Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFOSSIL CREEK ESTATES PUD FIRST FILING FINAL - 50 92F - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTFOSSIL CREEK ESTATES PUD ASSESSMENT OF NATURAL AREA IMPACTS Prepared For: City of Fort Collins, Colorado Natural Resources Division Prepared By: Shalkey Walker Associates, Inc. and ERO Resources Corporation Denver, Colorado March 16, 1994 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts • A description of any critical elements and possible problems that may influence the success of the project. • Description of techniques for reclaiming areas disturbed by construction including wetlands, buffer, staging areas and access routes. • Plans showing pre and post construction grades. • Plans showing representative cross -sections of mitigation site with elevations and scale indicated. • Description of construction techniques that include: Description of weed control techniques Location of topsoil stockpiling Description of earthwork (amounts of cut and fill in cubic yards) Drainage Plan The Preliminary Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Fossil Creek Estates PUD states several proposed actions that are concerns for the wetland complex and Fossil Creek within the Cathy Fromme Prairie. 1. "Easement acquisition from the City of Fort Collins will be required in order to extend sanitary sewer service from the project to the existing sewer trunk main adjacent to Fossil Creek." Any easement within the natural area should be carefully reviewed. Extension of the sanitary sewer line into the natural area should require routing to avoid wetlands if possible and revegetation of disturbed areas with native species (Manual, IV.D.4.b and Appendix A). 2. "Groundwater considerations and underground conveyance to the wetlands and the Fossil Creek channel, are a major issue and design constraint." It is agreed that the conveyance of additional water to the wetlands is a "major issue." It appears that there is an assumption that the existing wetlands would benefit from additional water being directed to them. If this is the assumption, it needs to be explained how more water will benefit the wetland. It is more reasonable to assume that a change in the hydrological regime will alter the present wetland complex (Manual, IV.C.2., Inundation or Drainage). N Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts 3. "The site is situated within the Fossil Creek Drainage study area. The majority of the improvements recommended by the study have been installed up to South Shields Street. The design and installation of these improvements considered development within the basin and therefore, no detention is proposed at this time" and "Proposed drainage improvements will convey 100% of storm runoff to the main Fossil Creek channel, north of Fossil Creek Estates PUD and west of South Shields Street, maintaining peak discharge points at, or near, historic peak discharge locations." Proper on -site detention could improve water quality of runoff prior to its routing to Fossil Creek within the natural area (Manual, IV.C.1., Water Quality). On -site detention and treatment should be considered and addressed. 4. "Runoff will be conveyed from the street system, to the main channel of Fossil Creek via a combination storm sewer and open channels. a. All runoff will be directed to the designated wetland areas as much as reasonably possible on the project site." Why is it assumed that directing water to the wetlands is preferential or beneficial? _ Street runoff will contain elevated levels of nutrients, toxics, oil and grease (Manual, Table IV-1), in addition to increasing flow to the wetland complex (see comments to #2, above). 5. "Easements and possible ditch improvements are being discussed with users of the ditch. This, however, has no immediate affect on drainage, erosion control and/or wetlands considerations." Seepage from the irrigation ditch that forms the southern boundary of the property supports wetlands adjacent to the ditch, and may help support wetlands to the north. Additionally, it appears that there may be some additional wetlands near the confluence of the Trilby Lateral and Scenic Knolls Ditch that were not identified on the Preliminary Plat. Therefore, future ditch improvements could adversely affect wetlands. Conclusions As presently proposed, and based on the information reviewed, it appears as though the potential impacts to wetlands within the Cathy Fromme Prairie and the wetlands that will remain within the proposed Fossil Creek Estates PUD have likely been understated z Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts as the potential adverse indirect impacts associated with stormwater runoff, landscape irrigation return flows, increased nutrients and toxicants have not been addressed. It also appears as though there could be additional direct impacts to wetlands within the natural area associated with utility construction and stabilization of the wetland channel. There is not enough information in the Conceptual Mitigation Plan to accurately determine the location of the wetland creation site and its potential for success. Recommendations In general, the following need to be addressed in enough detail that a third party can understand what is proposed and how it will potentially affect wetland resources. 1. Surface drainage systems that route stormwater and landscape irrigation return flows. 2. Subsurface drainage systems that could lower the water table or redirect ground water flows and gradients. 3. The direction of drainage (surface and/or subsurface) to existing wetlands. Recommended Mitigative Measures The following mitigative measures are proposed for the Fossil Creek Estates PUD as conceptually planned; however, components of the recommendations could also apply to other development options. 1. Buffer between the proposed PUD and Cathy Fromme Prairie. A buffer area between the Natural Area and the proposed PUD should be incorporated into the subdivision design. The buffer would serve as a transition zone between the Natural Area and the irrigated bluegrass turf of the subdivision and help reduce nutrient laden runoff from the subdivision to the natural area. Creation of a buffer would be consistent with the Manual (see V.G.7., Visual Resource Guideline 2 and IV.C.3.a., Buffer Zones). A buffer could be accomplished in a number of ways; however, the following is recommended: • A vegetated strip 25 feet wide, measured from the property boundary south (i.e., totally contained within the PUD boundary). 