Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix D - Wetland and Weed Report 05-05-2020______________________________________________________________________________________ 1 Harley Huestis, PE, Project Manager TD&H Engineering 234 E. Babcock, Suite 3 Bozeman, MT 59715 May 4, 2020 RE:Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park City of Bozeman Watercourse Regulation Adherence Submittal ____________________________________________________________________________________ Dear Mr. Huestis, The following Watercourse Regulation Adherence Documentation is being submitted in support of the proposed Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park PUD located in Bozeman, Montana. Enclosed documents include the following: ·Bozeman Community Development Wetland Review Required Materials & Checklist ·City of Bozeman Watercourse Regulations Adherence Responses ·City of Bozeman Development Review Conformance: Wetland and Watercourse Regulations Worksheet ·Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary ·Section 404 Application – as submitted to USACE ·Weed Management Plan – as submitted to Gallatin County Weed District Ø (Refer to Landscape Plan Sheets regarding Watercourse Planting Plan) Sincerely, Lynn Bacon, PWS TerraQuatic, LLC 614 West Lamme Street Bozeman, MT 59715 (406)-580-6993 Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 1. A description of the proposed activity. Impacts are proposed for 0.013 are wetland and 0 LF of any stream channels. Impacts to the most natural aquatic resource on the site (Walton Ditch and wetland fringe) were avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. Initial design impacts approximated 0.4-0.5 acre. 2. A description of why avoidance and less damaging alternatives have been rejected, if applicable. The current proposed design plan is the less damaging alternative. 3. Wetland delineation report complying with the requirements of Section 38.30 BMC. Completed June 2, 2019, report enclosed. 4. A site plan which shows the delineated wetland boundary, the property boundary, all existing and proposed structures, streets and hardscape including sidewalks and pathways, watercourses and drainage ways on and within 100 feet of the property. Include the date of preparation and any revisions and north point indicator. Suggested scale of 1 inch to 20 feet, but not less than 1 inch to 100 feet. The wetland boundary must be keyed to a wetland delineation report. Aquatic resource map is 1” to 50’ and is included in the delineation summary (see Exhibit A in the delineation report). 5. The exact locations and specifications for all proposed regulated activities and the direct and indirect impact of such activities. See enclosed Figure B impact map. 6. The source, type and method of transport and disposal of any fill materials to be used, and certification that he placement of fill material will not violate any applicable state or federal statutes and regulations. No fills will be placed in aquatic resources with the exception of those proposed in the Section 404 Application (0.013 ac). Materials will be sourced by TMC (Belgrade, MT). 6. Copies of any Section 404 wetland permits submitted or already obtained for the site. The Section 404 Application and accompanying letter to the USACE is enclosed. 7. Any historical information regarding wetland permitting or mitigation on the site. There is no historic permitting known on Lot 3A. Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal _____________________________________________________________________________ 1 Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD Submittal City of Bozeman Watercourse Regulations Adherence Submitted By: Lynn Bacon, PWS, TerraQuatic, LLC Date: May 4, 2020 _____________________________________________________________________________________ (Introduction if necessary…) [Some responses may require a ‘Does Not Apply’, explain why if necessary.] Sec. 38.30.080. - Review standards. A. The review authority may approve, conditionally approve or deny a regulated activity in a regulated wetland if: 1. The applicant has demonstrated that all adverse impacts on a wetland have been avoided; or Several early project designs were altered to minimize impacts to wetlands; original designs may have impacted up to 0.5 acre. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that any adverse impact on a wetland has been minimized; the activity will result in minimal impact or impairment to any wetland function. Wetland impacts have been limited to 0.013 acre along the west side of Walton Ditch. And the activity will not result in an adverse modification of habitats for, or jeopardize the continued existence of, the following: a. Plant, animal or other wildlife species listed as threatened or endangered (TES) by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; and/or Not a concern. b. Plant, animal or other wildlife species listed as a species of concern (SOC), species of potential concern, or species on review by the state department of fish, wildlife and parks and the state natural heritage program; or Not a concern. 