Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMULBERRY CONNECTION - FDP200030 - - WETLANDS DOCUMENTS OFFICE: 720-500-3710 FAX: 281-664-2491 1626 Wazee Street, Suite 2A Denver, Colorado 80202 spiritenv.com Wetland Delineation Report Poudre Valley Development Larimer County, Colorado March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 PREPARED FOR: Comunale Properties 1855 South Pearl St., Suite 20 | Denver, CO 80210 SPIRIT PROJECT: 19202.00F FOR SPIRIT ENVIRONMENTAL: Madeline Shields Tim DeMasters Project Consultant Senior Ecologist Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Table of Contents Table of Contents Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F ii 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................. 1–1 2.0 Project Overview .......................................................................... 2–1 3.0 Site Description ............................................................................ 3–1 4.0 Methods ....................................................................................... 4–1 4.1 Map and Database Review .............................................................. 4–1 4.1.1 USGS Topo Maps ................................................................................ 4–1 4.1.2 USFWS NWI Data ................................................................................ 4–1 4.1.3 NRCS Soil Survey Data ........................................................................ 4–1 4.1.4 Aerial Photography ............................................................................... 4–1 4.1.5 FEMA FIRM ......................................................................................... 4–2 4.1.6 Climatological Observations ................................................................. 4–2 4.2 Wetland Delineation ......................................................................... 4–2 4.2.1 Hydrology ............................................................................................. 4–3 4.2.2 Vegetation ............................................................................................ 4–3 4.2.3 Soils ..................................................................................................... 4–4 4.3 Waterbody Survey ............................................................................ 4–4 5.0 Results ......................................................................................... 5–1 5.1 Map and Database Review .............................................................. 5–1 5.1.1 USGS Topo Maps ................................................................................ 5–1 5.1.2 USFWS NWI Data ................................................................................ 5–1 5.1.3 NRCS Soil Survey Data ........................................................................ 5–1 5.1.4 Aerial Photography ............................................................................... 5–2 5.1.5 FEMA FIRM ......................................................................................... 5–2 5.1.6 Climatological Observations ................................................................. 5–2 5.2 Wetland Delineation ......................................................................... 5–3 5.2.1 Hydrology ............................................................................................. 5–4 5.2.2 Vegetation ............................................................................................ 5–4 Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Table of Contents Table of Contents (continued) Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F iii 5.2.3 Soils ..................................................................................................... 5–5 5.3 Waterbody Survey ............................................................................ 5–6 6.0 Conclusion ................................................................................... 6–1 7.0 References .................................................................................. 7–1 8.0 Attachments ................................................................................. 8–1 Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties List of Tables List of Tables Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F Table 5-1 NRCS Soils Data .................................................................. 5–2 Table 5-2 Upland Dominant Plant Species ........................................... 5–4 Table 5-3 Wetland Dominant Plant Species ......................................... 5–5 Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties List of Charts List of Charts Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F Chart 5-1 Rainfall Trends for Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado ... 5–3 Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Introduction Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 1–1 1.0 Introduction Spirit Environmental, LLC (“Spirit”) was subcontracted by Comunale Properties (“Comunale”) to conduct a wetland and waterbody delineation for a proposed land development located on agricultural property approximately 20 acres in size in Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado (“study area”). This report describes the methodology and results of the delineation, which was conducted on February 15, 2019. The delineation was performed to evaluate the presence of jurisdictional wetlands and waterbodies and to identify their boundaries within the proposed right-of-way (“ROW ”). It is anticipated that this wetland delineation report will be used for support of the jurisdictional determination process for on-site aquatic resources. If it is determined that jurisdictional resources will be impacted, this report will also support applications for regulatory permits that may be required from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (“USACE”) for the proposed construction activities. As required under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), wetlands were delineated using the routine method described in the USACE 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual (“1987 Manual”) and the USACE Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains Region (Version 2.0) (“2010 Regional Supplement”). Wetland types and boundaries were determined through initial map review, followed by fieldwork involving the examination of three (3) parameters: vegetation, soils, and hydrology. Delineation criteria and indicators for each of these parameters are outlined in the 1987 Manual and the 2010 Regional Supplement. The 2010 Regional Supplement presents wetland indicators, delineation guidance, and other information that is specific to the Great Plains Region. Wetlands and waterbodies were classified according to the Cowardin Classification System used for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service's (“USFWS”) National Wetlands Inventory (“NWI”). This document contains three (3) attachments. Attachment 1 contains maps of the study area; Attachment 2 contains the Wetland Determination Data Forms, which document the three (3) criteria for wetlands; and Attachment 3 contains site photographs taken during the site visit. Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Project Overview Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 2–1 2.0 Project Overview Comunale proposes the construction of three (3) industrial buildings, totaling 248,000 square feet (“sq. ft.”) on approximately 20 acres of land in Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. Attachment 1 contains maps of the study area, including a vicinity map depicting the location of the study area (Figure 1), an aerial overview map (Figure 2), and a 7.5 -minute series USGS topographic map (Figure 3). Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Site Description Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 3–1 3.0 Site Description The United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) Natural Resources Conservation S ervice (“NRCS”) designates Land Resource Regions (“LRR”) based on similar ecological traits present within an area. The NRCS hones these designations further into Major Land Resource Areas (“MLRA”). The study area is located within the Western Great Plains Range and Irrigated Region (“LRR G”) of the Great Plains Region and is more specifically located in Major Land Resource Area (“MLRA”) 67B (Central High Plains, Southern Part). This area is characterized by an elevated, smooth to slightly irregular plain made of sediments deposited by rivers that drain from the Rocky Mountains in Colorado. Where herbaceous and shrub vegetation are dominant, short prairie grasses such as Needle and thread (Hesperostipa comata), Prairie Junegrass (Koeleria macrantha), Blue Grama (Bouteloua gracilis), Galleta (Hilaria spp.), Threeawn (Aristida purpurea), Ring Muhly (Muhlenbergia torreyi), and Alkali Sacaton (Sporobolus airoides) are commonly encountered. Where trees are encountered, Cottonwood (Populus spp.) are common along streams and a mix of Juniper (Juniperus) and Pinyon (Pinus edulis) can be found in rocky soils. Average precipitation ranges from 12 to 18 inches per year in most of the region. Most of the precipitation occurs in spring through late autumn and manifests as snow during the winter. The soils can range from very shallow to very deep and are typically well drained with a general texture of loam or clay. Currently the study area consists of undeveloped agricultural land surrounded by additional agricultural land and commercial development. The western portion of the study area contains wetlands adjacent to Cooper Slough, which is located west of the study area. Herbaceous vegetation dominates the study area. Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Methods Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 4–1 4.0 Methods 4.1 Map and Database Review The following information sources were consulted prior to and during the field delineation to assist in the identification of potential wetlands and waterbodies within the study area. 4.1.1 USGS Topo Maps USGS topographic maps illustrate elevation contours, drainage patterns, and hydrography. Spirit staff reviewed the Fort Collins, Colorado USGS Quad map to determine the likelihood of the study area containing jurisdictional waterbodies. 4.1.2 USFWS NWI Data Spirit staff reviewed NWI data as a resource to determine the likelihood of wetland features in the study area. 4.1.3 NRCS Soil Survey Data The United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) NRCS maintains an online Web Soil Survey database. The data provided in the Web Soil Survey provides a standard basis for the soil textures and types one can expect at a delineation area. Spirit staff obtained reports for the NRCS-mapped soil types at the site to determine the likelihood of the soils in the study area exhibiting hydric characteristics. NRCS-mapped soil types are assigned a hydric indicator status of “hydric” or “non-hydric” by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. 4.1.4 Aerial Photography Aerial photography, both current and historic, provides insight to the state and function of land. Signs of inundation and vegetative signatures on aerial images indicate whether land might be functioning as a wetland. Spirit staff reviewed historic and current aerial photography available on Google Earth, prior to and during the field delineation, in order to further understand the nature of the study area. Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Methods Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 4–2 4.1.5 FEMA FIRM The Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) maintains flood insurance rate maps (“FIRM”). The FIRM of the site was reviewed to determine if the 100-year floodplain is present. The USACE uses the 100-year floodplain to assist in determining jurisdiction of aquatic features. 4.1.6 Climatological Observations The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”) maintains records of climate data collected from regional stations. Spirit obtained climate data from the closest NOAA station to the study area, which was the Fort Collins 4 E, CO US GHCND Station USC00053006. This station is approximately 1.4 miles southwest of the study area. 4.2 Wetland Delineation Wetlands in the study area were delineated based on the 1987 Manual and the 2010 Regional Supplement and the three (3) parameters – hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and hydrological characteristics – at selected data points within a study area. Data points are located in representative areas to ascertain upland/wetland boundaries and to record significant spatial changes in wetland plant communities. All three (3) parameters must be met in order for the area to be classified as a wetland (in normal circumstances). Spirit staff collected geospatial data by utilizing a Trimble GeoXT 2005 Series Global Positioning System (“GPS”) device with sub-meter accuracy. Removal of material or additional of fill into waters of the United States (“WOTUS”), including wetlands, are regulated by the USACE under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (“RHA”) and Section 404 of the CWA. Section 10 of the RHA applies to all navigable WOTUS, and those waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of tides, including any wetlands located below the Mean High Water (“MHW”) line of tidal waters. Section 404 of the CWA applies to all waters, including wetlands, that have a significant nexus to a Traditional Navigable Water (“TNW”). Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Methods Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 4–3 4.2.1 Hydrology Wetland hydrology is characterized when, under normal circumstances, the surface is either inundated or the upper horizon(s) of the soil are saturated at a sufficient frequency and duration to create anaerobic conditions. Seasonal and long-term rainfall patterns, local geology and topography, soil type, local water table conditions, and drainage are factors that control hydrology. Wetland hydrology indicators include: surface water, high water tables, saturation, water marks, sediment deposits, drift deposits, surface soil cracks, inundation visible on aerial imagery, water-stained leaves, salt crusts, biotic crusts, aquatic invertebrates, hydrogen sulfide odor, oxidized rhizospheres along living roots, the presence of iron reduction in tilled soils, thin muck surfaces, drainage patterns, crayfish burrows, and shallow aquitards. During the field survey, these indicators were used to determine if a plot area contained wetland hydrology. 4.2.2 Vegetation In accordance with the procedure set forth in the 1987 Manual and the 2010 Regional Supplement, the hydrophytic status of vegetation communities was determined by identifying dominant species and, if necessary, calculating a "Prevalence Index." Individual plant species were checked against the 2016 National Wetland Plant List (“NWPL”) and their regional wetland indicator status determined. Species are classified as: • Obligate Wetland (“OBL”) if they almost always occur in wetlands (>99 percent of the time), • Facultative Wetland (“FACW ”) if they usually occur in wetlands (67-99 percent of the time), • Facultative (“FAC”) if they are equally likely to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands (34-66 percent of the time), • Facultative Upland (“FACU”) if they usually occur in non-wetlands (67-99 percent of the time), and Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Methods Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 4–4 • Obligate Upland (“UPL”) if they almost always occur in non-wetlands (>99 percent of the time). A no indicator (“NI”) status is recorded for those species for which insufficient information is available to determine an indicator status. Hydrophytic (wetland) vegetation is considered prevalent where more than 50 percent of the dominant species in a plant community have an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC. However, in cases where the vegetation community does not meet this hydrophytic threshold but indicators of hydric soils and wetlands hydrology are present, the prevalence index can be applied. Calculation of this index is based on consideration of both dominant and non-dominant plants in the vegetation community, whereby each indicator status category is given a numeric code and weighted by absolute percent cover. The prevalence index ranges from 1 to 5 and an index of 3.0 or less signifies that hydrophytic vegetation is present. In the current delineation, and as shown on the wetland determination data sheets in Attachment 2, a prevalence index was calculated for each sampling station's vegetation community. 