10 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts • Any newly planted vegetation within the buffer shouldbe limited to native species recommended by the Natural Resources Division (see Manual Appendices A, B, C and D). • No structures should be allowed within the buffer. Incorporation of the recommended buffer into the PUD plans will minimize the effects of landscape irrigation return flows, nutrients, herbicides, pesticides, and human and pet activities on the natural area as well as providing a visual transition. 2. Water quality. It appears from the Preliminary Drainage and Erosion Control Report (Shear Engineering Corp., 1993) that stormwater runoff will be directed to Fossil Creek and the existing, and presumably, created wetland areas. The Manual (IV.C.1., Water Quality) states: "In most instances, aquatic, wetland and riparian habitats should not be used for treatment of wastewater or stormwater runoff unless specifically constructed primarily for the treatment of wastewater or stonnwater. Proper treatment of wastewater and stormwater prior to its discharge into naturally occurring wetland and riparian habitats will reduce enrichmentleutrophication, organic loading reduced dissolved oxygen, salinization, sedimentation, and turbidity.-,". It is recommended that on -site detention be used to minimize the contribution of sediment and other constituents to Fossil Creek or wetlands. 3. Ground water controls. Systems intended to control ground water levels should not be incorporated into the PUD plans unless it can be demonstrated that such systems will not lower ground water levels in nearby wetlands. 5. Buffer. A buffer greater than 10 feet should be considered for the Tract E wetland; We recommend a buffer width of 75 feet (Manual, IV.C.3.a). 6. Ground water levels. Ground water levels of the wetland within the Cathy Fromme Prairie should be monitored to determine potential effects from the Fossil Creek Estates PUD. Monitoring should include an adequate pre - development baseline. 11 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts BALD EAGLE/RAPTOR IMPACTS Potential impacts to bald eagles and other raptors resulting from the development of the Fossil Creek Estates is an issue of high concern. Bald eagles are protected by the Endangered Species Act and any action that could jeopardize their continued existence should be coordinated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Though this assessment applies to all raptors using the Cathy Fromme Prairie and surrounding areas, potential impacts to bald eagles are emphasized. The discussion of potential impacts and mitigation is organized as follows: • Future bald eagle use of the winter roost and perch site assuming Fossil Creek Estates is not developed. • Future bald eagle use assuming Fossil Creek Estates is developed. • Establishment of alternative winter roost and perch sites. • Bald Eagle Use of the Cathy Fromme Prairie if the Roost/Perch Site is Abandoned. It should be stated at the onset that there is little certainty regarding.bald eagle issues near the Cathy Fromme site. Even among experienced field biologists, opinions regarding the future behavior of bald eagles using this site are likely to differ to some degree, given the various potential impact scenarios that are possible. Because of the unpredictable behavior of this wide-ranging predatory bird, the proper decision regarding management will be difficult. Future Bald Eagle Use Without Fossil Creek Estates Development If bald eagles had been using the recently identified roost site for many years, it is reasonably certain that they would continue to do so for years to come, given no appreciable change in the prey base or in human disturbance factors. Based on the 12 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts understanding that winter roosting at the site south of the proposed development was first observed this past winter (1994), it is quite possible that bald eagles will use this site again. This is a significant observation and this first-time occurrence should not be dismissed as a random event. However, the eagles may not use the site again, even without the development of Fossil Creek Estates. Therefore, the potential expenditure of large sums of money to protect the roost site presents some risk. Future Bald Eagle Use With Fossil Creek Estates Development Assuming bald eagles continue to use the winter roost and perch site, it is possible, and perhaps likely that this usage would continue provided a one -quarter mile buffer were established and no development activity or human use during winter months occurs within this buffer zone. Because the development of the Fossil Creek Estates would significantly intrude within this buffer zone, the probability that the bald eagles would use the winter roost and perch site is very low. Occasional perching might be anticipated, but regular use for perching or roosting would be unlikely. Additionally, with the construction of an east - west subdivision arterial road between the winter roost and perch site and the Cathy Fromme Prairie, the probability of bald eagles continuing to roost or perch in the trees would become increasingly low. Establishment of Alternative Winter Roost and Perch Sites As a form of mitigation, artificial perch structures, e.g., wooden poles or large dead trees, could be placed within the Cathy Fromme Prairie. However, it is. unlikely that this would provide a viable mitigation or habitat enhancement option. There are numerous power poles and fence posts in the vicinity of the roost site and the Cathy Fromme 13 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts Prairie. The addition of more structures is likely to be of little merit and such structures would be a visual intrusion within the Prairie. Bald Eagle Use of the Cathy Fromme Prairie if the Roost/Perch Site is Abandoned Assuming that human use of the Prairie is well managed, bald eagles will likely continue to use the Cathy Fromme Prairie if the winter roost site is abandoned. The prey base on the Prairie is substantial and the area is large. Based on the findings of field work for the site and region performed by the Natural Resources Division and others, it