3. The applicant has demonstrated that the project is in the public interest, having considered and documented: a. The extent of the public need for the proposed regulated activity; The public need for this project has been demonstrated the relevant applications to the City of Bozeman, and is therefore in accordance with the public need described for this jurisdiction. The functions and values as determined by a state accepted method of functional assessment of the wetland that may be affected by the proposed regulated activity. Not conducted due to very limited wetland impacts (0.013 acre). b. The extent and permanence of the adverse effects of the regulated activity on the wetland and any associated watercourse; Permanent impact will be limited to 0.013 acre. Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal _____________________________________________________________________________ 2 c. The cumulative adverse effects of past activities on the wetland; and None. d. The uniqueness or scarcity of the wetland that may be affected. The wetland fringe and type of channel (stream channel formerly sued to convey irrigation water) are very common int eh City of Bozeman. (Ord. No. 1645, § 18.56.080, 8-15-2005; Ord. No. 1693, § 19(18.56.080), 2-20-2007; Ord. No. 1761, exh. K(18.56.080), 7-6-2009; Ord. No. 1945 , § 10, 4-25-2016) Sec. 38.30.090. - Wetland permit conditions. A. The review authority may recommend conditions of approval for proposed regulated activities, and the city may conditionally approve proposed regulated activities, subject to the following conditions: 1. Requiring the provision of a wetland buffer of a size appropriate for the particular proposed activity and the particular regulated wetland area; Wetland buffers have been established along the Walton Ditch wetland fringe and the fringe along the stormwater pond north of the project site. Buffers were not applied to the south stormwater ditch (NWW-2) because it is man-made and serves to convey water from the Lowe’s parking lot to the stormwater pond to the east. The north stormwater ditch-like feature qualifies as wetland (i.e. not a channel), and was wetland prior to the construction of the stormwater pond. Therefore, buffers have been applied to this feature. The original and current trail through the property was located in Zone 1 along the west side of Walton Ditch wetland fringe. Per advice from the Wetland Scientist, Engineers and Architects the trail was relocated from Zone 1 to Zone 2 with the exception of 130 feet in Zone 1 (130 feet is allowed per regulation calculations) to avoid sharp curves in the trail and prevent cross-cutting. 2. Requiring that structures be appropriately supported and elevated and otherwise protected against natural hazards; NA 3. Modifying waste disposal and water supply facilities; NA 4. Requiring deed restrictions or covenants regarding the future use and subdivision of lands, including but not limited to the preservation of undeveloped areas as open space and restrictions on vegetation removal; No deed restrictions or covenants are required (i.e. for wetland mitigation). The open space areas with Walton Ditch will be protected by the City of Bozeman watercourse regulations. 5. Restricting the use of an area, which may be greater than the regulated wetland area; NA 6. Requiring erosion control and stormwater management measures; A SWPPP will be required prior to construction. 7. Clustering structures or development; Refer to site plan. 8. Restricting fill, deposit of soil and other activities which may be detrimental to a wetland; Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal _____________________________________________________________________________ 3 Proposed wetland fill has been minimized to 0.013 acre. 9. Modifying the project design to ensure continued water supply to the regulated wetland; and Not an issue. 10. Requiring or restricting maintenance of a regulated wetland area for the purpose of maintaining wetland functions. No maintenance is required other than noxious weed control per State law. 11. A yearly mitigation monitoring report to be submitted to the review authority on a yearly basis, with the due date to be determined on a case-by-case basis. Does not apply for impacts <0.1 acre. 12. A deed restriction to be filed with the county clerk stating the measures that will be taken to protect all water resources, mitigation, and buffer areas in perpetuity. Does not apply. 13. That all reasonable effort has been made to limit indirect impacts to vegetation, faunal interspersion and connectivity, and hydrological connectivity in the site design (e.g., any structures, boardwalks, viewing platforms, or bridges, which are constructed within wetlands will have at least a two-foot space between the bottom chord of the structure and the wetland surface elevation to limit shading impacts and allow wetland vegetation to persist). Not an issue; no bridges across any aquatic resources are proposed. 