4.2.3 Soils Hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper horizons. The anaerobic conditions created by repeated or prolonged saturation or flooding results in permanent changes in soil color and chemistry. These changes in soil color are used to differentiate hydric from non-hydric soils. At each data point, in areas where the absence of inundation or heavy saturation allowed, a pit was excavated to a depth of at least 16 inches to reveal soil profiles and to determine whether positive indicators of hydric soils were present. Hydric soil indicators relate to color, structure, organic content, and the presence of reducing conditions. Color characteristics (Hue, Value, and Chroma) were recorded using Munsell® Charts. 4.3 Wa terbody Survey No waterbodies were observed onsite; therefore, width, depth, and flow classification (perennial, intermittent, or ephemeral) were not collected. Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Results Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 5–1 5.0 Results 5.1 Map and Database Review 5.1.1 USGS Topo Maps A review of the USGS Fort Collins, Colorado Quad map attached in Figure 3 showed the site gradually sloping to the southwest towards Cooper Slough. The elevation varies in the study area from 4,944 ft. to 4,955 ft. above sea level. Topographic signatures indicate that the southwestern study area boundary is slightly lower in elevation than the rest of the study area. This area was observed during field reconnaissance to contain a wetland vegetative community dominated by Broadleaf Cattail (Typha latifolia). 5.1.2 USFWS NWI Data A review of available NWI data showed the study area contains two (2) NWI wetland features: one (1) PEM1A (Palustrine, Emergent, Persistent, Seasonally Flooded) and one (1) PEM1C (Palustrine, Emergent, Persistent, Temporary Flooded). These features are mapped along the aerially-identified Typha community within the topographic depression identified onsite (Figure 4). 5.1.3 NRCS Soil Survey Data According to the Web Soil Survey database, three (3) mapped soil units, described in the table below, are represented onsite. One (1) soil unit identified in the study area is identified as hydric: Longmont Clay (63). This soil unit has no frequency of ponding and occasional frequency of flooding, with a depth to water table varying between 24-30 inches. Refer to Figure 5 for an illustration of the mapped soil units. Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Results Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 5–2 Table 5-1 NRCS Soils Data Unit Name Description Hydric/ Non-hydric 40 Garrett Loam, 0-1% slopes Well drained soils, grayish brown to reddish brown, loam to sandy loam to sandy clay loam in texture Non-Hydric 63 Longmont Clay, 0-3% slopes Poorly drained soils, light brownish gray to light olive brown, clay Hydric 73 Nunn Clay Loam, 0-1% slopes Very deep, well drained soils, graying brown to pale brown, clay loam to loam Non-Hydric 5.1.4 Aerial Photography Based upon a review of the earliest available aerial photograph, 1999, the study area was utilized as agricultural land with a riparian corridor along the western study area boundary. The study area has remained in agricultural use since the earliest available aerial photograph. One (1) potential aquatic feature associated with the riparian area is visible in all reviewed historic aerials and may indicate a wetland or waterway. This feature is distinguished by visible ponding (2005, 2006, 2009 aerials), potential saturation signatures (1999, 2011, 2016 aerials), and a stark vegetative contrast from the surrounding landscape (2012, 2014, 2017 aerials). Indications of crop stress are visible in the 2012 aerial as areas of lighter vegetation cover the western half of the study area. Areas within the agricultural field depicted as having vegetative stress were field verified as being non-wetland. 5.1.5 FEMA FIRM A review of FEMA FIRMs indicated that the western edge of the study area is located within the 100-year floodplain. The remainder of the study area is listed as an area of minimal flood hazard. Figure 6 in Attachment 1 illustrates the location of the Cooper Slough floodplain in relation to the study area. 5.1.6 Climatological Observations A review of climatological data provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”) obtained the following results for the study area. The results, although not site-specific, represent rainfall trends for the region surrounding the site. Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Results Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 5–3 Chart 5-1 Rainfall Trends for Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado These data show three (3) precipitation events in the month prior to the field delineation. In total, 0.25 inches of rain and 3.8 inches of snow fell between January 15 and February 15, 2019. The largest precipitation event for this time frame occurred ten (10) days prior to the field visit and included 0.14 inches of rain and 2.0 inches of snow. Field staff did not observe snow or ponding of water onsite from the most recent precipitation event. The delineation was conducted on a day with sunny, clear skies. The same timeframe in 2018 received 14.5 inches of snow and 0.85 inches of rain, indicating that the current year is drier than the previous year. 5.2 Wetland Delineation Spirit staff conducted a wetland and waterbody field survey in the study area on February 15, 2019. Figure 7 illustrates the locations of the six (6) sampling points taken during the delineation as well as the wetland boundaries. Two (2) wetland features, one (1) concrete drainage channel, and one (1) erosional rill were identified within the study area. 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 1/15/20191/16/20191/17/20191/18/20191/19/20191/20/20191/21/20191/22/20191/23/20191/24/20191/25/20191/26/20191/27/20191/28/20191/29/20191/30/20191/31/20192/1/20192/2/20192/3/20192/4/20192/5/20192/6/20192/7/20192/8/20192/9/20192/10/20192/11/20192/12/20192/13/20192/14/20192/15/2019Precipitation (Inches)2019 Rain Snow Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Results Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 5–4 5.2.1 Hydrology Five (5) data points, “DP1” through “DP5”, exhibited primary or secondary wetland hydrological indicators; however, DP2 and DP4 were not determined to not represent wetlands. DP1 exhibited the primary hydrological indicator of Algal Mat or Crust (B4) as seen as a green tinge on the soil between the Typha stems (see Attachment 3: Photograph 5). DP5 exhibited the primary hydrological indicator of Saturation (A3). DP1 and DP5 both exhibited two (2) secondary hydrological indicators of Geomorphic position (D2) and FAC-neutral test (D5). These sampling points were located within the floodplain and within a depressional feature; therefore, secondary indicator D2 was selected. DP3 exhibited two (2) secondary hydrological indicators as well, FAC-neutral test (D5) and Drainage Pattern (B10) (See Attachment 3, Photographs 4 and 11). It should be noted that the data points were collected in representative habitats and that all wetlands identified onsite exhibited at least one (1) primary hydrological indicator. 