is clear that the site is used by wintering bald eagles regularly and apparently has been used regularly for some years. The winter roost/perch site is not likely to be critical to the continued existence of wintering bald eagles in the area, although the use of the trees, particularly for roosting, probably increases the frequency of hunting on the Cathy Fromme Prairie. The continued use of the Prairie by bald eagles is biologically significant and provides valuable observation opportunities. The mere presence of eagles perching or roosting is in itself a visual attraction worth every effort to preserve. Supplementing this assessment, it is recommended that the Colorado Division of Wildlife and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also be consulted and possible recommendations also be considered, as both agencies have personnel with expertise in bald eagle management: ACCESS TO THE CATHY FROMME PRAIRIE The Cathy Fromme Prairie Management Issues Report (Natural Resources Division, 1993) identifies access to the Prairie as a significant management issue. The Prairie functions as both .a natural area and an open space area. The Management Issues Report, as well as comments from Fort Collins citizens, including neighbors of the Prairie, indicate diverse opinions regarding appropriate access to the Prairie. The 14 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts Report clearly recognizes the importance of regulating types of uses, accessibility, and time of use as important considerations in minimizing impacts to the prairie dog raptor food base and use by raptors. Additional impacts may result from unregulated access to the Prairie. The Management Issues Report also recognizes the difficulty in regulating access to the Cathy Fromme Prairie as a natural/open space area and the further difficulty in enforcing regulations. The proposed Fossil Creek Estates design would result in 16 lots fronting directly onto the Prairie. Without regulations, and possibly physical barriers, the Prairie could function as a "backyard open space" to these lots. The additional lots within the proposed development would also create a larger potential user group who may want to access the natural area. Without access regulations, informal recreational use of the " Prairie by neighboring residents, children, and pets would be expected and adverse impacts to resources would occur. The proposed buffer zone between the PUD and the Prairie could further exacerbate access problems by providing a commonly owned corridor outside of individually owned yards accessible to anyone. Options to controlling or minimizing access would include the following: 1. Posted regulations could restrict access to developed trails and planned observation/use areas. Self -policing, combined with enforcement by City personnel could attempt to assure that informal access is prevented. 2. Though possibly undesirable from policy, aesthetic, and maintenance considerations, fencing could be constructed along the southern portion of the Prairie preventing informal access from the proposed Fossil Creek Estates into the Prairie. 3. The proposed Fossil Creek Trail could be aligned along the southern edge of the Hahn portion of the Prairie adjacent to the proposed Fossil Creek Estates (Alternative II in the Management Issues Report). A limited number of access points from the proposed development to the trail could be planned. Users could access the Prairie only by means of the trail and additional access restrictions within the Prairie would apply. 15 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment or Natural Area Impacts 4. The recommended buffer zone between the proposed development and the Prairie could be used as an informal viewing area, allowing observation of the Prairie without actual access. POTENTIAL PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Potential project alternatives exist which could avoid or minimize impacts to the wetlands, and to the eagle perch/winter night roost site by maintaining an adequate buffer between development and the site. There are both pros and cons to each of the potential alternatives. It should be noted that an effort to create an adequate buffer to protect the night roost site from activities associated with the proposed Fossil Creek Estates could be undermined by development to either the west or south of the roost site. Although there are currently no development proposals for lands to the south of the proposed Fossil Creek Estates, a development is being proposed for the parcel between the west boundary of the proposed Fossil Creek Estates and Taft Hill Road. Such an action could result in a significant impact to the roost site. The long-term disposition of the Robbins Property and land use surrounding the roost site may also adversely impact the site. Option #1: One option would be to scale back the size of the proposed development. The intent would be to reduce the extent of the development and limit construction to the area between S. Shields Street and the ridge line which is located approximately at the separation between the proposed Phase I development and Phases II and III. To partially offset the reduced project size, the City could consider allowing the developer to build at higher densities than what is currently being proposed. 16 A Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts Pros: 1. The 2.55-acre wetland would not be impacted. 2. The night roost site may not be impacted as there would be an approximately 1/4 mile buffer between the western boundary of development and the roost site. Also, because of the topographic break at the ridge line, the development would be partially screened from the roost site. 3. Storm drainage impacts on Fossil Creek would be reduced. 4. The proposed development would support the City's desire to promote a mix of housing types and density levels, including higher density development. 5. The development would have less visual impact on the Cathy Fromme Prairie. 6. The City could acquire the undeveloped (western) portion of the parcel and add it to the Cathy Fromme Prairie. - 7. The City could develop an eagle observation area to the west of the proposed 3 development. Cons: 1 1. The developer may determine that the reduction in project extent makes the project economically unfeasible. 