14. The review authority may recommend conditions to mitigate for locally-regulated (wetlands not connected to a water of the U.S.) infringement upon watercourses, buffers, or negative indirect or direct effects on the functionality of wetlands, watercourses or buffers. NA Sec. 38.30.070. - Application requirements and procedures for activities in wetland areas. C. Submittal materials. The information required in 38.41.130 shall be submitted for all regulated activities proposed for regulated wetland areas. See Sec. 38.41.130 responses below. Sec. 38.41.130. - Submittal materials for regulated activities in wetlands. (Submitted or Not Submitted or Does Not Apply and Why) A. All parties applying for activity permits proposing action affecting federal, state or city regulated wetlands, watercourses and/or buffers within the city limits shall submit the following information to the water review board: 1. A wetland and watercourse delineation report must be submitted to the city for all projects, if aquatic resources are present. If no aquatic resources are present, a letter shall be submitted to the city stating that there are no water resources within the subject property. An aquatic resource delineation was conducted on June 2, 2019. a. This wetland and watercourse delineation report shall include, but not be limited to, the following: Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal _____________________________________________________________________________ 4 (1) Wetland and watercourse descriptions; Done. All features are jurisdictional. See enclosed delineation summary. (2) Functional assessment, as determined by a state-accepted functional assessment method, i.e., Montana Department of Transportation (Berglund and McEldowney 2008) or Montana Department of Environmental Quality (Apfelbeck and Farris 2005); Not included due to the very small proposed impact to aquatic resources: 0.013 ac wetland. (3) Wetland types, as determined by a state-accepted functional assessment method (i.e., Cowardin et al 1979); Done. (4) Wetland acreages (by a licensed surveyor); 0.48 in Lot 3A (WL-1); the adjacent open space pond area (WL-2) = 0.48 ac (see Exhibit A). The open space pond area is technically not part of the development submittal. [However, this pond area was delineated.] (5) Maps with property boundaries, wetland and watercourse boundaries and acreages; and Done. (6) Wetland data forms (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers data forms). Done. Sec. 38.41.130. - Submittal materials for regulated activities in wetlands. 2. If activities are planned in and/or adjacent to aquatic resources the following information is required: a. A site plan which shows the property boundary; delineated wetland and watercourse boundaries; buffer boundaries; and all existing and proposed structures, roads, trails, and easements. The site plan will include a table of existing wetland functional ratings and acreage, required buffers and acreage, and linear feet of all watercourses and ditches. (1) All direct impacts to wetlands, watercourses, and buffers shall be highlighted and summarized in a table on the site plan. The water resource and buffer summary table shall include wetland/watercourse identification number; corresponding buffer width and acreage; total site, wetland, watercourse, ditch, and buffer acreages; jurisdictional status; impacts to all water resources and buffers; and, mitigation types and acreages. See Exhibit B. (2) All indirect impacts (e.g., shading from boardwalks or public utility well drawdown) shall be summarized in the document. Not an issue. b. Include a map with all proposed mitigation areas and their required buffers. The map will include a table of mitigation wetland type and acreage and required buffers and acreage. No on-site mitigation is proposed. Describe the functional unit gain of the wetland mitigation (as determined by a state-accepted functional assessment method). Does not apply. Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal _____________________________________________________________________________ 5 c. The source, type and method of transport and disposal of any fill material to be used, and certification that the placement of fill material will not violate any applicable state or federal statutes and regulations as listed in section 38.41.020. No fill will be placed in any aquatic resources unless permitted (a 0.013 ac impact fill is being applied for from the USACE, see enclosed application). d. The names and addresses of all property owners within 200 feet of the subject property. The names and addresses shall also be provided on self-adhesive mailing labels. Not necessary. e. Copies of the following: (1) Any Clean Water Act (CWA) section 404 and 401 permits; Application enclosed. (2) Any MT 301 permits; Not required. (3) Any floodplain determinations for the proposed site known to the applicant; NA (site not within a floodplain) (4) Any other applications, state or federal, for wetlands permits regarding the proposed site; Not an issue. (5) Any U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional determinations regarding wetlands on the proposed and adjacent site; and Not required; the Wetland Scientist (Lynn Bacon) made a “likely” determination that all aquatic features within the site are jurisdictional. (6) If relevant, any MT state joint applications for the proposed project site. Not applicable. e. A completed wetland review checklist. Enclosed as a separate document. 