view - City of Fort Collins Public Records

September 3, 2013
Mr. John Acken
Capstone Collegiate Communities
431 Office Park Drive
Birmingham, Alabama 35223
RE: Environmental Characterization Study Report for the Capstone Cottages Project Site
This letter report documents the evaluation of habitat conditions on the proposed Capstone Cottages 21acre development parcel in Fort Collins, Colorado. The proposed development site is located in Fort
Collins, Larimer County, Colorado in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 7 (T. 7 N. R. 68 W.) at the northeast
corner of the intersection of Lemay Avenue and Lincoln Avenue. Existing land uses within the property
consist entirely of a cleared, abandoned farmstead area and fallow, non-native grassland pasture.
Topography of the site is essentially level with a drainage gradient to the southeast.
An environmental and wetland survey of the property was completed on August 23, 2013. The wetland
delineation and sampling work for the wetlands within the project area were completed using the methods
and techniques specified for "routine on-site delineations" in the publication, Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual (USACOE 1987), and supplemented by the document, Regional Supplement to the
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains Region, Version 2.0 (USACOE 2010) (see
attached draft wetland report).
The following provides the ecological characterization checklist of information required by Fort Collins
Land Use Code under 3.4.1 (D) (1) items (a) through (k).
(a) & (i) The majority of the project area supports non-native grassland. A previous ECSR report
prepared by Cedar Creek for a portion of this property in August 2005 documented the presence of an
abandoned farmstead on the property as well as grazing use by horses. This habitat has been converted
to non-native grassland to support livestock grazing in the past (see attached Figure 1). Non-native
grassland is dominated primarily by smooth brome (Bromus inermis)1 with lesser amounts of Kentucky
bluegrass (Poa pratensis), tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea), slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus),
crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum), western wheatgrass (Pascopyrom smithii), and cheatgrass
(Bromus tectorum). Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) is also present as a sub-dominant species in non-native
grassland over portions of the eastern half of the property. Western wheatgrass and slender wheatgrass
are the only native species among these. Total vegetation cover ranges from 10 percent, in the
overgrazed prairie dog town area, to nearly 100 percent in the weed dominated former farmstead area.
The former farmstead area has been cleared of all structures and is now dominated by tall, dense stands
of kochia (Bassia scoparia) and carelessweed (Cyclachaena xanthiifolia). Vegetation cover in the prairie
dog town at the north edge of the property is sparse as a result of prairie dog overgrazing and is
dominated primarily by weedy species including field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), cheatgrass,
Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), and pitseed goosefoot (Chenopodium berlandieri) with minor amounts of
smooth brome. Woody vegetation is restricted primarily to small (less than 6 inches in diameter) Russian
olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia), eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides), and peachleaf willow trees (see
attached Figure 1). Lance-leaf cottonwoods at the southwest property corner are the only potentially
significant trees located on the property.
1 Scientific nomenclature follows USDA, NRCS Plants Database. Available online at: http://plants.usda.gov/java/
Acken, J
September 3, 2013
Page 2 of 4
Aside from potentially significant trees and small wetland areas (see following Section b), the project area
does not support any native vegetation or other unique habitat features, and no features of ecological
value exist within 500 feet of the development site. Habitat value and wildlife use of non-native
grassland/pasture and weedy habitats is limited by the general lack of woody vegetation, dominance by
non-native grass species, and surrounding development and roads. Mice, voles, black-tailed prairie dog,
and pocket gopher are the principal species likely to establish resident mammal populations in non-native
grassland. Songbirds such as western meadowlark, Brewer’s blackbird, common grackle, and blackbilled magpie may also occasionally use non-native grassland/pasture habitat. Trees on the property may
be used for perching, nesting, and foraging by urban-adapted songbirds, and Canada geese grass may
occasionally graze the non-native grassland areas. No songbird nests were located in trees on the
project area during the August 23, 2013 survey.
(b) According to the Soil Conservation Service’s (SCS) Soil Survey of Larimer County Area, Colorado
project area soils are Loveland clay loam; Nunn clay loam, wet; and Caruso clay loam. Nunn clay loam,
wet, is not a hydric (wetland) soil, but both Loveland clay loam and Caruso clay loam are classified as
hydric. These two hydric soils cover about 70 percent of the property in the south half and northeast
quarter. Although hydric soils are prevalent, only two wetland areas were delineated on the project area.
They are located near the southeast corner of the property and near the southeast corner along the
Lincoln Avenue borrow/drainage ditch (see Figure 1). A draft wetland report has been prepared and will
be submitted to the COE for these wetlands once the boundaries are surveyed and their sizes (acres) are
determined. The southeast corner wetlands are isolated and will likely not be classified as jurisdictional
by the COE. A previous approved jurisdictional determination issued by the COE for Larimer County’s
Lincoln Avenue/Link Lane intersection upgrade project determined that the wetlands and waters in the
Lincoln Avenue ditch are non-jurisdictional (see COE File No. 200580352). A copy of the COE response
letter for the Capstone Cottages report will be provided to the City once it is received.
The borrow ditch wetland along Lincoln Avenue is characterized by a vegetation community dominated by
cattails (Typha latifolia), dogbane (Apocynum cannabinum), and Emory sedge (Carex emoryi). The small
depression wetlands in the southeast property corner are dominated by Baltic rush eastern cottonwood
(Populus deltoides), dogbane, and round-fruit rush (Juncus compressus) with upland plant species
making up a small percentage of the absolute cover.