5.2.2 Vegetation The majority of the study area is agricultural in nature and exhibits a separate vegetative community than that observed along the western boundary (see Attachment 3: Photographs 1 and 18). The currently fallow agricultural field was previously planted with a cultivated wheat species (Triticum spp.); however, weedy herbaceous plants have moved into the field including Pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) and Yellow Foxtail (Setaria pumila). Additionally, this delineation was conducted outside of the growing season and vegetation, where identified, was the previous season’s growth. Representative dominant taxa observed within the remaining portions of the study area are described in the tables below. Indicator status for each species was obtained from the 2016 NWPL. It should be noted that no Triticum species were listed on the NWPL; therefore, it is assumed that this plant is an upland species. Table 5-2 Upland Dominant Plant Species Strata Species Name Common Name Indicator Status Herbaceous Chenopodium album Lambsquarters FACU Herbaceous Distichlis spicata Saltgrass FACW Herbaceous Dactylis glomerata Orchardgrass FACU Herbaceous Triticum aestivus Wheat UPL Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Results Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 5–5 Table 5-3 Wetland Dominant Plant Species Strata Species Name Common Name Indicator Status Herbaceous Asclepias speciosa Showy Milkweed FAC Herbaceous Juncus balticus Baltic Rush FACW Herbaceous Schoenoplectus pungens Common Threesquare OBL Herbaceous Typha latifolia Broadleaf Cattail OBL 5.2.3 Soils Subsurface soil profiles were obtained at each sample point throughout the site. At many sampling points, a layer of frozen soil was observed of varying thicknesses. Where possible, soil pits were dug and assessed. DP1 was the only wetland soil pit for which a complete soil profile was not obtained as the amount of frozen ground restricted shovel access. Upland sampling points exhibited smaller frozen layers than their wetland counterparts. Multiple soil pits were attempted in areas where a full soil pit was not obtained. Generally, upland-identified soils consisted of very dark grayish brown to gray, loamy clay soils with matrix colors in the 10YR soil-color charts. Upland point DP4 exhibited a depleted matrix in the four (4) to 16-inch layer; however, this sampling point exhibited a loamy texture similar to the soils found at the upland point taken in the agricultural field. This datapoint is located on an earthen berm set between the two (2) depressional areas and was determined to be non-wetland. The Typha-dominated wetland community of Wetland 1 consisted of black clay soils with brown redox; however, a full soil profile was not obtained in this area as frozen soils prevented complete sample collection. The soil sampled at this pit qualified for hydric soil indicator F6 – Redox Dark Surface, as redox concentrations were distinct and greater than 5 percent, with a layer depth of greater than four (4) inches starting within the top eight (8) inches of soil. Soil pits in Wetland 2 ranged widely in matrix colors from black (10YR 2/1) to dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/6) to grayish brown (10YR 5/2) and exhibited a clay texture. Redoximorphic features were observed as both concentrations and depletions within both the matrix and the pore lining and ranging from three (3) to 25 percent. Redoximorphic feature color ranged greatly with concentrations spanning multiple hues and with depletions from pale brown (10YR 6/3) to Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Results Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 5–6 white (10YR 8/1). Sampling points within Wetland 2 exhibited two (2) hydric soil indicators: Depleted Matrix (F3) and Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11). 5.3 Waterbody Survey No natural waterbodies were observed in the study area. One (1) man-made drainage channel and one (1) erosional rill were identified within the study area. The small erosional rill has formed between the concrete drainage channel and Wetland 1 where the channel ends and empties into the wetland feature. This erosional rill is less than one (1) foot in width by 0.5-foot-deep by approximately 17 feet in length and has formed as a result of runoff from the concrete channel draining into the wetland feature. The concrete channel is 1,313 linear feet (“LF”) in length and is approximately four (4) feet wide. There is a roadside drainage ditch outside of the study area along the southern border that eventually drains into a wetland feature west of the study area which is connected to Wetlands 1 and 2. Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Conclusion Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 6–1 6.0 Conclusion Spirit conducted a wetland and waterbody delineation associated with a parcel of agricultural land located on approximately 20 acres in Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. Field efforts were performed on February 15, 2019. Two (2) wetland features, one (1) concrete drainage channel, and one (1) erosional rill were identified within the study area. Wetland 1 and Wetland 2 are palustrine emergent wetlands separated by an earthen berm that may see occasional flooding due to their location within the floodplain. Wetland 1 receives water inputs from outside of the study area to the north as the wetland feature continues offsite along a topographic depression, as well as from a concrete agricultural drainage channel along the northern study area boundary. Wetland 2 receives water inputs from Wetland 1 at the northern-most point where the two (2) wetlands are adjacent. These wetland features may also share hydrology across lower points within the earthen berm during extreme flooding events. Wetland 2 then drains back into Wetland 1 on its southern end, where Wetland 1 continues offsite before joining Cooper Slough 360 feet west of the study area. Wetland 1 is topographically lower than Wetland 2; however, both features are depressions underlain by clay soils, creating ideal conditions for prolonged saturation and ponding. The area west of Wetland 2 contains a berm associated with a fenceline for the nearby agricultural activities. The combination of berms on both the west and east side of Wetland 2 help create the topographic basin in which water accumulates. The State of Colorado currently utilizes guidance issued following the Supreme Court ruling of the Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States for determining what WOTUS are jurisdictional. This guidance, commonly referred to as the Rapanos Guidance, states that wetlands which abut relatively permanent waters (“RPW”) that are non-navigable tributaries of TNWs will be considered jurisdictional by the USACE. Through a review of aerial imagery and observations made during the delineation, Wetlands 1 and 2 continue offsite where they abut Cooper Slough, a relatively permanent non-navigable tributary. Cooper Slough flows south where it joins Lake Canal, which empties into the Windsor Reservoir. Windsor Reservoir is considered a TNW as it is currently being used for commercial navigation, including commercial water recreation, and may be susceptible to future use in interstate or foreign commerce including commercial water recreation. Given that Wetland 1 and Wetland 2 abut Cooper Slough (an RPW), Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Conclusion Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 6–2 which is a tributary to Lake Canal, which empties into Windsor Reservoir (a TNW), it is likely the USACE will assume jurisdiction over these features. The concrete drainage channel is a man-made feature that is located wholly within uplands, drains only uplands, and was not excavated from a natural feature. Additionally, the USACE generally does not assume jurisdiction over low-flow, short duration erosional features such as the erosional rill connecting the drainage channel with Wetland 1. As such, the USACE will likely not assume jurisdiction over this feature. Spirit’s professional opinions offered in this report are based on best professional judgement, but it should be noted that only the USACE may make a final determination of the location of wetland and waterbody boundaries and their jurisdiction. To obtain an official wetland determination from the USACE, this report should be submitted to the Omaha District Office of the USACE. Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties References Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 7–1 7.0 References Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Online. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/wetlands/classwet/index.htm (Version 04DEC1998). Climate Data Online. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Available online at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datasets. Accessed February 2019. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2011. Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Larimer County. Available online at http://fema.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer. Accessed February 2019. Google Inc. (2009). Google Earth (Version 5.1.3533.1731) [Software]. Accessed February 2019. Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X. Lists of Hydric Soils. National List; all states. United States Department of Agriculture. National Resource Conservation Service. Available online at http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/. Accessed February 2019. Munsell® Soil Color Charts. 2009. GretagMacbeth, New Windsor, New York Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2006. Land Resource Regions and Major land Resource Areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. Available online at www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS?nrcs142p2-050898.pdf. Accessed February 2019. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed February 2019. Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties References Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 7–2 United States, Congress, Grumbles, Benjamin H, and John Paul Woodley. “Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme Court's Decision in Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States.” Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supr eme Court's Decision in Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States, United States EPA & United States Army Corps of Engineers, 2 Dec. 2008. Available online: www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016- 02/documents/cwa_jurisdiction_following_rapanos120208.pdf. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0. L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and C.V. Noble (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Regulatory Guidance Letter: Ordinary High Water Mark Identification. Available online http://www.usace.army.mil/Portals/2/docs/civilworks/RGLS/rg105- 05.pdf. Accessed February 2019. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). March 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains Region (Version 2.0), ed. J.S. Wakely, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Attachments Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F 8–1 8.0 Attachments 1. Figures 2. Wetland Determination Data Forms 3. Site Photographs Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Attachments Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F Attachment 1 Figures Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, EsriChina (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GISUser Community FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATIONVICINITY MAPCOMUNALE PROPERTIESLARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO Note: This is not anofficial land survey. Figure No.: 1 ± Drawn By: MShields 1626 Wazee St. Suite 2ADenver, CO 80202 Site Visit Date: 2/15/19 0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION40.592485°, -105.001792°I-25Larimer County Colorado Colorado and Southern Railroad CacheLaPoudreRiver CacheLaPoudreReservoirInlet Larimerand Weld Canal Mulberry St. Running Deer Natural Area Cottonwood HollowNatural Area Riverbend PondsNatural AreaCattail ChorusNatural Area Kingfisher PointNatural Area NixNatural Area WilliamsNatural AreaSpringerNatural Area Legacy Park Lee Martinez Park Project No.: 19202.00F Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATIONAERIAL OVERVIEW MAPCOMUNALE PROPERTIESLARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO Note: This is not anofficial land survey. Figure No.: 2 ± Drawn By: MShields 1626 Wazee St. Suite 2ADenver, CO 80202 Site Visit Date: 2/15/19 0 150 30075Feet FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION40.592485°, -105.001792°NW Frontage RoadI-25Redman Drive Larimer County Colorado Project No.: 19202.00F Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATIONTOPOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW MAPCOMUNALE PROPERTIESLARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO Note: This is not anofficial land survey. Figure No.: 3 ± Drawn By: MShields 1626 Wazee St. Suite 2ADenver, CO 80202 Site Visit Date: 2/15/19 0 600 1,200300Feet FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION40.592485°, -105.001792°NW Frontage RoadI-25Larimer County Colorado Cooper Slou g h Larimer and Weld Can al Project No.: 19202.00F Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATIONNWI FEATURES MAPCOMUNALE PROPERTIESLARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO Note: This is not anofficial land survey. Figure No.: 4 ± Drawn By: MShields 1626 Wazee St. Suite 2ADenver, CO 80202 Site Visit Date: 2/15/19 0 150 30075Feet FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION40.592485°, -105.001792°NW Frontage RoadI-25Redman Drive Legend Delineation Boundary Palustrine Emergent Wetland - PEM1A Palustrine Emergent Wetland - PEM1C P E M 1A PEM1CPEM1A Project No.: 19202.00F 22 22 53 73 63 40 73 76 76 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATIONNRCS SOILS MAPCOMUNALE PROPERTIESLARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO Note: This is not anofficial land survey. Figure No.: 5 ± Drawn By: MShields 1626 Wazee St. Suite 2ADenver, CO 80202 Site Visit Date: 2/15/19 0 150 30075Feet FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION40.592485°, -105.001792°NW Frontage RoadI-25Redman Drive Legend Delineation Boundary 22 - Caruso clay loam, 0to 1 percent slope 40 - Garrett loam, 0 to 1percent slopes 53 - Kim loam, 1 to 3percent slopes 63 - Longmont clay, 0 to3 percent slopes 73 - Nunn clay loam, 0 to1 percent slopes 76 - Nunn clay loam,wet, 1 to 3 percentslopes Project No.: 19202.00F Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATIONFEMA FLOOD MAPCOMUNALE PROPERTIESLARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO Note: This is not anofficial land survey. Figure No.: 6 ± Drawn By: MShields 1626 Wazee St. Suite 2ADenver, CO 80202 Site Visit Date: 2/15/19 0 150 30075Feet FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION40.592485°, -105.001792°NW Frontage RoadI-25Redman Drive Legend Delineation Boundary Flood Zone 100-Year Flood Zone Area of Mnimial FloodHazard 100-Year Flood Zone Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Project No.: 19202.00F !( !( !( !(!( !( DP4 DP6DP5 DP3 DP2DP1 FORT COLLINS ECOLOGICAL CHARAC TERIZATIONAQUATIC FEATURES MAPCOMUNALE PROPERTIESLARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO Note: This is not anofficial land survey. Figu re No .: 7 ± Drawn By: MSh iel ds 1626 Wazee St. Suit e 2ADenver, CO 80 202 Project No.: 19 202.00F Site Visit Da te: 2 /15/1 9 0 300 600150Feet FORT COLLINS E COLOGICA L CHA RACTERIZATION40.592485°, -105.001792°NW Frontage RoadI-25Redman Drive Legend Delinea tion Bo undary PEM Wetlands - 1 .18 acres Concrete Channel - 1,313 lin ear fee t Er osion al R ill - 17 linear feet !(Sa mpling Points Se rvice La yer Credits: Source: Esri, D igitalGlobe, GeoEye , Earthstar G eographic s, CNES/Airbus DS,USD A, USGS, AeroGRI D, IG N, and t he G IS User Communit y Erosion al Ri ll (17 LF) Wetlan d 1(1.09 A C) Wetl an d 2(0.09 A C) !( !( !