3. If in the preparation or review of the required submittal materials it is determined that there are unavoidable impacts to wetlands and/or watercourses that will require a Federal Clean Water Act permit, then the following information will be submitted to the city for all federal jurisdictional and city-regulated wetlands (see section 38.42.3240) in a compensatory mitigation report: Does not apply, mitigation not required for 0.013 ac impact. ______________________________________________________________________________________ 1 City of Bozeman Development Review Conformance: Wetland and Watercourse Regulations Worksheet Project: Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD Conformance Review by: Lynn Bacon, Consultant for Arrowleaf Park & Perennial Park and TD&H Engineering Date Received: (This table is being submitted as part of the PUD submittal to ensure watercourse regulation materials are complete.) Date Review Completed: May 4, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ The following worksheet was compiled by TerraQuatic (TQ), LLC from the City of Bozeman, Chapter 38 Unified Development Code*. The worksheet is compiled of city wetland and watercourse regulations and designed to expedite analysis of development review conformance. Most regulation descriptions were condensed for the purposes of brevity and analysis. All references to wetlands and watercourses in other Articles or regulations may not be included in this document because of redundancy. Responses of “yes” or “no” in the “Answer” column do not necessarily imply noncompliance. To indicate compliance, a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer is in black font; unknown or noncompliance findings are in red font. Blue font indicates a response that must be made by the city review authority and may have no bearing on aquatic resource regulation conformance. Quick-summary reference tables have an orange heading to assist the city with expedient conformance analysis; gray headings are detailed regulation tables. DNA: Does Not Apply TBD: To Be Determined ARTICLE 19. – PLAN REVIEW. Section 38.19.090 – Plan Review Procedures Answer Comments D. Step 3 Review of Applications Acceptability and adequacy of application 1. [Paragraph 2] After the application is deemed to contain the required elements and to be acceptable, it shall be reviewed for adequacy. A determination of adequacy means the application contains all of the required elements in sufficient detail and accuracy to enable the review authority to make a determination that the application either does or does not conform to the requirements of this chapter and any other applicable regulations under the jurisdiction of the city. TQ: Does the submittal adequately contain all elements in accordance with city wetland and watercourse regulations? To the best of our ability, all items required by the COB watercourse regulations have been submitted or explanations provided why an item may not have been included. This section not filled in because of conflict of interest issues (TQ is the Arrowleaf project consultant). Abbreviations: TQ: TerraQuatic (Lynn Bacon) ARTICLE 19. – PLAN REVIEW. Section 38.19.100 – Plan Review Criteria Answer Comments A. In considering applications for plan approval under this chapter, the review authority and advisory bodies shall consider the following criteria. 3. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances and regulations. TQ: Does the submittal conform with city wetland and watercourse regulations? This section not filled in because of conflict of interest issues (TQ is the Arrowleaf project consultant). Abbreviations: TQ: TerraQuatic (Lynn Bacon); USACE-U.S. Army Corps of Engineers * https://www.municode.com/library/mt/bozeman/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH38UNDECO, site accessed March 13, 2017. Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 2 ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.30.080 – Review Standards Answer Comments A. Review authority may approve, conditionally approve, or deny an activity in a regulated wetland. --- (See complete 38.30.080 table below for complete analysis of this regulation.) 1. Has the applicant demonstrated all adverse wetland impacts have been avoided? Yes Proposed wetland impacts have been minimized to 0.13 acre (from earlier design of 0.4-0.4 ac) and the current trail length within Zone 1 has been moved to Zone 2 and minimized to 130 feet (130 feet of trail is allowed in Zone 1 per regulation). 2. Has the applicant demonstrated that adverse impacts have been minimized (re: function, TES, SOC)? Yes There are no TES/SOC concerns within the project site. 3. Has the applicant demonstrated that the project is in the public interest, having considered and documented: Yes Abbreviations: TQ: TerraQuatic (Lynn Bacon); USACE-U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ARTICLE 42. – DEFINITIONS Section 38.42.3220 – Watercourse Answer Comments Any stream, river, creek, drainage, waterway, gully, ravine or wash in which some or all of the water is naturally occurring, such as runoff or springs, and which flows either continuously or intermittently and has a definite channel, bed and banks, and includes any area adjacent thereto subject to inundation by reason of overflow. In the event of a braided or other multiple channel configuration of a watercourse, the area of the watercourse shall be that area lying between the two outermost high-water marks, as defined in this chapter. The term "watercourse" shall not be construed to mean any facility created exclusively for the conveyance of irrigation water or stormwater. Yes Walton Ditch, an apparent perennial channel that does not appear to be currently used as an irrigation channel. ARTICLE 42. – DEFINITIONS Section 38.42.3240. – Wetland Answer Comments A. Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions, and meet the established criteria (dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, positive hydrologic criteria). Yes Delineation conducted by TerraQuatic, LLC on June 2, 2019. ARTICLE 23. – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Section 38.23.100. – Watercourse Setback Answer Comments A. Does the development cross a watercourse? 1. Was the development granted preliminary plan or plat approval BEFORE 7/10/2002? No Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 3 ARTICLE 23. – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Section 38.23.100. – Watercourse Setback Answer Comments a. Required Setbacks: - East Gallatin-100ft; - All Other Watercourses – 35 ft; - (1) Area immediately adjacent to the OHWM left in natural vegetative state: - (a) East Gallatin: 50 ft - (b) All Other Watercourses: 5 ft - (2) No fence, residential or commercial structure, fill material, parking, other similar improvements shall be located within required watercourse setbacks. - (3) All watercourse setbacks shall be measured from the OHWM. If indiscernible, setbacks shall be measured from the top of the streambank. 2. Was the development granted preliminary plan or plat approval AFTER 7/10/2002? - Pending post-2002 a. & b. Has the developer appealed or applied for any variances pertaining to watercourse setbacks? No c. Setbacks on both sides of watercourse: (1) East Gallatin River: 100 ft (2) Sourdough Creek: 75 ft (3) Other Watercourses: 50 ft (4) Setback Extensions: (a) setback shall extend to delineated 100-year floodplain if larger than 2.c. setbacks; DNA (b) setback shall be extended by the width of immediately adjacent fringe wetlands; Yes Wetland buffers (50ft) have been applied to all features except the south current stormwater pond inlet which is a manmade feature that conveys water from Lowes parking lots to the stormwater pond north of Lot 3A. Man-made stormwater conveyance ditches do not require a watercourse buffer per City of Bozeman watercourse regulations. (c) area of slope greater than 33% shall not be counted towards setback requirement; and, DNA (d) setback shall extend 50 ft beyond the perimeter of connected wetlands. Yes Done. (5) All watercourse setbacks shall be measured from the OHWM. If indiscernible, setbacks shall be measured from the top of the streambank. DNA The Walton Ditch has a wetland fringe, therefore the setback was measured from the edge of wetland. d. No fence, residential or commercial structure, fill material, parking, other similar improvements shall be located within required watercourse setbacks, unless approved through, and in conformance with, a variance or deviation process. DNA No structures are proposed for any setback areas. Three stormwater ponds are proposed for Zone 2, which is allowed per COB regulations. e. Exceptions (setback zones): Zone 1: 60% of the area closest to OHWM; Zone 2: 40% of area furthest from OHWM - (1) Zone 2: On-site stormwater facilities; Yes All stormwater detention ponds would be constructed within Zone 2 of the watercourse setback (2) Trail Improvements: (a) Zone 2: signage, benches; Yes Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 4 ARTICLE 23. – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Section 38.23.100. – Watercourse Setback Answer Comments (b) Zone 1: limited non-looping spur trails to the water’s edge, interpretative signs, benches at terminus; Yes The length of the current trail within Zone 1 has been limited to 130 feet (allowed 130ft per ). The trail is within Zone 1 to smooth corners and encourage no cross-cutting. (c) Zone 1 special circumstances (topography, avoidance of wetlands, other constraints: <300% watercourse setback per 500LF watercourse (includes spurs, etc, and applies per side) Yes There is 434 LF of Walton Ditch channel bed within the project boundary. Allowed trail and spurs (300% of setback width (150ft) per 500 ft = 130 ft is allowable within 434 ft watercourse length. (d) Sedimentation, bank instability, pollution runoff, etc minimized? DNA Wetland edges will be protected by appropriate stormwater measures per SWPPP guidelines. (e) Crossings allowed in all zones, must have all applicable local, state, federal permits. DNA No crossings are proposed for Walton Ditch. (3) Streets, sidewalks, utility crossings (a) minimized? Yes No utilities, streets or sidewalks are proposed for buffer zones (dirt trail will cross Zone 1 for 130 “allowable” feet). (b) crossings at 90 degrees where feasible? DNA (c) crossings withstand 100-year flood event? DNA The site is not within a floodplain. (d) grading and drainage designed to prevent untreated stormwater from entering