2. The City would have to bear the cost of acquiring the western portion of the site. This acquisition cost would preclude the use of these funds for acquisition elsewhere. 3. Neighboring residents may oppose a proposal to increase the density of the built portion of the site. 4. The City may still not have fully protected the roost site due to other potential development. 5. Development of the eastern portion of the site may place restrictions on the development of an optimally sited eagle observation area and may restrict views from such an area. 17 TABLE OF CONTENTS METHODOLOGY ................................................ 2 APPLICABLE POLICY, RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS .......................................... 3 WETLAND RESOURCES ........................................... 3 Assumptions ................................................ 4 Wetland Impacts ............................................ 4 Wetland Mitigation Plan ....................................... 5 Drainage Plan ................................................ 8 Conclusions ................................................ 9 Recommendations ........................................... 10 Recommended Mitigative Measures .............................. 10 BALD EAGLE/RAPTOR IMPACTS ................................... 12 Future Bald Eagle Use Without Fossil Creek Estates Development ....... 12 Future Bald Eagle Use With Fossil Creek Estates Development .......... 13 Establishment of Alternative Winter Roost and Perch Sites ............. 13 Bald Eagle Use of the Cathy Fromme Prairie if the Roost/Perch Site is Abandoned ................................ :.......... 14 ACCESS TO THE CATHY FROMME PRAIRIE .......................... 14 POTENTIAL PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ............................. 16 Option#1:................................................. 16 Option#2:................................................ 18 Option#3 :.............................. ................. 19 Option#4:................................................ 21 Potential Impacts of Project Alternatives: .......................... 22 REFERENCES: ........... .................................... 23 . Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts 6. Increased density may make it more difficult to establish a buffer between the Cathy Fromme Prairie and the proposed development. ' Option #2: Negotiating an agreement beneficial to all three parties, the City could acquire a portion or all of the property to the north of the Cathy Fromme Prairie, east of Taft Hill Road and west of existing development. The City could then acquire the Fossil Creek Estates site and sell the developer a comparable parcel of the newly acquired area and permit the development to proceed. Pros: 1. None of the wetlands would be impacted. 2. The grove of trees and the night roost site would not be impacted. 3. Storm drainage impacts on Fossil Creek may be reduced. 4. The acquired Fossil Creek Estates parcel could be added to the Cathy Fromme Prairie. 5. Depending on the extent of the land acquisition to the north of the Prairie, a sizable parcel of undeveloped land could be added to the Prairie. 6. Dependant on the location of the new development parcel to the north of the Cathy Fromme Prairie, visual impacts on the Prairie could be significantly reduced. 7. The new development would be more contiguous with existing development resulting in less fragmentation of the total landscape unit around and including the Cathy Fromme Prairie. 8. An eagle observation area could be constructed on the undeveloped Fossil Creek Estates parcel. 18 it Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts Cons: 1. This alternative places the City in a real estate brokering position with its attendant administrative and legal difficulties. 2. Land acquisition costs incurred by the City may be high or prohibitive. This expenditure would also preclude the use of these funds for the acquisition of other important resource areas elsewhere within the Urban Growth Area. 3. The City may still not have fully protected the roost site due to other potential development. Option #3: Option #3 represents a variant of Options #1 and #2. Under this scenario, the developer would be permitted to develop the eastern portion of the proposed Fossil Creek Estates as discussed under Option #1. This would provide the first development pod. The City and/or the developer would then attempt to negotiate the acquisition of a parcel of land in the area to the north of the Cathy Fromme Prairie in a manner similar to what is described in Option #2. This area would provide the developer with a second development pod to compensate the loss of the western portion of the proposed Fossil Creek Estates. Potentially higher acquisition costs for the second development pod could be offset by the City. Pros: 1. The 2.55-acre wetland would not be impacted. 2. The night roost site may not be impacted as there would be an approximate 1/4 mile buffer between the western boundary of development and the roost site. Also, because of the topographic break at the ridge line, the development would be partially screened from the roost site. 3. If storm drainage is more dispersed, storm drainage impacts on Fossil Creek may be reduced. 19 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts 4. The development would have less visual impact on the Cathy Fromme Prairie. 5. The City could acquire the undeveloped (western) portion of the parcel and add it to the Cathy Fromme Prairie. 6. Though the development would be segregated into two pods, the total number of permitted housing units may remain the same. Depending on density requirements for the first pod (Phase I of the proposed Fossil Creek Estates) and the size and density requirements of the second pod, the number of permitted housing units could increase. 7. The City could develop an eagle observation area to the west of the proposed development. Cons: 1. Depending on the number of permitted housing units, and other considerations, the developer may realize significant cost inefficiencies in developing two isolated pods. These inefficiencies may make the project(s) economically unfeasible. 2. The City would have to bear the cost of acquiring the western portion of the site. This acquisition cost would preclude the use of these funds for acquisition elsewhere. 