The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSANCTUARY ON THE GREEN - PDP190003 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 6 - ECS REPORT Sanctuary on the Green Environmental Characterization Study Field Work: July, 2018 Report: January, 2019 Revised: September, 2020 CEDAR CREEK ASSOCIATES, INC. i Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 Site Description ........................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Methods ...................................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 Desktop Review ..................................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Site Assessment ..................................................................................................................... 3 4.0 Ecological characterization ........................................................................................................... 4 4.1 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................. 4 4.1.1 Noxious Weeds ..................................................................................................... 8 4.1.2 Tree Inventory ...................................................................................................... 8 4.2 Wetlands ............................................................................................................................... 9 4.3 Drainage Features ................................................................................................................ 12 4.4 Wildlife ................................................................................................................................ 13 4.4.1 Avifauna ............................................................................................................. 13 4.4.2 Mammals ............................................................................................................ 14 4.4.3 Amphibians ......................................................................................................... 14 4.5 Prominent Views .................................................................................................................. 18 4.6 Sensitive and Specially Valued Species .................................................................................. 18 4.7 Wildlife Migration Corridors ................................................................................................... 20 4.8 General Ecological Functions ................................................................................................. 20 4.9 Timing of Development in Relation to Ecological Character ..................................................... 20 5.0 Mitigation measures and Recommendations ................................................................................ 21 6.0 Literature Cited and Data Sources .............................................................................................. 24 Appendix A: Vegetation Datasheets Appendix B: Wetland Datasheets Appendix C: Photographs Appendix D: Natural Buffer Mitigation Plan 1 Sanctuary on the Green Environmental Characterization Study 1.0 INTRODUCTION Solitaire Homes, LLC. proposes to construct a mixture of single-family homes, duplexes, townhomes, and condos on the 41.34 acre site setback from the northwest corner of Laporte Avenue and Taft Hill Road. This report describes the ecological conditions and functions observed at the Site. Field surveys were conducted by biologists from Cedar Creek Associates, Inc (Cedar Creek) on July 20-21st and 30th, 2018 to evaluate site conditions, determine presence of significant plant communities, define the ecological function of the site and its features, and determine presence of significant wildlife species or habitats. An additional field survey was conducted in August 2020 to complete additional evaluations requested by the City of Fort Collins. Section 2.0 provides a Site description, Section 3.0 presents the methodologies used, Section 4.0 contains a summary of findings, and Section 5.0 provides potential mitigation measures and recommendations. At the rear of the document, Appendix A includes vegetation data sheets, Appendix B contains wetland datasheets, and Appendix C displays the photo log. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The Site is located in northwest Fort Collins, setback from the northwest corner of Laporte Avenue and Taft Hill Road. The 41.34-acre Site is entirely within the Section 9, Township 7 North, Range 69 West, of the Sixth Principal Meridian. The home site on the east portion of the Site coordinates are 40.591711°N and 105.115504°W. The non-irrigated Site has a gently sloping elevation that ranges from 5,070 feet on the west side to 5,050 feet on the east side. The New Mercer Ditch runs through the eastern portion of the Site. A flood basin runs along the northern property line on the western half of the Site and the western property line on the eastern half of the Site. Map 1 displays the Site. 2 Map 1: Sanctuary on the Green Site Overview 150 300 ~ z W Vine Or L.1p 8'1Re ., ~ . l ..,., if. "' :z W Mou nun Av• ~ .. ,ulb«r)' SI W P,o$pect Rd 600 Feet 3 3.0 METHODS 3.1 Desktop Review A data review was conducted to gather information and assist in the evaluation of potential natural biological resources within the property. The data review entailed an evaluation of online resources and publications to determine the presence or potential occurrence of important natural and biological resources. This data review included: • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Federally Listed and Proposed Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species and Critical Habitat as identified by the USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC) Official Species List and Critical Habitat Mapper; • Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) protected species as identified on the IPAC Trust Resources Report; • The Colorado Natural Heritage Program database statewide species and natural community tracking list for Larimer County; • Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Threatened and Endangered Species List; • Species identified as in need of protection in the City’s Natural Areas Policy Plan; • The City’s Land Use Code (Article 3, Section 3.4.1); • The City’s Natural Habitat and Features Inventory Map (2000); • USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI); and • US Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey. 3.2 Site Assessment The entirety of the Site was traversed on foot to qualitatively evaluate site conditions, determine presence of significant plant communities, determine presence of significant wildlife species or habitats, and delineate wetlands. The wetland delineation was conducted following the methodology described in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation manual and the 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains Region. To gain an understanding of the hydrology, several soil test pits were dug, dominant vegetation was observed, and hydrolologic indicators were noted at each soil test pit location. Data was recorded on Corps of Engineers data sheets (Appendix A). Photographs were taken to document site conditions at test pits and data sampling points (Plates 1 through 18). 