(c) The property does not provide any unobstructed views of significant landscape or topographical
features.
(d) Because of past farmstead development and pasture conversion of the property, the only native
woody vegetation located on the property are few young (less than 6 inches in diameter) eastern
cottonwood (Populus deltoides) trees, associated with the wetland area, and lance-leaf cottonwood
(Populus acuminata) trees the western property boundary (see attached Figure 2).
(e) There are no perennial water features or natural drainages on or near the property.
(f) The project area was evaluated with regards to potential habitat for state and federal listed threatened
and endangered species, and it was determined that no suitable habitat exists for Preble’s meadow
jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei), Ute ladies’-tresses orchid (Spriranthes diluvialis), or Colorado
butterfly plant (Gaura neomexicana coloradenis). A portion of a black-tailed prairie dog town extends into
the northern portion of the project area. Little active prairie dog activity was noted at the time of the field
survey except in the northeast portion of the town where prairie dog activity was observed. The prairie
dog town is well under 50 acres acres, and Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code provides for no protection
of prairie dog towns less than 50 acres in size. Section 3.4.1 (N)(6) does stipulate that before the
commencement of grading or other construction on the development site, any prairie dogs inhabiting
portions of the site within the LOD shall be relocated or eradicated by the developer using city-approved
Acken, J
September 3, 2013
Page 3 of 4
methods as set forth in Chapter 4 of the City Code and, when applicable, using methods reviewed and
approved by the Colorado Division of Wildlife.
(g) Because of past cultivation of non-native grass pasture over most of the property, there are no special
habitat features present except for the larger trees noted on Figure and the small cluster of isolated
wetlands near the southeast property corner (see Section b).
(h) There are no suitable wildlife movement corridors on or near the property.
(j) Because of the lack of natural habitat features on the project area, there are only two issues regarding
the timing of property development and ecological features or wildlife use of the project area. If the
development proposal includes removal of any trees on the property, tree removal during the songbirdnesting season could result in the loss or abandonment of a nest and would be in violation of the federal
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Prairie dogs in the proposed offsite detention pond area would need to be
removed as indicated in paragraph (f) prior to the initiation of grading and construction activities.
(k) Wetlands and lance-leaf cottonwood (Populus acuminata) trees 6 inches or greater in diameter on the
property may require protection as per the City’s Land Use Code. Trees will need to be evaluated by the
City Forester or a private arborist to determine which trees may be classified as significant. Loss of trees
classified as significant would need to be mitigated with replacement trees as per Section 3.2.1 (F) of the
Code. Most wetlands require protection, and based on Section 3.4.1(E)(1)(d) of the Land Use Code, the
small (less than 0.3-acre) wetlands on the property would require a 50-foot non-development setback.
Because tree removal during the songbird nesting season could result in the loss or abandonment of a
nest, it is recommended that tree removal or pruning occur outside of the songbird nesting season (April 1
– July 31), or trees be surveyed to ensure lack of nesting prior to removal during the nesting season. This
mitigation recommendation would preclude the possible incidental take or disturbance of active songbird
nests.
Prairie dogs in the proposed offsite detention pond area would need to be removed as indicated in
paragraph (f) prior to the initiation of construction activities.
John, this concludes my environmental assessment of the Capstone Villages project area. Please let me
know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
INC.
T. Michael Phelan
Principal
PHOTO APPENDIX: PHOTOS TAKEN AUGUST 23, 2013 AT THE CAPSTONE COTTAGES
PROJECT SITE
6
P-1: W-1 – Borrow Ditch
P-2: W-2 – Depression
7
P-3: W-3 – Shallow Drainage
8
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF SAMPLE POINT CHARACTERISTICS
Sample
Point #
CC-1
CC-2
CC-3
CC-4
CC-5
CC-6
CC-7
Dominant
Species
Hydric
Soil Indicator(s)
Primary & Secondary Wetland
Hydrology Indicator(s)
Apca, Tyla, Caem
Chna, Brin
Ivxa, Basi
Juba
Juco
Pasm
Pode, Apca, Juco
F6
None
None
None
F6
None
F6
A3, B10, D-2
None
None
None
A2 (seasonal) B10, D2
None
B1, B10, D2
COE
Wetland
PEM1B
No
No
No
PEM1Y
No
PFO1/PEM1Y
Name
W-1
W-2
W-3
Borrow Ditch
Depression
Shallow Drainage
Vegetated Wetlands
Feature
Dominant
Species
PEM1B
Apca, Tyla, Caem
PEM1Y
Juco
PFO1/PEM1Y Pode, Apca, Juco
Cowardin
Classification
0.18
0.02
0.02
Acreage
(ac.)
None observed
None observed
None observed
Hydrologic
Connection
CC-1/P-1
CC-5/P-2
CC-7/P-3
Sample Points/
Photos
TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF PERTINENT VEGETATED WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS
(No Other Waters of the U. S. Were Observed on Site)
PHOTO APPENDIX: PHOTOS TAKEN AUGUST 23, 2013 AT THE CAPSTONE COTTAGES
PROJECT SITE
P-1: W-1 – Borrow Ditch
P-2: W-2 – Depression
P-3: W-3 – Shallow Drainage