( DP4 DP5 DP3 Con crete Drain age Chann el (1,31 3 LF) Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Attachments Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F Attachment 2 Wetland Determination Data Forms Section, Township, Range: S DP1 15-Feb-19 2.0%1.1 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Datapoint taken within Typha community within NWI identified PEM1A feature. Typha community located in topographic depression that drains south offsite. Datapoint taken in NRCS-identified hydric soil. 10 0 10 0 100.0%0 0 *Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS. 0 0 100 100 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 100 100.0%OBL 0 0.0% 100.0% Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Great Plains Region Investigator(s): Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope: 0 ° Subregion (LRR): Lat.: Long.: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? (If no, explain in Remarks.) 0.0% 0 0.0% Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soil Present? Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Remarks: 0 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Herb Stratum Woody Vine Stratum Absolute % Cover Indicator Status = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species FACW species FAC species FACU species UPL species Column Totals: x 1 = x 2 = x 3 = x 4 = x 5 = (A) Prevalence Index = B/A = (B) (A) (B) (A/B) 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0% 0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 4 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 0 100 100 100 Yes No0 Vegetation community solely Typha, no additional herb stratum on ground. Bare ground between Typha stems. Yes No Remarks: Dominant Species? Rel.Strat. Cover 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Tree Stratum 1. 2. TR 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Poudre Valley Development Comunale Properties MShields Depressional LRR G 40.591312°-105.007007° Longmont Clay (63) Fort Collins/Larimer CO 9 7N 68W WGS84 PEM1A Typha latifolia FWS Region:GP 1 1 1 1 (Plot size:30 ) (Plot size:15 ) (Plot size:5 ) (Plot size:) concave 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 Remarks: Soil frozen 0-8 inches. *Texture for frozen soil was determined though melting soil/ice in hands prior to texturing soil. DP1 Mossy layer present on bare ground between Typha stems, green film on stems of some of the Typha. Datapoint taken within floodplain in a topographical depression. Soil Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) 1Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils : Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soil Present? Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F,G,H) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox depressions (F8) High Plains Depressions (F16) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Coastal Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) High Plains Depressions (F16) Other (Explain in Remarks) Type: Depth (inches): Hydrology Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Salt Crust (B11) Dry Season Water Table (C2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Frost Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) FAC-neutral Test (D5) Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (where not tilled) (where tilled) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) Sandy Gleyed Matrix S4 (MLRA 72 and 73 of LRR H) Reduced Vertic (F18) Red Parent Material (TF2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 and 73) 3 3 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Depth (inches) Color (moist) Color (moist) Matrix Redox Features %Loc²Texture RemarksType% See below. 1 0-8 10YR 2/1 85 10YR 4/3 10 C M Clay* Section, Township, Range: S DP2 15-Feb-19 1.0%0.6 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Datapoint taken outside of the depression which holds the Typha community. DP2 lower in the landscape than the agricultural field to the east, but not as low as the Typha community. Soils contain fill dirt. Datapoint taken in NRCS-identified hydric soil. 10 0 20 0 50.0%0 0 *Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS. 0 0 0 0 30 600 0 00 70 2800 0 0 30 30.0%FACW 70 70.0%FACU 3.400.0% Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Great Plains Region Investigator(s): Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope: 0 ° Subregion (LRR): Lat.: Long.: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? (If no, explain in Remarks.) 0.0% 0 0.0% Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soil Present? Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Remarks: 0 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Herb Stratum Woody Vine Stratum Absolute % Cover Indicator Status = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species FACW species FAC species FACU species UPL species Column Totals: x 1 = x 2 = x 3 = x 4 = x 5 = (A) Prevalence Index = B/A = (B) (A) (B) (A/B) 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0% 0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 4 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 0 100 100 340 Yes No0 Vegetation managed through mowing and community does not reflect species diversity of undisturbed grassland areas. Yes No Remarks: Dominant Species? Rel.Strat. Cover 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Tree Stratum 1. 2. TR 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Poudre Valley Development Comunale Properties MShields Flat/Sloping LRR G 40.591248° -105.006941° Longmont Clay (63) Fort Collins/Larimer CO 9 7N 68W WGS84 NA Distichlis spicata Dactylis glomerata FWS Region:GP 1 1 1 1 (Plot size:30 ) (Plot size:15 ) (Plot size:5 ) (Plot size:15 ) flat 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 Soil layer filled with small to medium sized stones/gravel throughout. DP2SoilSampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) 1Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils : Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soil Present? Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F,G,H) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox depressions (F8) High Plains Depressions (F16) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Coastal Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) High Plains Depressions (F16) Other (Explain in Remarks) Type: Depth (inches): Hydrology Remarks: Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Salt Crust (B11) Dry Season Water Table (C2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Frost Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) FAC-neutral Test (D5) Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No other hydrologic indicators observed. Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Gravel 7.5 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (where not tilled) (where tilled) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) Sandy Gleyed Matrix S4 (MLRA 72 and 73 of LRR H) Reduced Vertic (F18) Red Parent Material (TF2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 and 73) 3 3 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Depth (inches) Color (moist) Color (moist) Matrix Redox Features %Loc²Texture RemarksType% Fill containing stones/gravel 1 0-7.5 10YR 3/1 100 Loamy Clay Section, Township, Range: S DP3 15-Feb-19 2.0%1.1 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Datapoint taken west of the Typha community in a depressional feature separated from the Typha community by a natural berm. This datapoint is not as topographically low as Typha community; however, Typha community appears to drain into this depressional feature at its north end. 2 0 0 20 0 100.0%0 0 *Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS. 0 0 0 0 90 1800 60 1800 0 00 0 0 60 40.0%FAC 90 60.0%FACW 2.400.0% Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Great Plains Region Investigator(s): Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope: 0 ° Subregion (LRR): Lat.: Long.: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? (If no, explain in Remarks.) 0.0% 0 0.0% Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soil Present? Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Remarks: 0 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Herb Stratum Woody Vine Stratum Absolute % Cover Indicator Status = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species FACW species FAC species FACU species UPL species Column Totals: x 1 = x 2 = x 3 = x 4 = x 5 = (A) Prevalence Index = B/A = (B) (A) (B) (A/B) 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0% 0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 4 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 0 150 150 360 Yes No0 Canopy cover estimated as vegetation is laid down. Unable to obtain bare ground as the vegetation is laid down. Yes No Remarks: Dominant Species? Rel.Strat. Cover 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Tree Stratum 1. 2. TR 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Poudre Valley Development Comunale Properties MShields Depression LRR G 40.591754° -105.007118° Longmont Clay (63) Fort Collins/Larimer CO 9 7N 68W WGS84 None Asclepias speciosa Juncus balticus FWS Region:GP 1 1 1 1 (Plot size:30 ) (Plot size:15 ) (Plot size:5 ) (Plot size:15 ) concave 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 Depletions increased as soil depth increased. Datapoint taken in NRCS identified hydric soil. DP3 Vegetation laid down and oriented north to south following pattern of flow. Datapoint also passes for geomorphic position as it was taken within floodplain in a depressional area. Soil Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) 1Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils : Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soil Present? Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F,G,H) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox depressions (F8) High Plains Depressions (F16) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Coastal Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) High Plains Depressions (F16) Other (Explain in Remarks) Type: Depth (inches): Hydrology Remarks: Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Salt Crust (B11) Dry Season Water Table (C2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Frost Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) FAC-neutral Test (D5) Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) N/A Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (where not tilled) (where tilled) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) Sandy Gleyed Matrix S4 (MLRA 72 and 73 of LRR H) Reduced Vertic (F18) Red Parent Material (TF2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 and 73) 3 3 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Depth (inches) Color (moist) Color (moist) Matrix Redox Features %Loc²Texture RemarksType% Frozen, 1 0-2 2-8 8-16 10YR 10YR 10YR 10YR 4/1 3/1 4/2 4/1 60 35 90 75 10YR 10YR 10YR 10YR 10YR 4/3 7/1 7/2 4/4 5/3 5 5 5 20 5 C D D C C M M M M PL Clay Clay Clay Section, Township, Range: S DP4 15-Feb-19 0.0%0.0 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Datapoint taken on berm between Typha community and depression to the west. Area dominated by monoculture of Chenopodium album. Datapoint taken in NRCS-identified hydric soil. 00 0 10 0 0.0%0 0 *Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS. 0 0 5 5 0 00 0 00 90 3600 0 0 5 5.3%OBL 5 5.3%FACU 3.8428589.5%FACU Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Great Plains Region Investigator(s): Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope: 0 ° Subregion (LRR): Lat.: Long.: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? (If no, explain in Remarks.) 0.0% 0 0.0% Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soil Present? Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Remarks: 0 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Herb Stratum Woody Vine Stratum Absolute % Cover Indicator Status = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species FACW species FAC species FACU species UPL species Column Totals: x 1 = x 2 = x 3 = x 4 = x 5 = (A) Prevalence Index = B/A = (B) (A) (B) (A/B) 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0% 0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 4 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 0 95 95 365 Yes No5 Berm average of four feet wide but tapers in some places. Typha species listed due to presence in 5' plot but does not infiltrate the vegetation community of the berm. Ground on berm contains a lot of vegetative debris. Yes No Remarks: Dominant Species? Rel.Strat. Cover 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Tree Stratum 1. 2. TR 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Poudre Valley Development Comunale Properties MShields Berm LRR G 40.591857° -105.007040° Longmont Clay (63) Fort Collins/Larimer CO 9 7N 68W WGS84 None Typha latifolia Cirsium arvense Chenopodium album FWS Region:GP 1 1 1 1 (Plot size:30 ) (Plot size:15 ) (Plot size:5 ) (Plot size:15 ) convex 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 DP4 Although the area around this sample point contains vegetative debris on the ground, this did not present as drift deposits. Datapoint taken within floodplain but on a convex surface (berm) between depressional features. Soil Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) 1Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils : Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soil Present? Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F,G,H) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox depressions (F8) High Plains Depressions (F16) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Coastal Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) High Plains Depressions (F16) Other (Explain in Remarks) Type: Depth (inches): Hydrology Remarks: Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Salt Crust (B11) Dry Season Water Table (C2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Frost Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) FAC-neutral Test (D5) Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (where not tilled) (where tilled) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) Sandy Gleyed Matrix S4 (MLRA 72 and 73 of LRR H) Reduced Vertic (F18) Red Parent Material (TF2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 and 73) 3 3 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Depth (inches) Color (moist) Color (moist) Matrix Redox Features %Loc²Texture RemarksType% Very crumbly soil 1 0-2 2-4 4-16 10YR 10YR 10YR 3/2 4/1 5/1 100 100 82 10YR 10YR 8/1 6/4 3 15 D C M M Loam Loam Section, Township, Range: S DP5 15-Feb-19 1.0%0.6 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Datapoint taken on northern end of depressional feature located west of the berm (and west of the Typha community). Veg. community shifted slightly to include S. pungens and C. album so point was captured to assess potential wetland characteristics. 20 0 30 0 66.7%0 0 *Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS. 0 0 40 40 15 300 20 600 25 1000 0 0 40 40.0%OBL 20 20.0%FAC 2.355.0%FACU Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Great Plains Region Investigator(s): Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope: 5 ° Subregion (LRR): Lat.: Long.: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? (If no, explain in Remarks.) 5.0%FACW 10 10.0%FACW Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soil Present? Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Remarks: 20 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Herb Stratum Woody Vine Stratum Absolute % Cover Indicator Status = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species FACW species FAC species FACU species UPL species Column Totals: x 1 = x 2 = x 3 = x 4 = x 5 = (A) Prevalence Index = B/A = (B) (A) (B) (A/B) FACU20.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0% 0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 4 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 0 100 100 230 Yes No5 C. album located on eastern side of 5' plot and did not extend into the rest of the plot. Milkweed and J.balticus on western side of plot. Plot is vegetatively split between milkweed/Juncus species and Disticlis/Bassia species. Yes No Remarks: Dominant Species? Rel.Strat. Cover 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Tree Stratum 1. 