4 4.0 ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION 4.1 Vegetation Map 2 displays Fort Collins Natural Habitat & Features Inventory, it shows that there is a non-native upland plains forest on the very west side of the property. Map 3 shows the vegetation communites encountered across the entire Site. The entire site is 41.34 acres, with Non-native Herbaceous (pasture/hayland) comprising the greatest portion with 36.17 acres (87.5%). Table 1 shows the remaining acres are comprised of Home Site (0.93 acres), Riparian Herbaceous (1.88 acres), Riparian Woodland (0.09 acres), Upland Woodland (1.79 acres), and wetland (0.48 acres). Descriptions of each community are presented below. Non-native Herbaceous This is a grass and forb dominated ecosystem, comprised mostly of non-native species. At the Site, this community is found covering almost the entirety of the upland area and is primarily hayed lands. Species common to this community are highly palatable species for livestock, such as smooth brome (Bromopsis inermis), orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata), alfalfa (Medicago sativa), and field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis). Scattered non-native trees occur throughout this community on the Site. These areas are mowed periodically during the growing season to collect the biomass for hay. In general, non-native herbaceous ecosystems provide diminished ecological function when compared with native ecosystems. The primarily ecological function of this community is primary production and surface stability from erosion. Riparian Herbaceous This is a grass and forb dominated ecosystem found along the banks of a flowing water system. At the Site, this community is found along the New Mercer Ditch. Species common to this community are fast growing non-native perennial grasses which stabilize banks, such as smooth brome and common reed grass (Phragmites australis). In general, non-native herbaceous ecosystems provide diminished ecological Vegetation Communities Type Acreage Percent Home Site 0.93 2.2% Non-native Herbaceous 36.17 87.5% Riparian Herbaceous 1.88 4.5% Riparian Woodland 0.09 0.2% Upland Woodland 1.79 4.3% Wetland 0.48 1.2% TOTAL 41.34 100.0% Table 1 - Sanctuary on the Green 5 function when compared with native ecosystems. The primarily ecological function of this community is primary production and bank stability. Riparian Woodland This ecosystem is characterized by having both a grass and forb component and woody stratum (tree/shrub component) found along the banks of a flowing water system. At the Site, this community is found along the New Mercer Ditch where the plains cottonwoods are found. Species common to this community are fast growing non-native perennial grasses which stabilize banks, such as smooth brome and common reed grass. In general, non-native ecosystems provide diminished ecological function when compared with native ecosystems. The primarily ecological function of this community is primary production and bank stability. However, the trees can provide cover, nesting, and cooling opportunities for wildlife. Upland Woodland This ecosystem is characterized by having both a grass and forb component and woody stratum (tree/shrub component) found in upland areas. This community was designated in the Fort Collins Natural Habitat and Features Inventory (Map 2). Species common to this community are non-native trees, such as Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila) and boxelder (Negundo violaceus) which are considered nuisance species by the City of Fort Collins, and a mixed grass and forb understory. The primarily ecological function of this community is wildlife habitat and aesthetic value. Wetland This ecosystem is inundated by water, either permanently or seasonally. The primary factor that distinguishes wetlands from other communities is the characteristic vegetation of aquatic plants, adapted to the unique hydric soil. There are two wetlands within the property; they are described in Section 4.2. Typically, wetlands provide water purification and wildlife habitat. The ecosystem function of these wetlands, particularly the Laporte wetland on the south portion of the project, would be diminished because the vegetation is primarily non-native grasses. 6 Map 2: Sanctuary on the Green Natural Habitat & Features Inventory 600 R!et ---=====----- 150 300 7 Map 3: Sanctuary on the Green Vegetation Communities 150 300 D Approximate Property Boundary Vegetation Communities Home Site Non-native Herb Riparian Herbaceous Riparian Woodland Upland Wood land 600 Feet 8 4.1.1 Noxious Weeds A total of two noxious weeds were observed throughout the Site and adjacent areas Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula). Most noxious weeds were associated with the wetter areas, around wetlands and along New Mercer Ditch. However, noxious weeds were observed sporadically across the site. 4.1.2 Tree Inventory The tree inventory was conducted by Ripley Design and City of Fort Collins Forestry Department on October 12, 2018. The inventory evaluated 80 trees/groves and yielded a mitigation requirement of 87 trees, if all trees are removed. Several species of trees were encountered across the site, including Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila), Boxelder (Acer negundo), Plains Cottonwood (Populus deltoides), Russian Olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia), White Ash (Fraxinus americana), and Poplar (Populus sp.) along with several other minor tree species. Most trees were found to be in fair to poor condition with DBH’s (diameter at breast height) ranging from 2-42 inches. Full details of the tree inventory, including those trees indicated for removal and the associated tree mitigation plan, can be found in the tree inventory plan (Ripley Design, Project Development Plan, 2019). 9 4.2 Wetlands The National Wetlands Inventory depicts one PEM1A wetland along the northern property boundary. A PEM1A wetland is a freshwater emergent wetland characterized by persistent, herbaceous hydrophytic vegetation and experiences temporary flooding by surface water during the growing season. Three wetlands were identified and delineated using the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation manual and the 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains Region. Wetland delineation occurred on July 30, 2018. A total of 6 wetland verification points were sampled with three points qualifying as wetlands (Map 5, Appendix B). Three of the points were located in the most likely areas to display the characteristics of a wetland – Fort Collins Wetland (Plates 9 and 10) and Laporte Wetland (Plates 13 and 14) were located in local depressions, and Cherry Wetland (Plates 17 and 18) was located at the confluence of New Mercer Ditch and the Cherry Street drainage channel. Co- located upland points were also sampled to provide an upland contrast. Field surveys indicate that wetlands were more extensive than the NWI maps. Fort Collins Wetland was found to be 0.90 acres, Cherry Wetland was found to be 0.14 acres and Laporte Wetland was found to be 0.39 acres. Delineation datasheets can be found in Appendix B. Both Fort Collins and Cherry Wetlands provide good ecological function and character as they exhibit life form (structural). In other words, the vegetation of these two wetlands is comprised of grasses, forbs, and shrubs/trees. Therefore, these sites provide shading, cover, and nesting opportunity for a variety of wildlife species. The Laporte Wetland is comprised entirely of grasses and forbs and does not provide important ecological function to wildlife. 