Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLANDMARK APARTMENTS EXPANSION - FDP190002 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTFebruary 29, 2016 Herbert Newman Summit Management Services 730 W. Market Street Akron, Ohio 44303 RE: Updated and Revised Ecological Characterization Study (ECS) Report for the Landmark Apartments Expansion (formerly Aggie Station) Project Mr. Newman: This updated and revised ECS Report is submitted to address City of Fort Collins Land Use Code (Section 3.4.1) requirements to identify habitats and natural resource areas on or within 500 feet of proposed developments. An earlier ECS Report and an update were completed for the project area in November 2012 and March 2014, respectively. The earlier proposed developments were initially called the Landmark Apartments Expansion and Aggie Station Projects. The current proposed development for the same project area has reverted back to the original project name, the Landmark Apartments Expansion. The current proposal is to construct and rent market-rate apartments as an expansion to the existing Landmark Apartments located immediately to the west. The Landmark Apartments Expansion project area is situated south of Prospect Avenue and east of Shields Street. Hobbit Street extends east from Shields Street and ends at the southwest corner of the project area (see attached Figure 1). Ecological characteristics were reviewed on October 17, 2012 and a wetland delineation survey was completed on October 11 and 15, 2012. An additional site visit was completed on February 16, 2016 in order to review existing habitat conditions. The following provides a summary of information required by Fort Collins Land Use Code under 3.4.1 (D) (1) items (a) through (k). ECOLOGICAL STUDY CHARACTERIZATION CHECKLIST (a & i) Native vegetation has been removed from the development parcel in the past, and the majority of the property supports non-native and weedy species except for wetland vegetation in the unnamed drainage that crosses the south end of the property. This unnamed drainage originates at the City of Fort Collins’ two stormwater detention basins located at the southwest and southeast corners of the Prospect Road and South Taft Hill Road intersection. After the drainage exits the project area, it drains into Spring Creek approximately 700 feet south of the project area. Dominant vegetation species supported in the uplands and the majority of the development parcel are smooth brome (Bromus inermis 1), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), alfalfa (Medicago sativa), and white prairie aster (Symphyotrichum falcatum). Attached Photos 1 and 2 provide representative views of the upland portions of the property. Because of surrounding residential development and roadways, the project area has low ecological value and supports no important habitat features aside from the wetlands in the unnamed drainage. Surrounding areas are comprised primarily of paved surfaces, single-family and multi-family dwellings, and associated landscaping. As a result, there are no stands of native vegetation, wetlands, or other unique habitat features of ecological value within 500 feet of the project area except for the unnamed drainage passing thought the southern portion of the project area. Woody vegetation is restricted to five (≥ 6-inch diameter) Siberian elms (Ulmus pumila) along the south property boundary; one 18-inch diameter, thornless honey locust (Gleditsia triacanthos) at the east property edge; at least two multi-stemmed, shrub-like crack willows (Salix fragilis) at the west end of the 1 Scientific nomenclature follows USDA, NRCS Plants Database. Available online at: http://plants.usda.gov/java/ C. Mathis 2/29/16 Page 2 of 4 unnamed drainage; and one mostly decadent, multi-stemmed Siberian elm at the west property edge (see Figure 1). None of these are native trees, and Siberian elm is classified as a nuisance tree by the City of Fort Collins. Although Siberian elm is classified as a nuisance species, this species does provide some wildlife habitat value in terms of perching, nesting, and foraging habitat for songbirds. Wildlife use of the project site is low because of the relatively small size of the project area, surrounding development, and a lack of native and woody vegetation cover. No raptor or other bird nests were located in trees on the property during previous and the February 2016 site surveys. Future raptor nesting use of project area trees is unlikely due to surrounding human activities and the lack of suitable adjacent hunting habitats. Urban adapted waterfowl such as mallard may occasionally use the small open water portions of the unnamed drainage for loafing and feeding activities. (b) Wetlands along the unnamed drainage were delineated on October 11 and 15, 2012 using the methods and techniques specified for "routine on-site delineations" in the publication, Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (USACOE 1987), and supplemented by the document, Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains Region, Version 2.0 (USACOE 2010). The wetland report and map was submitted to and approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (see attached report, map, and Corps acceptance letter). Corps’ approvals of wetland delineations extend for 5 years after the acceptance letter is issued so the existing wetland delineation is considered acceptable by the Corps until November 2017. Wetlands are continuous along the unnamed drainage except where open water is present (see attached Figure 1 and Photo 3). The drainage wetlands are dominated by broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia) along the central and more saturated portions of the drainage. Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) and common threesquare (Schoenoplectus pungens) are the dominant wetland vegetation species growing in less saturated portions of the drainage along both sides of the cattail stands. Total extent of the drainage wetlands was determined to be 0.2 acre, and the open water portion of the drainage was 0.01 acre. Project area wetlands provide suitable habitat for occasional loafing and feeding activities by urban adapted puddle ducks, and possible breeding habitat for western chorus frog. (c) The project area does not provide any significant or unobstructed views of natural areas or other important visual features. (d) As indicated under (a & i) the project area does not support any native vegetation except for wetland species in the unnamed drainage. (e) The unnamed drainage across the south end of the project area is the only natural drainages on or near the project site. Spring Creek is located almost 700 feet south of the southern property boundary. (f) Because of surrounding development and a lack of native habitats, there is no suitable habitat for any threatened, endangered, or other sensitive species on or adjacent to the project area. The wetlands within the unnamed drainage do not provide suitable habitat conditions for Ute ladies’-tresses orchid (Spiranthes diluvialis), Colorado butterfly plant (Gaura neomexicana coloradensis), or Preble’s meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei). (g) The unnamed drainage is the only special habitat feature within or near the project area. Past clearing native vegetation from the remainder of the project area has eliminated the potential for any special habitat features aside from the unnamed wetland drainage. (h) The unnamed drainage may provide for some localized movement of urban adapted species such as raccoon, striped skunk, and some urban-adapted waterfowl and songbirds between the two Fort Collins’ stormwater detention basins to the west and Spring Creek to the south. However, the lack of cover and other natural features as well as adjacent development along the segment of the unnamed drainage immediately west of the project area reduces the drainage’s value as a wildlife movement corridor (see Photo 4). (j) Because of the general lack of natural habitat features in and near the area and general lack of nesting habitat for avian species there are no issues regarding the timing of proposed project and ecological features or wildlife use of the project area. (k) Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code requires a buffer setback of 50 feet for wetlands less than 0.3 acre. The same buffer setback is required for naturalized storm drainage channels. Section 3.4.1 allows for a reduction in C. Mathis 2/29/16 Page 3 of 4 buffer requirements as long as the nine buffer zone performance standards (listed under Section 3.4.1 (E) (1) are met. Current development plans indicate that four building footprints would encroach into the 50-foot buffer as a result of other development constraints and considerations. In order for the current proposal to preserve or enhance the existing wetland drainage and associated buffer zone, additional mitigation measures will need to be implemented in the drainage buffer zone, especially where buildings or other hard surface features encroach into the buffer zone. Habitat enhancement measures could also be employed in planned stormwater/water quality detention areas to further mitigate reductions in the drainage buffer zone. Mitigation can best be accomplished by plantings of native shrub and tree species as well as select herbaceous species. The goal of these plantings should be to create a self-sustaining, native vegetation community to stabilize soils and enhance wildlife habitat. Since the existing buffer zone is vegetated primarily by non-native smooth brome with no woody species, these planting would increase overall vegetation structural and wildlife habitat diversity, provide visual screening between developed sites and the buffer zone, and improve water quality of surface runoff before it enters the existing wetland drainage. Supplemental irrigation and soil amendments may be required for initial establishment of native shrubs and trees. Suggested species for planting include the following trees, shrubs and grasses. Upland Riparian Zone Trees Shrubs eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides) big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) lanceleaf cottonwood (Populus acuminata) skunkbrush sumac (Rhus trilobata) (both non-cotton bearing varieties) rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa) Saskatoon serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) Red-osier dogwood (Cornus sericea) Streamside Riparian Zone eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides) American plum (Prunus americana) lanceleaf cottonwood (Populus x acuminata) chokecherry (Prunus virginiana) (both non-cotton bearing varieties) golden currant (Ribes aureum) peachleaf willow (Salix amygdaloides) leadplant (Amorpha canescens) false indigo bush (Amorpha fruticosa) sandbar willow (Salix exigua) Native grasses recommended for