3. Purchasing only a portion of the total site to the north of the Cathy Fromme Prairie may be unacceptable to the owner. Also, land acquisition costs may be high or prohibitive to the developer and/or the City. If City funds are used to acquire the northern pod for resale to the developer and significantly higher land costs are incurred, or City funds are used to offset potentially higher lands costs incurred by the developer, these funds would not be available for natural areas acquisition elsewhere in the City or the Urban Growth Area. 4. The City may still not have fully protected the roost site due to other potential development. 5. Development of the eastern portion of the site may -place restrictions on the development of an optimally -sited eagle observation area and may restrict views from such an area. 20 S Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts Option #4: An additional option would be for the City to purchase the proposed Fossil Creek Estates parcel as a natural areas acquisition and merge the management of the parcel with the management of the Cathy Fromme Prairie. Pros: 1. None of the wetlands would be impacted. 2. The grove of trees and the night roost site would not be impacted. 3. Storm drainage impacts on Fossil Creek associated with the proposed Fossil Creek Estates would be eliminated. 4. The acquired Fossil Creek Estates parcel could be added to the Cathy Fromme �f Prairie. 5. There would be no visual impact on the Cathy Fromme Prairie. 6. An eagle observation area could be constructed on the undeveloped Fossil Creek . Estates parcel. Cons: 1. The acquisition cost would preclude the City from using these funds to acquire natural areas elsewhere. 2. Though recouping land acquisition costs, the developer is denied the opportunity to develop Fossil Creek Estates. Though comparable acquisition and development areas may be available to the developer, this is speculative. A hardship is placed upon the developer to secure such a parcel. If the developer is unable or unwilling to secure another development parcel, a housing provision opportunity is lost within the City. 3. The City may still not have fully protected the roost site due to other potential development. 21 3 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts Potential Impacts of Project Alternatives: The project alternatives identified above may result in impacts to wetland or wildlife habitats, specifically Options #2 and #3. This would be dependant on the. location of relocated development under Option #2 or the location of the second development pod under Option #3. A thorough evaluation of potential wetland or wildlife impacts associated with any project alternative would have to be conducted to weigh its merit relative to impacts identified with the proposed Fossil Creeks Estates. 22 l . Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts REFERENCES: City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Policy Plan, Natural Resources Division, 1992. Natural Areas Design Guidelines and Mitigation Manual, City of Fort Collins, Natural Resources Division, 1993. Cathy Fromme Prairie Management Issues Report, City of Fort Collins, Natural Resources Division, 1993. Fossil Creek Estates PUD. Preliminary Plat, Site and Landscape Plan, Jim Sell Design, Inc., September, 1993. Preliminary Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Fossil Creek Estates PUD, Shear Engineering Corporation, September, 1993. Conceptual Wetlands Mitigation Plan for the Fossil Creek Estates PUD, TR Boss Environmental and Biological Consulting, October, 1993. Memorandum from Tom Shoemaker, Natural Resources Director, to Mayor, Councilmembers and City Manager, February 18, 1994. Letter from Tom Shoemaker, Natural Resources Director, to Carter Ewing, Managing Partner, Fossil Creek Partners, February 18, 1994. Winter Raptor Use of Urban Prairie Dog Colonies, Karen M. Manci, City of Fort Collins, Natural Resources Division, C.F.O. Journal, Abstract, October, 1992. Letter from Jerry Craig, State Raptor Biologist, Colorado Division of Wildlife, to Karen Manci, City of Fort Collins Natural Resources Division, August 27, 1993. 23 1. lntrIlduction. This ,404" mitigation policy is intended to be consistent with the primary purpose of the Open Space program, which is to preserve and protect Open Space Lind for the benefit of the public. Therefore, the policy does not favor the use of Open Space land for the financial benefit or convenience of private parties or public agencies. Any sale of Open Space land for this purpose is discouraged. This policy provides a mechanism for Open Space Board of Trustees ("OSBT") to review plans to utilize Open Space lands for purposes of "404"33 mitigation. ti S C.n The . federal "404" program (derived from the Clean :^later Act, prevents the destruction of most wetlands without a "404" permit issued by the Ccrps cf Engineers. Such permits generaily require mitigation by the permittee. Typically, mitigation is achieved by the creation of new wetlands or other wildlife. habitat. Although the OSBT recognizes that the creation of wetlands on selected Open Space property may, under some circumstances, be beneficial, the OSBT is under no obligation to approve such use on Open Space lands. Each application will be individually reviewed, and the approval of any such application shall not constitute a precedent for decisions on future applications. This policy is applicable to all persons, as defined in Section 1-2-11 B.R.C. 19819 including all city departments and other governmental entities. ll, application Process. A. An applicant either for an easement on Open Space property or for the purchase of Open Space property for wetlands mitigation must submit the following documents to the Department of Real Estate and Open Space ("staff") at least 30 days prior to the OSBT meeting at which consideration of the request is sought: 1. A written statement describing the proposed project, the Ietlands to be destroyed and their location, . the work schedule for the entire project, and the mitigation that is proposed to be created on Open Space property in satisfac- tion of "404" mitigation requirements; 2. An environmental inventory of the Open Space property proposed to be used; 3. A map detailing the location and a schematic diagram of the proposed wetland location and also a map indicating the location of the wetland to be destroyed; 4. Complete plans for the