10 .r: VI ... ·;: lri h ; E'~rmnbry V) IJ) 1:7,218 0 0 .05 0 .1 I I I I I I I 0 0.075 0.15 August 10, 2018 Wetlands I I I I Cherry St Pou:Jre Community ~demy 0 .2mi I I 0.3 km V) ,,, ■ Estuarine and Marine Deepwater 0 Estuarine and Marine Wetland P.oudre Sch o l D1tlr1cl 0 Freshwater Eme rg en t Wetland ■ Fresh water Forested /Shrub Wetland 0 Freshwater Pond Map 4: Sanctuary on the Green National Wetland Inventory ■ Lake D Other Riverine U .S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and S u art Team, 1Nettands_team@fws.gov Lila This map is for gene ral reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for t he accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map . All wetlands re lated data shou ld be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. National Wetlands Inv entory (NW) This page was prod uced by t he N'v\1 mapper 11 Map 5: Sanctuary on the Green Wetland Delineations 150 300 600 Feet 12 4.3 Water Conveyance Features Two features to convey water were identified during field surveys of the Site and nearby vicinity. Within the Site, the New Mercer Ditch runs along portions of the property’s northern boundaries and continues south to bisect the parcel. Adjacent to the Site, an unnamed drainage furrow runs parallel to the Site’s northern boundary, originating from the Fort Collins Wetland and flowing east until it crosses under Taft Hill Road. Each feature was traversed to evaluate vegetative composition, wetland potential, and other notable ecological functions identified during field surveys. The New Mercer Ditch exhibits narrow bands of riparian herbaceous and riparian woodland vegetation along the inside of the ditch embankments. Common reed grass and smooth brome dominate its majority, interspersed with sporadic patches of Canada thistle and leafy spurge. Ditch embankments are moderately incised and exhibit steep slopes that range from 60 to 90 degrees. Despite these characteristics, there is minimal evidence of bank failure or sediment deposition into the waterway, likely due to the stability provided by dense perennial grass roots. The ordinary high-water mark is visible approximately 1 foot from the channel floor, while bank elevations varies between 3 to 6 feet. Given that evidence of periodic inundation is limited to the engineered channel and flanked by tall and steep banks, hydrology of the ditch was not determined to be indicative of a wetland. The New Mercer Ditch provides some degree of benefit as a wildlife migration corridor, which is discussed in more detail in Section 4.7. The small, unnamed drainage furrow varies from ½ foot to 2 feet in both width and depth. At the time of the August field evaluation, the Fort Collins Wetland supplied low water flow into the drainage, which was sustained throughout much of the channel before gradually drying out further south, around 250-300 feet west of Taft Hill Road. The drainage furrow exhibited moderately to highly incised banks along its majority, before transitioning to a gentler gradient along the drier reach to the south. The upland herbaceous vegetation community along both banks consists of almost entirely of Timothy grass (Phleum pratense). Hydrophytic species were occasionally observed along drainage banks, sporadically interspersed among upland vegetation species. In these areas, hydrophytic cover and composition was minimal, with dominant species and a vegetative composition consistent with an upland herbaceous community. For these reasons, vegetation along the drainage furrow was not determined to be indicative of a wetland. Additionally, post- field analysis of its delineation indicates that if field surveys had determined that conditions along the drainage furrow were indicative of a wetland, the required 50-foot buffer for wetlands smaller than 1/3 of an acre lies outside of the Site boundary and would not be impacted by development activities. The location of this ditch can be seen in Map 6. 13 4.4 Wildlife Pedestrian transects to document incidental wildlife occurrence as well as habitat defined point count transects were implemented to inventory wildlife populations during the summer field effort. Each point count location was designated by habitat (non-native herbaceous, riparian herbaceous, riparian woodland, upland woodland, wetland, & ditch) and was observed at a 50m radius for 10 min, recording species, location and behavior. Habitat value and wildlife use of the project area is limited by the general lack of woody vegetation, dominance by non-native species, seasonal mowing, and surrounding developments and roads. Only a few species are likely to establish resident populations in this non-native grassland parcel. Songbirds such as European starling, common grackle, and black-billed magpie may also occasionally use non-native grassland habitat at this site. Urban-adapted species including raccoon, striped skunk, red fox, mourning dove, and muskrat are also present or have the potential to inhabit this site. The New Mercer Ditch has limited value as a potential wildlife movement corridor because of the proximity of residential and other developments along most portions of the ditch to the west and east of the Sanctuary West property, however, wetland obligate species such as mallard and muskrat were observed utilizing this feature, and should be given some value as a wildlife corridor. 4.4.1 Avifauna A total of 19 bird species were observed during the point count surveys and pedestrian transects that were conducted at the property. Most species are common in urban settings and occupy the shrubs and trees that are present on the parcel. Seasonal and/or year-round use can be expected by a number of urban adapted birds including American robin (Turdus migratorius), sparrows, magpies (Pica hudsonia), swallows, crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos), ravens (Corvus corax), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), pigeon (Columbalivia domestica), grackle (Quiscalus quiscula), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), jays (Cyanocitta sp.), western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta), and red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus). Some ground-nesting species may nest in the tall grasses on the periphery of the property, however the pasture is routinely mowed, and managed such that many ground nesting avian species would be precluded from nesting. Canada geese (Branta Canadensis) were observed and may occasionally move into non-native grassland to seek prey or feed on grass or grass seeds. Waterfowl likely use the area for foraging and loafing and may use the un-mowed tall grass immediately surrounding the wetlands for nesting, though the small size of the area and proximity to development greatly reduces the quality of nesting habitat. This property is not a concentration area for migratory or nesting waterfowl or shorebirds. The ephemeral nature of the ditch and wetlands make the habitat less attractive for concentrations of migrating or overwintering shorebirds or waterfowl. The only wetland 14 obligate species that was observed was the common mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) and was seen utilizing the New Mercer ditch as brood rearing habitat. The site has limited potential to be hunted by most raptors except for urban-adapted species such as American kestrel, red-tailed hawk and great horned owl, although none were observed. Raptor species known to occur in the region include turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis), Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), northern harrier (Circus circus), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), rough-legged hawk (Buteo lagopus), and golden eagle (Aquila chrysateos). These species are year-round residents, seasonal visitors, or migrants, depending on the species. Owl species which could potentially frequent the property include the barn owl (Tyto alba), great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), long-eared owl (Asio otus), and the short- eared owl (Asio flammeus). Turkey vulture were observed within the vicinity and may utilize the property, although not for a critical life requirement. A raptor nest survey was implemented on September 3, 2020 but did not result in conclusive findings, a winter survey is needed to observe potential nests and activity after trees have dropped their leaves. A complete list of all birds encountered during the field survey(s) can be seen on Table 2. 