2. TR 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Poudre Valley Development Comunale Properties MShields Depressional LRR G 40.591965° -105.007099° Longmont Clay (63) Fort Collins/Larimer CO 9 7N 68W WGS84 PEM1C Schoenoplectus pungens Asclepias speciosa Chenopodium album Distichlis spicata Juncus balticus Bassia scoparia FWS Region:GP 1 1 1 1 (Plot size:30 ) (Plot size:15 ) (Plot size:5 ) (Plot size:15 ) concave 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 Soils: 9-16" (continued) 10YR 3/2 20%, redox- 10YR 5/8 with 5% concentrations in the matrix, clay texture. Soil was moist clay in the 9-16" layer, could not pull apart into separate pedons. DP5 9 Saturation at 9 inches, clay was slick and unable to separate. Datapoint passes secondary indicator of D2 because it is located within a depression within the floodplain. Soil Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) 1Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils : Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soil Present? Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F,G,H) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox depressions (F8) High Plains Depressions (F16) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Coastal Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) High Plains Depressions (F16) Other (Explain in Remarks) Type: Depth (inches): Hydrology Remarks: Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Salt Crust (B11) Dry Season Water Table (C2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Frost Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) FAC-neutral Test (D5) Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (where not tilled) (where tilled) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) Sandy Gleyed Matrix S4 (MLRA 72 and 73 of LRR H) Reduced Vertic (F18) Red Parent Material (TF2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 and 73) 3 3 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Depth (inches) Color (moist) Color (moist) Matrix Redox Features %Loc²Texture RemarksType% Very clayey due to saturation, can't avoid 1 0-3 3-7 7-9 9-16 10YR 10YR 10YR 10YR 10YR 10YR 10YR 2/1 4/3 2/1 3/6 4/1 4/2 5/2 70 15 10 25 20 70 10YR 10YR 10YR 7.5YR 5YR 10YR 8/1 3/4 4/4 8/2 8/1 6/3 3 5 20 10 25 5 D C C D D D M M M M M M Clay Clay Clay Clay Clay Clay Clay Clayey/loam Section, Township, Range: S DP6 15-Feb-19 0.0%0.0 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Datapoint taken in an agricultural field in area exhibiting aerially identified crop stress signatures. Datapoint taken in NRCS non-hydric soil. 00 0 10 0 0.0%0 0 *Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS. 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 15 600 40 200 10 18.2%FACU 5 9.1%FACU 4.7274072.7%UPL Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Great Plains Region Investigator(s): Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope: 0 ° Subregion (LRR): Lat.: Long.: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? (If no, explain in Remarks.) 0.0% 0 0.0% Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soil Present? Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Remarks: 0 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Herb Stratum Woody Vine Stratum Absolute % Cover Indicator Status = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species FACW species FAC species FACU species UPL species Column Totals: x 1 = x 2 = x 3 = x 4 = x 5 = (A) Prevalence Index = B/A = (B) (A) (B) (A/B) 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0% 0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 4 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 0 55 55 260 Yes No45 Fallow agricultural field. Yes No Remarks: Dominant Species? Rel.Strat. Cover 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Tree Stratum 1. 2. TR 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Poudre Valley Development Comunale Properties MShields Flat LRR G 40.591983° -105.004922° Nunn Clay Loam 0-1% slopes (73) Fort Collins/Larimer CO 9 7N 68W WGS84 None Amaranthus retroflexus Setaria pumila ssp. pumila Triticum aestivus FWS Region:GP 1 1 1 1 (Plot size:) (Plot size:) (Plot size:) (Plot size:) flat 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) US Army Corps of Engineers Great Plains - Version 2.0 DP6 No hydrology observed. Soil Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) 1Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils : Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soil Present? Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR F) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR F,G,H) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) 2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G, H) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox depressions (F8) High Plains Depressions (F16) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR I, J) Coastal Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR F, G, H) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR G) High Plains Depressions (F16) Other (Explain in Remarks) Type: Depth (inches): Hydrology Remarks: Soil disturbed via tilling. Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Salt Crust (B11) Dry Season Water Table (C2) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Frost Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) FAC-neutral Test (D5) Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (where not tilled) (where tilled) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR F) Sandy Gleyed Matrix S4 (MLRA 72 and 73 of LRR H) Reduced Vertic (F18) Red Parent Material (TF2) (LRR H outside of MLRA 72 and 73) 3 3 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Depth (inches) Color (moist) Color (moist) Matrix Redox Features %Loc²Texture RemarksType%1 0-16 10YR 3/2 100 Loamy Clay Wetland Delineation Report Comunale Properties Attachments Spirit Environmental, LLC March 1, 2019, Revised March 7, 2019 19202.00F Attachment 3 Site Visit Photograph Poudre Valley Development, Fort Collins, CO Site Visit Photographs Photo 1: Overview of agricultural community in the study area. Photo 2: Overview of wetland communities in the study area. Photo 3: Overview of Wetland 1 facing north.Photo 4: Overview of Wetland 2 facing south. Photo 5: View of hydrology at vegetative community within Wetland 1 at DP1. Photo 6: View of landcape setting at DP1 facing east. Spirit Environmental, LLC 19202.00F February 15, 2019 1 Poudre Valley Development, Fort Collins, CO Site Visit Photographs Photo 7: View of fill dirt present at DP2.Photo 8: View of landscape setting at DP2 in relation to Wetland 1. Photo 9: View of redoximorphic features identified in soils at DP3. Photo 10: View of soil profile at DP3. Photo 11: View of landscape setting at DP3 showing hydrology facing north along Wetland 2. Photo 12: View of soil profile at DP4. Spirit Environmental, LLC 19202.00F February 15, 2019 2 Poudre Valley Development, Fort Collins, CO Site Visit Photographs Photo 13: View of landscape setting at DP4 showing wetland communities split by earthen berm. Photo 14: View of saturation within soils at DP5. Photo 15: View of redoximorphic features identified in soils at DP5. Photo 16: View of landscape setting at DP5 facing north. Photo 17: View of soil profile at DP6 taken within the agricultural field. Photo 18: View of landscape setting at DP6 facing west towards the wetland features. Spirit Environmental, LLC 19202.00F February 15, 2019 3 Poudre Valley Development, Fort Collins, CO Site Visit Photographs Photo 19: View of concerete-lined drainage channel along nothern study area boundary facing east. Photo 20: View of erosional rill created by runoff through the concrete-lined drainage and emptying into Wetland 1. Photo 21: View of roadside drainage ditch along southern study area boundary. #N/A #N/A #N/A Spirit Environmental, LLC 19202.00F February 15, 2019 4