seeding in the upland riparian zone include blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis), buffalograss (Buchloe dactyloides), slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus), and thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus). Grasses recommended for planting in the streamside zone include western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii) and basin wildrye (Leymus cinereus). Plantings of native grasses should focus primarily on sites in the buffer zone disturbed by construction or the creation of stormwater/water quality detention basins. It is not the intention of the mitigation recommendations to convert areas currently supporting stable non-native grass cover to be converted to native grassland species. Conversion of stable non-native grass areas to native grassland is not recommended for three principal reasons. First, although the majority of existing grass cover is non-native, non-native grassland in the buffer zone is currently well established and meets the general intent of buffer zone performance standards. Second, soils are stable in the non-native grassland areas and non-native grass (primarily smooth brome), when not mowed, provides adequate wildlife cover adjacent to riparian and wetland habitats. Finally, any attempt to convert well-established non-native grassland habitat to native grassland are likely to fail without intensive management efforts, and converted areas would most likely be initially dominated by aggressive, undesirable weedy species such as cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) and kochia (Bassia scoparia). Any buffer reductions and mitigation measures would need to be negotiated with and approved by City of Fort Collins planning staff. Woody species plantings in the drainage also need to be in compliance with floodway considerations regarding restriction of surface flow within the existing floodway. Any loss of wetlands associated with the project would also need to be mitigated based on Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code. The one existing honey locust tree is the only tree on the project site that could be classified as significant by the City of Fort Collins. Loss of any trees classified as significant by the City of Fort Collins C. Mathis 2/29/16 Page 4 of 4 would need to be mitigated with replacement trees as per Section 3.2.1 (F) of the Land Use Code. In addition the City requires replacement or mitigation for the loss of woody species (i.e. crack willow or Siberian elm trees) that provide wildlife habitat value. 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 night lighting from the sides of structures facing the drainage and associated buffer zone should be shielded or directed to preclude the intrusion of artificial nighttime light into the landscaped buffer zone and the wetland drainage. Herbert, this concludes my evaluation of the Landmarks Expansion project area. If you have any questions or require additional input regarding my evaluation, please give me a call. Sincerely, INC. T. Michael Phelan, Principal attachments: Figure 1, Photos 1-4, and Wetland Survey Report U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Acceptance Letter and Landmark Apartments Expansion Wetland Report Mr. Terry McKee October 30, 2012 Department of the Army Project Name Changed March 11, 2014 Corps of Engineers, Omaha District Denver Regulatory Office 9307 South Wadsworth Blvd Littleton, Colorado 80128-6901 Re: Waters of the U. S. Delineation for the Landmark Apartments Expansion Project (No Corps Number Assigned) (Project now known as Aggie Station) Dear Mr. McKee: At the direction of The Neenan Company, Cedar Creek Associates, Inc. completed a wetland and other Waters of the U. S. delineation for the Landmark Apartments Expansion (Aggie Station) Project located in Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. The project area is situated Section 23, Township 7 North, Range 69 West (N 40.56572, W 105.09322, NAD 83). The objective of this project is to construct and rent market-rate apartments. At this time, four apartment buildings are proposed for construction along with associated facilities, including a parking area. The wetlands and other Waters of the U. S. delineated are not proposed to be disturbed. As a part of the project, the City of Fort Collins will require a setback from the delineation boundaries. The setback distance has not been determined as of this date. The objective of the delineation work is to fulfill the requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act regarding the delineation of wetlands and other Waters of the U. S. prior to potential development activities. The site can be reached by traveling north from Denver on I-25 and exiting west on the Prospect Street exit. Continue west past South College Ave.; turn left on Sheely Avenue (before Shields Street) and then turn right on Wallenberg Drive. The project area is located at the west end of Wallenberg Drive before it turns south. The main project contact is: Mr. Michael Chalona The Neenan Company 2607 Midpoint Drive Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 Phone: 970-493-8747 Cell: 303-710-1917 E-mail: michael.chalona@neenan.com 1.1 Field Delineation Methodology Wetland delineation and sampling work for the wetlands and open water features within the project area were completed on October 11 and 15, 2012 using the methods and techniques specified for "routine on-site