4.4.2 Mammals Various small rodents including mice, voles, rats, gophers, ground squirrels, chipmunks and lagomorphs (Lepus sp, Sylvilagus sp) are expected to utilize the property year round, although few were observed during pedestrian transects. Prey species are cyclically common, widespread throughout the region, and are important food sources for raptors and other predators. Other species such as porcupines (Erethizon dorsatum) and various bats could also frequent the area. Two common bat species that are consistently found in Fort Collins and roost primarily in trees are hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus) and silver-haired bats (Lasionycteris noctivagans), although none were observed. The value of the property to mammals is low due to urban location of the property and the land use of grazing, mowing, and baling the pasture. No big game species were observed during pedestrian transects, although it is likely that mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) utilize the area. Three mammals were observed utilizing the property during the field effort, muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), and fox squirrel (Sciurus niger). There was no evidence of prairie dogs or prairie dog burrows on the property. 4.4.3 Amphibians No amphibians were observed on the property, however the wetlands on the northern and southern portions of the property will likely contain amphibians and wetland reptiles common to the City of Fort Collins. Locally common riparian species, within suitable habitat in the region, include western chorus frogs (Pseudacris triseriata), bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus), plains spadefoot (Spea bombifrons) and Woodhouse’s toad (Bufo woodhousei). Common upland reptile species expected on the property would 15 include the bull snake (Pituophis melanoleucas) and garter snake (Thamnophis sp.). Less common upland species may include the prairie rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis), eastern yellow-bellied racer (Coluber constrictor flaviventris), and plains hog-nosed snake (Heterodon nasicus). The only reptile species observed on the property was the common garter snake. Table 2 - Sanctuary on the Green Observed Wildlife Species List Common Name Scientific Name Blackbird, Red-winged Agelaius phoeniceus Chickadee, Black-capped Poecile atricapillus Dove, Mourning Zenaida macroura Finch, House Haemorhous mexicanus Flicker, Northern Colaptes auratus Grackel, Common Quiscalus quiscula Goldfinch, American Spinus tristis Goose, Canada Branta canadensis Hummingbird, Broad-tailed Selasphorus platycercus Jay, Blue Cyanocitta cristata Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Nighthawk, Common Chordeiles minor Robin, American Turdus migratorius Sparrow, Song Melospiza melodia Starling, European Sturnus vulgaris Swallow, Barn Hirundo rustica Vulture, Turkey Cathartes aura Woodpecker, Hairy Leuconotopicus villosus Wren, House Troglodytes aedon Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus Racoon Procyon lotor Fox Squirrel Sciurus niger Garter Snake Thamnophis sirtalis Mammals Bird Reptiles 16 0 Map 6: Sanctuary on the Green Water Conveyance 150 300 600 Feet pproximate Property Boundary ater Conveyance N w❖• 17 Map 6: Sanctuary on the Green Wildlife Survey 150 300 Legend • Wildlife Survey Points D Approxima te Property Bound ary Vegetation Communities Home Site Non-native Herb Riparian H erbaceous Riparian Woodland Upland Woodland Wetland 18 4.5 Prominent Views Views across the Site to the east are met with Taft Hill Road and non-native herbaceous fields and low density housing before encountering riparian woodland around the ditch east of Taft Hill Road and to the north and south views across the Site views are met with high density residential housing. The prominent across the Site is to the west where there is high density housing and eventually the Rocky Mountains can be seen. 4.6 Sensitive and Specially Valued Species A current list of federally threatened, endangered, proposed, and candidate species, and designated critical habitat that may occur within the boundary of the Site and/or may be affected by the proposed development was obtained from the USFWS IPaC website (2018). Table 3 lists the species and their designated and proposed critical habitats. No USFWS designated critical habitat occurs in or near the Site. 19 Common Name Scientific Name North Platte, South Platte, and Laramie River Basin Species Least Tern Sterna antillarum E Sparsely vegetated sandbars on large rivers and sand/gravel pits.No No large rivers on project site.No potential impact Pallid Sturgeon Scaphirhynchus albus E Large, free-flowing, warm-water, and turbid rivers with a diverse assemblage of physical habitats.No No large rivers on project site.No potential impact Piping Plover Charadrius melodus T Sandy beaches, sandflats, dredge islands, and drained river floodplains.No No sand beaches or flats on the project site. No potential impact Western Prairie Fringed Orchid Platanthera praeclara T Tall grass prairie on unplowed, calcareous prairies, and sedge meadows. Upstream depletions to the Platte River system in Wyoming may affect the species in NE. No No tall grass praire on project site. No potential impact Whooping Crane Grus americana E Wetlands, inland marshes, lakes, ponds, wet meadows and rivers, and agricultural fields.No No water depletion associated with the project.No potential impact Mammals Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis T Moist boreal/subalpine forests in the W. US with cold, snowy winters and a high- density snowshoe hare prey base.No No dense forests with snowshoe hare on project site.No potential impact North American Wolverine Gulo gulo luscus PT Deep, persistent, and reliable snow cover.No No deep persistent snow on project site. No potential impact Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse Zapus hudsonius preblei T Lush vegetation along watercourses or herbaceous understories in wooded areas near water.No No water depletion associated with the project. No hibernacula on project site.No potential impact Birds Mexican Spotted Owl Stri occidentalis lucida T Nesting/roosting habitat typically occurs either in well- structured forests with high canopy cover, large trees, and other late seral characteristics, or in steep and narrow rocky canyons formed by parallel cliffs with numerous caves and/or ledges within specific geological formations. No No late seral forests in steep canyons on the project site. No potential impact Fish Greenback Cutthroat Trout Oncorhynchus clarkii stomias T This species inhabits cold water streams and lakes with adequate stream spawning habitat during spring.No No spawning habitat associated with ditches. No potential impact Insects Arapahoe Snowfly Arsapnia arapahoe C Stoneflies are primarily associated with clean, cool, running waters.No No water depletion associated with the project. No potential impact Flowering Plants Colorado Butterfly Plant Gaura neomexicana v. coloradensis T An early successional plant (although probably not a pioneer) adapted to use stream channel sites that are periodically disturbed. It occurs on subirrigated, alluvial soils on level or slightly sloping floodplains and drainage channels. No No subirrigated alluvial soils on site. No water depletion associated with the project. No potential impact North Park Phacelia Phacelia formosula E The species is limited to eroded soil outcrops composed of barren exposures of the Coalmont Formation, a coal- bearing substrate in North Park CO.No No Coalmont Formation on the project.No potential impact Ute Ladies'-tresses Spiranthes diluvialis T Seasonally moist soils and wet meadows of drainages below 7000' elevation.No No wetmeadows on the project. No water depletion associated with the project. No potential impact Source: USFWS 2018 E = Federally Endangered, T = Federally Threatened, PT = Proposed Threatened, C = Candidate Explanation Determination Special Status Species with Potential to Occur on the Site Species Table 3 Sanctuary on the Green Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present? 