establishment and maintenance of the wetland or habitat area on Open Space land, including the water source, grading, planting, and any additional maintenance such as water and weed control during esta- blishment of the vegetation that would be required; i. \ statement explaining the need for the 11404" mitigation, which includes the fullowino information: (a) Alternative methods and alternative locations for the mitigation. (b) The co,t to the ;applicant if the Open Space easement or purchase is granted. (c) The costs of alternative methods and locations. (d) Any benefits perceived by the applicant to accrue to a broader group or to the public as a whole by virtue.of the granting of the request. "u. any other items reasonably requested by the staff. B. If the request is for an easement, the applicant must satisfy the City of Boulder Open Space Board of Trustees` Policy for Easement Requests on Open Space dated November 13, 1985, including the Charter review process. C. Any items submitted in an application may be retained by the City of Boulder. D. For purposes of this policy, any trade of land will be considered a "sale." III. Referral to the Open Space Board of Trustees. The application to utilize Open Space land for the purposes of satisfying 11404" mitigation requirements, will be referred to and considered by the OSBT if the following criteria have been met: A. All required documents have been timely received; and B. The Open Space Board Chair and the Director of the Real Estate and Open Space Department concur that the proposal will benefit Open Space land. If the Board Chair and Director do not so concur, the applicant may appeal that decision to the OSBT within 30 days of the denial, and the OSST must hear the matter at its first regularly scheduled meeting which occurs at least 15 days after receipt of such appeal. The OSBT also has the authority to call up an item for review on their own motion. 1V. Consideration by the Open Space Board of Trustees. The OSBT will consider, at a public meeting, all applications that meet the criteria in Paragraph IIl. The OSST will consider the following factors in determining whether or not to recommend to City Council that an easement or any other interest be granted on Open Space land for the purposes of "404" mitigation: A. Whether there is sufficient need for the use of .Open Space land for mitigation. In determining that such need exists, the Board will consider, without limitation, any alternatives available to the applicant, 2 ki P� the cn,t of ,uch alternatives, and the purposes for which the easement or snle is requested; 3. The dc;ree to which the proposed mitigation will change the appear- ance and condition of the Open Space land; C. Whether the proposed use of the mitigation interferes with use of the land for Open Splice purposes; D. Whether the proposed mitigation is consistent with the goals of the Open Space Program as set forth in Section 2-3-9(c), B.R.C. 1931; E. Whether the entire ecosystem has been considered, and whether the existing use should be protected as opposed to allowing mitigation, which is a change of use of the property; F. Loss of income due to the cancellation of existing leases or other such activities; and G. Any other relevant factors. V. Payment of Monev to the Open Space Fund. In determining the amount of payment to the fund, the Board shall consider the following factors: A. Whether the property will remain open to the public; and whether it will remain Open Space property. S. The applicant shall pay the cost of all mitigation efforts on Open Space property. C. Staff time for wort: on wetlands mitigation projects shall be reim- bursed. The minimum fee is $250.00, but should staff time (including other city employees) exceed that amount, then the fee shall be for the actual time spent on the project. D. Irrespective of any change in the value of the property as a result of mitigation, the OSBT reserves the right to charge full value for property. VI. General Requirements. A. All plans for work for wetlands mitigation activities on Open Space land . shall be approved by the staff and the OSBT. B. Applications for mitigation on Open Space land will be considered as a change of use and/or conveyance by the OSBT, and will thus be subject to approval by both the OSBT and the City Council. C. Applicants are responsible for obtaining a 11404" permit, and they remain responsible for the mitigation and all other requirements of 3 L7 their contractwith the U.S. -Army corps of Engineers. Thus, after mitigation has occurred, and even if staff has agreed to maintain that property pursuant to paragraph D., the applicant remains ultimately responsible by contract or deed restriction for meeting the terms and conditions of the "404" permit. D. after the completion of a "404" mitigation project, and after accep- tance of that project by the staff, the staff will be responsible for the maintenance of that property, except in the case of absolute fee transfer of land to the applicant. however, should the mitigation area be destroyed for any reason other than the negligence of the Open Space Department, the applicant will be responsible for any restoration, including restoration of physical works (berms, canals, etc.) that may be necessary in order to continue to fullfill the mitigation requirements of the "404" permit. E. Any Open Space property disturbed as a result of construction activities associated with wetlands mitigation projects, shall be restored to a condition at least equal to its condition prior to the disturbance. All restoration work must be to a standard and within a time frame acceptable to the staff. F. The applicant shall indemnify and hold the City harmless for any losses, ` claims, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by the City as a result of any wetlands mitigation activities. G. The OSST may impose any other requirements necessary to assure minimum disturbance and maximum preservation of the Open Space land resource, and performance by the applicant of any obligation imposed as a condition of the approval of an easement or the sale of Open Space property. OS OS 4 FOSSIL CREEK ESTATES PUD ASSESSMENT OF NATURAL AREA IMPACTS Name of Project: Fossil Creek Estates PUD Location: Southwest Comer of S. Shields Street and Fossil Creek Drive Assessment ERO Resources Corporation, Performed By: Shalkey Walker