delineations" in the publication Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Department of the Army 1987), supplemented by the document Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains Region (Version 2.0). The project area was evaluated and potential wetland, transition zone, and upland vegetation communities were identified. Using the three-parameter approach via test hole characteristics, the wetland/upland boundaries were flagged. Formal sample point locations were then identified. Sample point locations were selected to represent typical wetland and upland conditions on site. At each sample point, percent total cover of dominant plant species was estimated. Species were then classed as OBL (obligate wetland species), FACW (facultative wetland species), FAC (facultative species), FACU (facultative upland species) or UPL (upland species). Soil and hydrologic data were also collected to determine the presence or absence of wetlands at each sample point. Wetland soil indicators potentially included the presence of a histic epipedon, thick dark surface, redox features, gleying, depleted profile conditions, an aquic soil moisture regime, and high organic matter content and/or a stripped matrix in sandy soils. Potential wetland hydrology indicators included geomorphic position, presence of standing water and/or saturated soil profile conditions, drainage patterns, watermarks, sediment deposits, and oxidized root channels in the upper 12 inches of the soil profile. Sample holes were dug to a depth of from 12 to 14 inches. Formal field data sheets were completed for each sample point evaluated (L-1 through L-3). Wetland / upland boundaries and sample points were flagged with pink fluorescent tape and numbered orange pin flags tied with pink fluorescent tape, respectively, for subsequent surveying work. The open water features were flagged with blue tape. Adjunct test holes were also dug, where appropriate, to gain additional vegetation, soil, and hydrologic information used to aid in the characterization of wetlands, uplands, and transition zones. Data sheets were not completed for test holes. The results of the field delineation are summarized in the following paragraphs. Copies of the data sheets completed during the survey, along with a delineation map and pertinent photos, are included with this report to aid the Corps in completing an evaluation of this project site. Table T-1 is presented to support the text. A vicinity map is also included. Results – Uplands Uplands (Photo 2) occur across the vast majority of the project area. These uplands comprise a gently sloping to nearly level meadow to the north and south of the wetland delineation (see included map). Sample points L-1 and L-3 (see Table 1) were selected to represent this meadow. The dominant plant species is smooth brome (Bromopsis inermis) at both sample sites. There were no soil or hydrology wetland indicators observed. The upland transition zone located along the slopes and upper terrace adjacent to the wetlands are dominated by upland-classed plants including smooth brome, Canada thistle (Breea arvense) and birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus tenuis, L. corniculatus?). Results - Vegetated Wetlands and Other Waters of the US The characteristics of the open water features and vegetated wetland communities occurring within the project area are summarized below. Table 1 presents the characteristics of the sample points evaluated. Wetland Drainage (Photo 1) The wetlands located along this drainage consist of a central cattail (Typha latifolia) community established under flooded conditions (no sample point) bordered immediately upslope by saturated soils supporting a vegetation community (sample point L-2) dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaroides arundinacea) and three square (Schoenoplectus pungens). Soils at the sample point selected to represent this community had matrix colors of 10YR 3/2 and 5/3 with 10YR 5/6 mottles beginning at 5 inches. The soils were saturated at 5 inches, exhibited oxidized rhizospheres on living roots, and exhibited a hydrogen sulfide odor. Open Water (No Photograph) Two open water elements located within the cattail-dominated drainage were delineated. These elements are characterized by an open water condition where cattails have not become established. TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF SAMPLE POINT CHARACTERISTICS Sample Dominant Hydric Primary & Secondary Wetland COE Point # Species Soil Indicator(s) Hydrology Indicator(s) Wetland L-1 BRIN None None No L-2 Phar, Scpu A4, Other A3, C1, C3, B10, D2 PEM1B L-3 Brin None None No Connection to Waters of the US This unnamed drainage flows into Spring Creek to the south, which, in turn, flows into the Cache la Poudre River. I trust this letter report will fulfill your needs with respect to wetland and other Waters of the U. S. delineation concerns. We request that you evaluate our delineation report with a view to considering it accurate and complete. Please call (970-229-9278) if you have any questions regarding the delineation work completed for this project. Sincerely, CEDAR CREEK ASSOCIATES, INC. Stephen G. Long Principal Copies: Mr. Michael Chalona PHOTO LOG OF THE PROJECT AREA - 2012 Photos Taken October 11, 2012 Photo 1: Delineated wetlands facing northwest; uplands to right and left of the drainage. Photo 2: Smooth brome/alfalfa uplands north of drainage facing north.