20 4.7 Wildlife Migration Corridors The Site is surrounded by residential development to the north, south, and west, with pasture/hayland fields to the east. It is highly unlikely that the Site serves as a migration corridor for sensitive, unique, or regionally protected wildlife. However, New Mercer Ditch does provide some migratory benefit to resident urban-adapted wildlife such as red foxes, raccoons, coyotes, and skunks, and it may provide temporary stopover habitat for migrating birds. The ditch originates at the Cache la Poudre River near Laporte and terminates at Mail Creek southeast of the project area. Much of the canal passes through developed portions of Fort Collins, and in most areas, development, and associated landscaping approaches up to the top edge of the canal. The continuity of the canal is further compromised by numerous culverted road crossings. 4.8 General Ecological Functions The general ecological functions provided by the Site have been reduced by multiple human-induced stressors including agricultural (hay) production, suburban development, and anthropogenic uses of the site, such as recreation from adjacent community member. Both riparian and associated habitats along New Mercer Ditch provide shading, cover, and nesting opportunity for a variety of wildlife species, flood abatement, water infiltration, and aesthetic appeal. The upland woodland could provide shading, cover, and nesting opportunities for a variety of wildlife species. 4.9 Timing of Development in Relation to Ecological Character The MBTA specifically protects migratory birds and their nests from possession, sale, purchase, barter, transport, import, export, and take. The regulatory definition of take (50 CFR 10.12) means to pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt these actions. No trees shall be removed during the songbird nesting season (February 1 to July 31) without first having a professional ecologist or wildlife biologist complete a nesting survey to identify any active nests existing on the project site. If active nests are found, the city environmental planner will determine whether additional restrictions on tree removal and construction apply. 21 5.0 MITIGATION MEASURES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Despite the diminished ecological function due to the non-naïve species and history of use on the Site, mitigation measures and buffer distances should be used to improve or maintain ecological function of natural features on the Site. Trees A variety of trees are scattered throughout the Site and were found to be mostly in poor or fair condition by Fort Collins Forestry department during the tree survey on October 12, 2018. In accordance with the Tree Inventory Plans (Ripley Design, Project Development Plan, 2019), mitigation trees will be planted in addition to the 1:1 acreage replacement of upland woodland groves that are disturbed during development. The following tree protection conditions apply: 1. Trees to be removed are shown on Tree Inventory Plans. All others shall remain and be protected in place. 2. Within the drip line of any protected existing tree, there shall be no cut or fill over a four-inch depth unless a qualified arborist or forester has evaluated and approved the disturbance. 3. All protected existing trees shall be pruned to the City of Fort Collins forestry standards. Tree pruning and removal shall be performed by a business that holds a current City of Fort Collins arborist license where required by code. 4. Prior to and during construction, barriers shall be erected around all protected existing trees with such barriers to be of orange fencing a minimum of four (4) feet in height, secured with metal t- posts, no closer than six (6) feet from the trunk or one-half (½) of the drip line, whichever is greater. There shall be no storage or movement of equipment, material, debris or fill within the fenced tree protection zone. 5. During the construction stage of development, the applicant shall prevent the cleaning of equipment or material or the storage and disposal of waste material such as paints, oils, solvents, asphalt, concrete, motor oil or any other material harmful to the life of a tree within the drip line of any protected tree or group of trees. 6. No damaging attachment, wires, signs or permits may be fastened to any protected tree. 7. Large property areas containing protected trees and separated from construction or land clearing areas, road rights-of-way and utility easements may be "ribboned off," rather than erecting protective fencing around each tree as required in subsection (g)(3) above. This may be accomplished by placing metal t-post stakes a maximum of fifty (50) feet apart and tying ribbon or rope from stake-to-stake along the outside perimeters of such areas being cleared. 8. The installation of utilities, irrigation lines or any underground fixture requiring excavation deeper than six (6) inches shall be accomplished by boring under the root system of protected existing --- 22 trees at a minimum depth of twenty-four (24) inches. The auger distance is established from the face of the tree (outer bark) and is scaled from tree diameter at breast height as described in the tree plan. 9. No trees shall be removed during the songbird nesting season (February 1 to July 31) without first having a professional ecologist or wildlife biologist complete a nesting survey to identify any active nests existing on the project site. If active nests are found, the city environmental planner will determine whether additional restrictions on tree removal and construction apply. Wetlands There were three delineated wetlands encountered onsite or immediately adjacent (Fort Collins, Cherry, and Laporte). The Fort Collins wetland is the biggest at 0.90 acres and located offsite immediately to the north of the property line and east of New Mercer Ditch. No significant use by waterfowl or shorebirds was observed, therefore, the buffer zone standard of 100 feet applies. The Cherry wetland is 0.14 acres and located between New Mercer Ditch and Cherry Street. Since it is less than 1/3 of an acre, the buffer zone standard of 50 feet applies. Finally, the onsite portion of the Laporte wetland is 0.39 acres, but extends onto private land to the east and west. The portion of this wetland on the Site is greater than 1/3 of an acre and no significant use by waterfowl or shorebirds was observed, therefore, the buffer zone standard of 100 feet applies. The acreage created by wetland buffers should be maintained to: 1. Preserve or enhance the ecological character or function and wildlife use of the natural habitat or feature and to minimize or adequately mitigate the foreseeable impacts of development. 2. Preserve or enhance the existence of wildlife movement corridors between natural habitats and features, both within and adjacent to the site. 3. Designed to enhance the natural ecological characteristics of the site. If existing landscaping within the buffer zone is determined by the decision maker to be incompatible with the purposes of the buffer zone, then the applicant shall undertake restoration and mitigation measures such as regrading and/or the replanting of native vegetation. 