Associates, Inc. and Stoecker Ecological Consultants, Inc. Date: March 16, 1994 Purpose of the Assessment: The purpose of this assessment is to determine both on -site and off -site impacts to natural areas _resulting from the development of the Fossil Creek Estates PUD. Based on the determination of impacts, this assessment also identifies appropriate mitigation:", Additionally, this assessment addresses project and design alternatives which may be considered by the City of Fort Collins. V Study Area: The Study Area includes the proposed Fossil Creek Estates PUD, which is approximately 45.19 acres in size. The Study Area also includes portions of the Cathy Fromme Prairie (Natural Area) purchased by the City of Fort Collins in May 1993. The primary area of assessment on the Cathy Fromme Prairie includes the parcel to the immediate north of the proposed Fossil Creek Estates, or what was the Hahn Property portion of the Cathy Fromme Prairie acquisition. The Study Area also includes undeveloped lands, adjacent, and to the south and west of the proposed Fossil Creek Estates. Key Issues: 1. A wetland is located within the proposed Fossil Creek Estates parcel and extends to the north into the Cathy Fromme Prairie. 1 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment or Natural Area Impacts 2. A Preliminary Drainage and Erosion Control Report prepared for Fossil Creek Estates proposes drainage improvements to convey 100% of the storm runoff from the proposed development north to the main Fossil Creek channel within the Cathy Fromme Prairie. 3. Citizens of Fort Collins, City of Fort Collins Natural Resources Division staff, and members of the Consultant Team observed bald eagles perching in a grove of trees on the Robbins Property to the immediate south of the proposed development. One member of the Consultant Team observed six eagles perching in one of these trees. Based on reports of citizen observations and confirmed by the City's Natural Resources Division, this grove of trees is being used as a winter night roost site by multiple eagles, a significant finding. Additionally, other birds of prey, including ferruginous hawks, use the area. 4. The Cathy Fromme Prairie provides a valuable prairie dog prey base for bald eagles, ferruginous hawks, and other wintering raptors using the area. For this reason, the Cathy Fromme Prairie represents a valuable wildlife habitat within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area. Based on the results of a questionnaire conducted by the Natural Resources Division queering citizens and natural resource professionals regarding the management of the Cathy Fromme Prairie, the use of the Prairie as a raptor feeding area is highly valued. METHODOLOGY This assessment consisted of a review of background documents and reports provided by the City of Fort Collins Natural Resources Division, conversations with Natural Resources Division staff, and a site investigation by the Consultant Team. This assessment also complies with the policy directives of the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Policy Plan (Natural Resources Division, 1992) and design and mitigation guidelines presented in the Natural Areas Design Guidelines and Mitigation Manual' (Natural Resources Division, 1993). All references are cited at the end of this report. 2 . Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts APPLICABLE POLICY, RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS The policy and resource management bases for the identification, value, and protection of natural areas (wetland and wildlife habitats) within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area are defined in the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Policy Plan. Relevant to this assessment, the Natural Areas Policy Plan details the natural features, challenges, and opportunities of the Fossil Creek Natural Resource Area. The assessment and mitigation (if required) of site impacts to wetland and wildlife habitats within the Urban Growth Area, as well as site impacts within the City's Natural Resource Areas (including Fossil Creek) are defined in the Natural Areas Design Guidelines and Mitigation Manual, specifically Section IV, Design and Mitigation 7 Guidelines, and Section V, Natural Resource Areas and Guidelines. The assessment and mitigation of any impact to a wetland or wildlife habitat within the Urban Growth Area is addressed in Section IV. Section V addresses an additional "protective overlay" to the recommendations of Section IV based on ecological land unit principals of the City's Natural Resource Areas. Relevant to the Fossil Creek Natural Resource Area, the Manual addresses specific objectives, habitats and species of special concern, opportunities for restoration and enhancement, specific wildlife guidelines and specific wetland and riparian guidelines. WETLAND RESOURCES The Natural Areas Design Guidelines and Mitigation Manual (the Manual) has been referenced where applicable in regard to wetland mitigation. References to the Manual are cited by section. Although the Manual focuses on the city's Natural Resource Areas, its guidelines are certainly applicable to wetlands outside of designated Natural Resource 3 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts Areas. Additionally, in this specific review, there is a high potential for wetlands within the Cathy Fromme Prairie Natural Area to be adversely affected by adjoining development. The Manual applies to resources that cross political boundaries (i.e., occur both within and outside the Natural Resource Areas), as is the situation under review for the Fossil Creek Estates PUD. Assumptions The following assumptions have been made: 1. For the purposes of this review, the wetland delineation on the Preliminary Plat, Site and Landscape Plan (September 27, 1993) accurately depicts all wetlands within the proposed Fossil Creek Estates PUD that meet the criteria of the 1987 Corps of Engineers wetland delineation manual. 2. The acreage calculations stated for the wetlands on the Preliminary Plat are accurate. 