 acre and 0.10 acre,
respectively. It was also estimated that approximately 0.20 acre of wetlands was lost in the central portion of the
ditch, which had been recently re-constructed (see Figure 1). Representative views of the vegetated wetland
and recently re-constructed portions of the ditch are provided by attached Photos 1 through 4.
Undisturbed open water and wetlands in the unnamed ditch provide wildlife habitat for songbirds such as red-
winged blackbird, common yellowthroat, and song sparrow as well as habitat for amphibians and reptiles such
as northern chorus frog, Woodhouse’s toad, and garter snake species. Wetlands in the ditch also serve to
improve water quality in the ditch by filtering out sediment and other possible contaminants.
The source of water flowing in the unnamed ditch could not be determined with certainty in the field. It was
assumed that water in the ditch travels by underground pipe from the detention pond on Intel’s property nearby
to the west, but water supply into the pond could not be determined. Water in the unnamed ditch flows east to
the west edge of Lady Moon Drive then flows south in a narrow, incised ditch to an underground drain. The
narrow incised portion of the flowing ditch does not support any wetlands, and smooth brome is the dominant
vegetation on both sides of this ditch segment. The discharge location of water flowing into the drain could not
be determined in the field. It is possible it discharges into the Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet Canal approximately
0.6 mile to the east. If so, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers would likely classify open water and wetlands in
the unnamed ditch as jurisdictional since it has classified the Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet Canal as jurisdictional.
In this case, fill and construction activities in the unnamed ditch would require a Section 404 Nationwide Permit
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
(c) The project area does no provide any unobstructed views of any significant natural features except for partial
views of the Front Range foothills.
(d & e) As indicated under (a & j) the project area is dominated by non-native grass and weedy herbaceous
vegetation, and there are no woody species present within the project area boundaries. Therefore, there are no
significant native trees, other native vegetation stands, or non-native trees within the project area.
(f) There are no perennial streams or bodies of water in the project area. The unnamed ditch to the north
carries water at least seasonally. Whether or not it flows year round is unknown.
(g) Because of the extent past land clearing and lack of native habitats on the project area, there are no suitable
habitats for any threatened, endangered, or sensitive species.
(h) Past disturbance and land clearing activities in the project area has eliminated the potential for any special
habitat features.
(i) Since the entire project area was historically cultivated for agricultural production, it does not support any
wildlife movement corridors. The unnamed drainage to the north of the project area also does not serve as a
C. Russell
June 28, 2016
Page 3 of 3
wildlife movement corridor connection to natural areas or undeveloped land since the ditch terminates where the
east end flows into an underground drain. It is uncertain where flow into the drain daylights, but the closest
possible drainage corridor (Fossil Creek Inlet Canal) is 0.6 mile away to the east and is separated from the ditch
by roadways and land without any possible corridor connection.
(k) There are no issues regarding the timing of property development and ecological features or wildlife use of
the project area.
(l) Since the majority of the project area has been previously cleared of native vegetation and habitat, project
development would have no direct impact on natural habitats or important habitat features.
It is estimated that the unnamed ditch to the north of the project area formerly supported approximately 0.48
acre of wetlands, and currently about 0.28 acre of wetlands. Buffer requirements stipulated for less than 0.3
acre and greater than 0.3 acre are 50 feet and 100 feet, respectively. The Eldon James Corporation project
area is 155 feet south of the south top of bank of the unnamed ditch (see Figure 1) so any development within
the project area would be in compliance with either buffer zone requirement.
One mitigation recommendation is based on Article 3.2.4(D)(6) in the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code that
requires protection of natural areas and natural features from light spillage from off site sources. Therefore,
intensity of street or building lighting should be shielded or directed to minimize the intrusion of artificial nighttime
light into the buffer zone for the unnamed drainage ditch.
This concludes Cedar Creek Associates, Inc.’s evaluation of the Eldon James Corporation project area. If you
have any questions or require additional information regarding my evaluation, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
INC.
T. Michael Phelan
Principal and Senior Wildlife Biologist
attachments: Habitat map and photos