4. Designed to provide appropriate human access to natural habitats and features and their associated buffer zones in order to serve recreation purposes, provided that such access is compatible with the ecological character or wildlife use of the natural habitat or feature. Wildlife Corridor New Mercer Ditch has been identified as an irrigation ditch that serves as a wildlife corridor. Therefore, the buffer zone standard of 50 feet applies. The acreage created by wildlife corridor buffers should be maintained to the objectives presented in the wetland section. 23 Raptor Nest Survey A winter raptor nest survey will be completed to determine if there are active nests in the vicinity of the project. Winter surveys are the best approach to be able to observe nests and activity prior to leaf-out in the trees. If nests are found, Colorado Parks and Wildlife’s Recommended Buffer Zones and Seasonal Restrictions for Colorado Raptors (2020) would apply. 24 6.0 LITERATURE CITED AND DATA SOURCES City of Fort Collins. 2000. Natural Habitat and Features Inventory Map. Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Threatened and Endangered Species List. https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SOC-ThreatenedEndangeredList.aspx. Accessed 12/17/2018. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/. Accessed 12/17/2018. USACE. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. USACE. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains (Version 2.0). US Fish and Wildlife Service. Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC). https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed 12/17/2018. US Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Wetlands Mapper. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/. Accessed 12/17/2018. Appendix A Vegetation Data Sheets 1 Tree % Shrub % Forb % Grass %ExcellentGoodFairPoorN/A4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X List species: 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X NoneMinorModerateMajorN/AExcellentGoodFairPoorN/A4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X Feet Intermittent Ephemeral Perennial N/A Bedrock Boulders Riprap Gravel Sand Silt/Clay Concrete N/A Possible Ecosystem Services: Other Comments, including wildlife species seen: Total Vegetation Cover by StrataPollinators? E. Direct Human Impacts F: Indirect Human Impacts MAINTENANCE QUALITATIVE PARAMETERS 3 2 M. Root Density (Percent) N. Surface Protection (Percent) O. Bank Angle (Degrees) L. Root Depth (Feet) Q. Flow Regime B. Wildlife Habitat C. Overall Aesthetic D. Ecological Connectivity Sustainability B1. Prairie Dog Habitat B2. Species of Concern A. Biodiversity A2. Habitat Diversity A1. Plant Diversity LANDSCAPE TYPOLOGY FIELD DATA SHEET Noxious Weeds COMMENTS % % % % Landscape Description: 2 GENERAL QUALITATIVE PARAMETERS 21 Dominant Species 2 K. Opportunities for Restoration (Describe in comments)Y / N Total Score I. Annual / Invasive Weed Population Description 4 3 2 1 X J. Ground Disturbance 4 3 2 1 1 X R. Bank Material (Type) STREAM CHARACTERISTICS (Stream Areas Only) X1G. Noxious Weed Population Description 4 P. Bank Height XH. Visual Water Quality (excluding upland typologies)4 3 Habitat Subtype: Date:Project: Typology:Hydrologic System (riparian & surface water types): Observer:Sample ID:Sanctuary on the Green Jesse Dillon 01 7/30/18 Non-native Herbaceous None None Mowed hay fields 20 80 Smooth Brome Western Wheatgrass Alfalfa Bindweed Canada Thistle No habitat diverisity, the landscaped in homogenous None None Typical agricultural field, limited lifeformand species diversity Surrounded by sub-urban development, adjacent to New Mercer Ditch Various user trails transverse this community Scattered bindweed and Canada thistle Noise from adjacent suburban development, roads Only ground disturbance associated with homesite Potential to impove ecological character with native species Primary Production, Erosion Protection 22/36 Very little plant diversity, community dominated by aggressive grasses 1 Tree % Shrub % Forb % Grass %ExcellentGoodFairPoorN/A4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X List species: 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X NoneMinorModerateMajorN/AExcellentGoodFairPoorN/A4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X Feet Intermittent Ephemeral Perennial N/A Bedrock Boulders Riprap Gravel Sand Silt/Clay Concrete N/A Possible Ecosystem Services: Other Comments, including wildlife species seen: Total Vegetation Cover by StrataPollinators? E. Direct Human Impacts F: Indirect Human Impacts MAINTENANCE QUALITATIVE PARAMETERS 3 2 M. Root Density (Percent) N. Surface Protection (Percent) O. Bank Angle (Degrees) L. Root Depth (Feet) Q. Flow Regime B. Wildlife Habitat C. Overall Aesthetic D. Ecological Connectivity Sustainability B1. Prairie Dog Habitat B2. Species of Concern A. Biodiversity A2. Habitat Diversity A1. Plant Diversity LANDSCAPE TYPOLOGY FIELD DATA SHEET Noxious Weeds COMMENTS % % % % Landscape Description: 2 GENERAL QUALITATIVE PARAMETERS 21 Dominant Species 2 K. Opportunities for Restoration (Describe in comments)Y / N Total Score I. Annual / Invasive Weed Population Description 4 3 2 1 X J. Ground Disturbance 4 3 2 1 1 X R. Bank Material (Type) STREAM CHARACTERISTICS (Stream Areas Only) X1G. Noxious Weed Population Description 4 P. Bank Height XH. Visual Water Quality (excluding upland typologies)4 3 Habitat Subtype: Date:Project: Typology:Hydrologic System (riparian & surface water types): Observer:Sample ID:Sanctuary on the Green Jesse Dillon 7/30/18 None None None Noise from adjacent suburban development, roads Potential to impove ecological character with native species None 02 Riparian Herbaceous New Mercer Ditch Grass dominated communities adjacent to New Mercer Ditch 10 90 Reed Grass Smooth Brome Canada Thistle Leafy Spurge Typical grass dominated banks, limited lifeform and species diversity Banks provide some habitat diverisity Surrounded by suburban development, but New Mercer Ditch is a wildlife corridor Various user trails transverse this community, ditch maintainance Canada thistle common, leafy spurge scattered Good plant cover on banks Good plant cover on banks Good plant cover on banks Slope is between 2:1 and 1:1 (27 degrees to 45 degrees) 0 Primary Production, Bank Stability Ground disturbance associated with trails and maintenance access 26/40 Very little plant diversity, community dominated by aggressive grasses 1 Tree % Shrub % Forb % Grass %ExcellentGoodFairPoorN/A4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X List species: 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X NoneMinorModerateMajorN/AExcellentGoodFairPoorN/A4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X Feet Intermittent Ephemeral Perennial N/A Bedrock Boulders Riprap Gravel Sand Silt/Clay Concrete N/A Possible Ecosystem Services: Other Comments, including wildlife species seen: Total Vegetation Cover by StrataPollinators? E. Direct Human Impacts F: Indirect Human Impacts MAINTENANCE QUALITATIVE PARAMETERS 3 2 M. Root Density (Percent) N. Surface Protection (Percent) O. Bank Angle (Degrees) L. Root Depth (Feet) Q. Flow Regime B. Wildlife Habitat C. Overall Aesthetic D. Ecological Connectivity Sustainability B1. Prairie Dog Habitat B2. Species of Concern A. Biodiversity A2. Habitat Diversity A1. Plant Diversity LANDSCAPE TYPOLOGY FIELD DATA SHEET Noxious Weeds COMMENTS % % % % Landscape Description: 2 GENERAL QUALITATIVE PARAMETERS 21 Dominant Species 2 K. Opportunities for Restoration (Describe in comments)Y / N Total Score I. Annual / Invasive Weed Population Description 4 3 2 1 X J. Ground Disturbance 4 3 2 1 1 X R. Bank Material (Type) STREAM CHARACTERISTICS (Stream Areas Only) X1G. Noxious Weed Population