3. The Preliminary Plat represents the maximum extent of practicable avoidance and minimization of direct adverse impacts to wetlands. No attempt was made by the consultant team to redesign lots to further avoid or minimize direct adverse impacts to wetlands. Wetland Impacts T.R. Boss' Conceptual Mitigation Plan states that "FCE's site plan shows the filling of 1.02 acres of wetlands" (i.e., direct impacts to wetlands). The Preliminary Plat indicates 0.94 acres. T.R. Boss' assessment does not address indirect impacts to either the wetlands that are intended to remain within the proposed subdivision or the adjacent wetlands to the north within the Cathy Fromme Prairie. Indirect impacts to wetlands within the proposed Fossil Creek Estates PUD and the adjoining Cathy Fromme Prairie need to be addressed. n Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts The primary concerns for the wetland complex that occurs within the Cathy Fromme Prairie and proposed Fossil Creek Estates PUD are hydrologic modification, nutrient loading, and toxicant retention and assimilation. Subdivision development will greatly increase the amount of impervious surface in the area and increased stormwater and landscape irrigation return flows will carry increased levels of nutrients and toxicants as a result of homeowner applications of fertilizer, pesticides and herbicides. It is inappropriate to have drainage collection systems deliver this water untreated to the wetland complex that borders the Cathy Fromme Prairie (Manual, IV.C.1., Water Quality). Hydrologic modification (either an increase or decrease in the amount and timing of water to the wetlands) will result in alterations to the wetland complex. Significant increases in nutrients delivered to the wetlands can result in changes in species composition. The accumulation of toxicants in the wetland could increase the introduction of toxicants into the food chain of the Natural Area. The effects of changes in both water quantity and quality that drain to the wetland complex that straddles the boundary between the Natural Area and the proposed subdivision must be addressed. Water quantity issues also include changes to ground water levels that could be affected by drain systems intended to lower ground water levels to accommodate basements and bedded sewer lines that could unintentionally act as drains and lower the ground water table (Manual, IV.C.2., Inundation or Drainage). Wetland Mitigation Plan T.R. Boss states that the wetland mitigation plan is conceptual, so this assessment's reviews and comments focus on what should be addressed in the mitigation plan at a 5 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of -Natural Area Impacts conceptual level., The Manual describes guidelines for wetland creation (Section IV.G.6.) The following deficiencies have been identified: 1. The Conceptual Plan should clearly state its goals (i.e., proposed functions, hydrology, plant communities). The plan should support these goals. 2. There should be a discussion of avoidance, minimization and protection measures. 3. There needs to be more discussion on supportive hydrology for the created wetland. The Conceptual Mitigation Plan should describe the hydrologic regime that will support the wetland communities to be established as stated in the mitigation goals. 4. It is our understanding that the proposed wetland mitigation will occur on lands within the Cathy Fromme Prairie. A map showing the planned location and distribution of the wetlands to be created should be submitted. The use of a natural area to mitigate impacts caused by adjoining private development is an issue that was not addressed in the Manual, but potentially sets a precedent. We suggest that the City should consider if such proposed actions should be addressed singularly as the issues arise, or develop a policy and criteria for evaluating mitigation proposed for City -owned natural areas (attached is a policy developed by the City of Boulder). 5. A brief description of the vegetation that presently occurs at the proposed wetland creation site should be given. 6. Section 2.3, Topsoiling, states "Once the mitigation site has been excavated to final grade, the vegetation and topsoil from the wetlands that will be lost ... will be applied to the mitigation site." This will result in a site with a final grade that is too high above the water table. The mitigation site must be over -excavated to allow for placement of salvaged wetland soils, which will result in a final grade. 7. The Conceptual Mitigation Plan needs to address monitoring, reporting determination of success, and potential remedial measures. It is suggested that the Conceptual Plan include the following: • A schedule of reporting milestones; • State that "as -built" conditions will be documented and submitted to the Natural Resources Division within six weeks of the completion of 0 Fossil Creek Estates PUD Assessment of Natural Area Impacts mitigation (i.e., grading and placement of salvaged soils). Extensive information on documentation of "as -built" conditions are found in Section IV.C.9.a of the Manual; • State that annual monitoring reports (five years) will be prepared and will include the following (Manual, IV.C.9.c., Reporting): - Report preparer and person(s) performing the monitoring - Dates of monitoring - Photographs of the site - Methods used for monitoring - Significant changes that have occurred at the site relative to the last report - Corrective actions taken since last report - Recommended future corrective actions Judgement of site progress in meeting design objectives Documentation of hydrology Documentation of success of wetland vegetation establishment State how successful establishment of wetland hydrology will be measured. Success should be tied to depth, duration and plant community, not simply meeting the 1987 COE delineation manual criteria for jurisdictional wetlands. • State what remedial actions will be taken if wetland creation is not successful. It is recognized that the Wetland Mitigation Plan thus far proposed is conceptual. It is recommended that the final Wetland Mitigation Plan include the following: • An indication of present ground water levels within the area of the proposed mitigation, including seasonal fluctuations. • Person(s) responsible for mitigation (name, address and phone number). • Adjacent land uses: Briefly describe all known present and proposed uses of mitigation area. Discuss non-native landscape plantings, irrigation ditches, sub -surface drains, pipelines, powerlines, roads, distance and location of nearest structures etc., if any, on the properties immediately adjacent to the property containing mitigation site. 7