Description 4 P. Bank Height XH. Visual Water Quality (excluding upland typologies)4 3 Habitat Subtype: Date:Project: Typology:Hydrologic System (riparian & surface water types): Observer:Sample ID:Sanctuary on the Green Jesse Dillon 7/30/18 None None None Noise from adjacent suburban development, roads Potential to impove ecological character with native species None New Mercer Ditch 10 90 Reed Grass Smooth Brome Canada Thistle Surrounded by suburban development, but New Mercer Ditch is a wildlife corridor Various user trails transverse this community, ditch maintainance Good plant cover on banks Good plant cover on banks Good plant cover on banks Slope is between 2:1 and 1:1 (27 degrees to 45 degrees) 0 Primary Production, Bank Stability 40 Plains cottonwood Banks and tree cover provide some habitat diverisity Typical grass dominated banks, limited lifeform and species diversity, tree cover Canada thistle common Ground disturbance associated with trails and maintenance access The trees can provide cover, nesting, and cooling opportunities for wildlife 28/40 Very little plant diversity, community dominated by aggressive grasses Grass / tree dominated communities adjacent to New Mercer Ditch Riparian Woodland 03 1 Tree % Shrub % Forb % Grass %ExcellentGoodFairPoorN/A4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X List species: 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X NoneMinorModerateMajorN/AExcellentGoodFairPoorN/A4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X 4 3 2 1 X Feet Intermittent Ephemeral Perennial N/A Bedrock Boulders Riprap Gravel Sand Silt/Clay Concrete N/A Possible Ecosystem Services: Other Comments, including wildlife species seen: Total Vegetation Cover by StrataPollinators? E. Direct Human Impacts F: Indirect Human Impacts MAINTENANCE QUALITATIVE PARAMETERS 3 2 M. Root Density (Percent) N. Surface Protection (Percent) O. Bank Angle (Degrees) L. Root Depth (Feet) Q. Flow Regime B. Wildlife Habitat C. Overall Aesthetic D. Ecological Connectivity Sustainability B1. Prairie Dog Habitat B2. Species of Concern A. Biodiversity A2. Habitat Diversity A1. Plant Diversity LANDSCAPE TYPOLOGY FIELD DATA SHEET Noxious Weeds COMMENTS % % % % Landscape Description: 2 GENERAL QUALITATIVE PARAMETERS 21 Dominant Species 2 K. Opportunities for Restoration (Describe in comments)Y / N Total Score I. Annual / Invasive Weed Population Description 4 3 2 1 X J. Ground Disturbance 4 3 2 1 1 X R. Bank Material (Type) STREAM CHARACTERISTICS (Stream Areas Only) X1G. Noxious Weed Population Description 4 P. Bank Height XH. Visual Water Quality (excluding upland typologies)4 3 Habitat Subtype: Date:Project: Typology:Hydrologic System (riparian & surface water types): Observer:Sample ID:Sanctuary on the Green Jesse Dillon 7/30/18 None None None Noise from adjacent suburban development, roads Potential to impove ecological character with native species None 10 60 10 various various Siberian Elm Boxelder Marginal plant diversity, non-native nuisance trees Tree cover provides habitat diverisity There is lifeform and species diversity, but non-natives Tree dominated upland communities Upland Woodland 04 Surrounded by suburban development, adjacent to New Mercer Ditch Camp found in the upland woodland Canada thistle scattered Ground disturbance associated with camp The trees can provide cover, nesting, and cooling opportunities for wildlife 23/36 Appendix B Wetland Data Sheets US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Great Plains Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC−): (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) High Plains Depressions (F16) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 & 73) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F, G, H) Depleted Matrix (F3) Reduced Vertic (F18) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) Other (Explain in Remarks) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) High Plains Depressions (F16) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) (MLRA 72 & 73 of LRR H) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Saturation (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) (where tilled) Drift Deposits (B3) (where not tilled) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Geomorphic Position (D2) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Great Plains Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC−): (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) High Plains Depressions (F16) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 & 73) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F, G, H) Depleted Matrix (F3) Reduced Vertic (F18) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) Other (Explain in Remarks) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) High Plains Depressions (F16) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) (MLRA 72 & 73 of LRR H) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Saturation (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) (where tilled) Drift Deposits (B3) (where not tilled) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Geomorphic Position (D2) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Great Plains Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC−): (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) High Plains Depressions (F16) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 & 73) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F, G, H) Depleted Matrix (F3) Reduced Vertic (F18) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) Other (Explain in Remarks) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) High Plains Depressions (F16) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) (MLRA 72 & 73 of LRR H) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Saturation (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) (where tilled) Drift Deposits (B3) (where not tilled) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Geomorphic Position (D2) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Great Plains Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC−): (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) High Plains Depressions (F16) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 & 73) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F, G, H) Depleted Matrix (F3) Reduced Vertic (F18) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) Other (Explain in Remarks) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) High Plains Depressions (F16) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) (MLRA 72 & 73 of LRR H) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Saturation (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) (where tilled) Drift Deposits (B3) (where not tilled) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Geomorphic Position (D2) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Great Plains Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC−): (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) High Plains Depressions (F16) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 & 73) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F, G, H) Depleted Matrix (F3) Reduced Vertic (F18) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) Other (Explain in Remarks) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) High Plains Depressions (F16) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) (MLRA 72 & 73 of LRR H) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Saturation (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) (where tilled) Drift Deposits (B3) (where not tilled) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Geomorphic Position (D2) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Appendix C Photographs Plate 1 – New Mercer Ditch – Riparian Woodland Plate 2 – New Mercer Ditch – Riparian Herbaceous Plate 3 – Non-native Herbaceous Plate 4 - Non-native Herbaceous Sanctuary on the Green Photos Plate 5 – Fort Collins Wetland Plate 6 – Laporte Wetland Plate 7 – Upland Woodland Plate 8 – Upland Woodland Sanctuary on the Green Photos Plate 9 – Fort Collins Wetland Plate 10 – Fort Collins Wetland Soil Core Fort Collins Wetland Photos Plate 11 – Fort Collins Co-located Upland Plate 12 – Fort Collins Upland Soil Core Fort Collins Co-located Upland Photos Plate 13 – Laporte Wetland Plate 14 – Laporte Wetland Soil Core LaporteWetland Photos Plate 15 – Laporte Co-located Upland Plate 16 – Laporte Upland Soil Core Laporte Co-located Upland Photos Plate 17 – Cherry Wetland Plate 18 – Cherry Wetland Soil Core LaporteWetland Photos Appendix D Natural Buffer Mitigation Plan Natural Buffer Mitigation Plan The project creates Natural Buffers associated with New Mercer Ditch and established wetlands found on the Site. In accordance with City of Fort Collins guidelines, these Natural Buffers should be managed to: 1. Preserve or enhance the ecological character or function and wildlife use of the natural habitat or feature and to minimize or adequately mitigate the foreseeable impacts of development. 2. Preserve or enhance the existence of wildlife movement corridors between natural habitats and features, both within and adjacent to the site. 3. Designed to enhance the natural ecological characteristics of the site. If existing landscaping within the buffer zone is determined by the decision maker to be incompatible with the purposes of the buffer zone, then the applicant shall undertake restoration and mitigation measures such as regrading and/or the replanting of native vegetation. 4. Designed to provide appropriate human access to natural habitats and features and their associated buffer zones in order to serve recreation purposes, provided that such access is compatible with the ecological character or wildlife use of the natural habitat or feature. Essentially, this plan aims to define an approach and provide specific treatments to improve ecological function and enhance the ecological characteristics of the Natural Buffers. Specifically, this plan will attempt to increase both species and structural diversity of the vegetation communities using native, drought tolerant species. Wetlands are not proposed to be improved as part of this plan, this plan strictly addresses the Natural Buffers associated with the wetlands and New Mercer Ditch. Step 1: Creating Opportunity or Niches Vegetation currently inhabiting the Natural Buffers is primarily aggressive, non-native perennial grasses. These species tend to dominate and ecosystem by outcompeting minor, desirable species. Therefore, creating opportunities for a variety of native species to establish is vital. Some method of vegetation control must be used on these aggressive grasses. Typically, mechanical or chemical control is used. Mechanical control entails scraping or plowing to increase bare ground exposure which will serve as a seedbed / planting medium. Chemical control entails the use of herbicide to diminish dominance of perennial grasses. If chemical control is selected, only City of Fort Collins approved herbicide should be used by a qualified contractor, in accordance with the label. Step 2: Soil Preparation The soil surface should be optimized for seeding or planting. An agronomic assessment should be implemented to evaluate the chemical and physical properties of the soil. This information can be used to determine whether soil amendments would benefit the establishing plant communities and allow for optimization of the seed mix to soil conditions. Prior to seeding the soil surface should be loose, allowing for good soil/seed contact. A disc harrow prior to seeding is best. Step 3: Seeding and Planting The species used should be native and suitable to the soil of the Natural Buffers. Seed mixes should be designed to facilitate growth of appropriate and sustainable species. An initial seed mix is presented below but may be changed based on the agronomic assessment results. Seeding can be accomplished using both broadcasting and drilling techniques, following final contouring and amendment application/incorporation, if appropriate. If seed is broadcast, a light disc harrowing perpendicular to the flow of energy (wind and/or water) should immediately follow seeding to increase seed to soil contact and provide some protection from wind or water erosion and granivory. If seed is drilled, final drilling pass must occur on the contour, to create subtle ridges perpendicular to the flow of energy. The following guidelines are provided by the City of Fort Collins: 1. Prepare soil as necessary and appropriate for native seed mix species through aeration and addition of amendments, then seed in two directions to distribute seed evenly over entire area. Drill seed all indicated areas as soon as possible after completion of grading operations. 2. If changes are to be made to seed mix based on site conditions then approval must be provided by a city Environmental Planner. 3. Appropriate native seeding equipment will be used (standard turf seeding equipment or agriculture equipment shall not be used). 4. Drill seed application recommended per specified application rate to no more than ½ inch depth (or appropriate depth for selected species). For broadcast seeding instead of drill seeding method double specified application rate. 5. After seeding the area shall be covered with crimped straw, jute mesh, or other appropriate methods. Planting of native shrubs should occur to provide structural diversity. Species to be used should be approved by a city Environmental Planner. According to the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the following native shrubs, sub-shrubs, and agavoids are found on these soils and presumably would be appropriate to plant: • Fourwing Saltbush (Atriplex canescens) • Rubber Rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa ssp. nauseosa var. nauseosa) • Winterfat (Krascheninnikovia lanata) • Prairie Sagewort (Artemisia frigida) • Soapweed Yucca (Yucca glauca) Shrubs should be planted using industry Best Management Practices. Step 4: Maintenance and Management Maintenance and management activities should be implemented to ensure success of the ecological restoration project. After seeding the area shall be covered with crimped straw, jute mesh, or other appropriate soil surface stabilization methods. Temporary irrigation will be used until seed is established; an irrigation plan will be prepared prior to seeding. The irrigation system for seeded areas shall be fully operational at the time of seeding and shall ensure 100% head-to-head coverage over all seeded areas. A weed management plan should be implemented to ensure that weeds are properly managed before, during, and after seeding activities. Overall, the contractor shall monitor seeded area for proper irrigation, erosion control, germination and reseeding as needed to establish cover. Step 5: Completion Restored vegetation communities will be considered established when seventy percent vegetative cover is reached with no larger than one foot square bare spots and/or until deemed established by city planning services and erosion control. The developer and/or landscape contractor is responsible for adequate seedling coverage and growth at the time of final stabilization, as defined by state and local agencies. If final stabilization is not achieved to the satisfaction of the agency, the developer and/or landscape contractor shall be responsible for additional corrective measures to satisfy final vegetative requirements for closeout.