watercourse? Yes All water will be treated in stormwater detention ponds before being released into State waters. (e) bank stabilization plan approved by the City for all crossings? DNA (4) Outlets from stormwater treatment facilities may pass through all zones, are all pertinent permits acquired to discharge to a watercourse? Yes Stormwater ponds will be located in Zone 2, no outlets will be constructed through any wetlands within the entire site.. (5) Is there a noxious weed control program in place (acceptable in all zones)? Yes See enclosed Weed Management Plan, which will be filed after accepted. f. Setback Planting: submitted and approved by City planning department (including schedule and plantings indicated on plan)? ___ (1) Zone 1: 100% of area shall be planted with native new or existing grass/forb species; 1 shrub/10ft; and 1 tree/30ft. Yes Seed mix enclosed. (2) Zone 2: new or existing grass species. Yes Seed mix enclosed. (3) Will setback zones be maintained? Is planting zone irrigated or woody species fenced? If so, quantities may be reduce to 1 shrub/20 ft, 1 tree/60 ft. [(4) Note: there are no size requirements.] Yes Irrigation will be installed to support watercourse woody species plantings, however numbers of woody species were not decreased. (5) Was the site seeded as soon as was feasible to prevent noxious weed invasion and soil erosion? TBD If the buffer areas are disturbed during site construction, they will be seeded using a temp seed mix (annual rye, barley, clover) per weed management plan. Final seeding of disturbed buffer zones and watercourse woody species plantings, will be completed by 2022 (seed mix enclosed in submittal). (6) Where all plants/seeds native to Gallatin Valley? No Not an issue: Seeds will be native or naturalized species typically used in low maintenance parkland areas. (7) Were native species used in all disturbed areas (crossings. trails, utilities)? No Not an issue: Seeds will be native or naturalized species typically used in low maintenance parkland areas. g. Were any other areas in zone 1 or 2 disturbed other than those above in 2.e. and f. of this section? No 3. Other Provisions: Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 5 ARTICLE 23. – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Section 38.23.100. – Watercourse Setback Answer Comments a. Were watercourse setbacks depicted on preliminary and final plats and plans? Yes b. Does the site include agricultural activities, which have not been abandoned for >180 days? No Abbreviations: COB-City of Bozeman; DNA-Does Not Apply; OHWM-Ordinary High Water mark; NA-Not available ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.30.010. – Title and Applicability Answer Comment The City of Bozeman’s regulations pertain to direct hydrologic connection to “waters of the U.S.” (those wetlands that connect to a federally-regulated stream or river directly or via a series or watercourse, wetlands or ditches), and also to isolated wetlands with no direct connection to a water of the U.S. and exhibit positive wetland indicators for all three wetland parameters. The provisions contained in these regulations do not apply to wetlands created by a wholly manmade water source used for irrigation purposes or stormwater control. -- Are there wetlands within the proposed project area that are known jurisdictional wetlands? If so, list identification/Cowardin type. Yes See enclosed current conditions delineation map (Exhibit A) and delineation summary. Are there wetlands within the proposed project area that are known nonjurisdictional wetlands? If so, list identification /Cowardin type. No A. Were wetlands discovered during the development review process? Yes Delineation conducted on June 2, 2019 by TerraQuatic, LLC. Abbreviations: COB-City of Bozeman; DNA-Does Not Apply; OHWM-Ordinary High Water mark; WL-wetland; USACE-U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.30.030. – Application of Wetland Regulations Answer Comment A. Were wetlands (as defined by Section 38.42.3240) discovered during the development review process? Yes 1. Was a delineation conducted according to the 1987 and 2010 USACE manuals? Yes 2. Did a qualified professional conduct the delineation? Yes Lynn Bacon, PWS (TerraQuatic) B. Are the isolated wetlands < 400 sqft? If so they are exempt, unless: No 1. Does the wetland provides habitat for TES? No 2. Does the wetland provides habitat for state SOC or under review by the state? No C. Have the setback requirements of 38.23.100 been addressed? Yes See Exhibit B. D. Does this Article repeal, abrogate, etc and existing laws or deed restrictions? No Does this Article impose more stringent restrictions than those already imposed on the property? No Does this Article impose more stringent restrictions than the USACE under the 404 CWA? No Abbreviations: COB-City of Bozeman; DNA-Does Not Apply; OHWM-Ordinary High Water mark; CWA-Clean Water Act; WL-wetland; USACE-U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; TES-Threatened Endangered Species (Federally-listed); SOC-Species of Concern (State-listing) Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 6 ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.30.050. – Wetlands Determinations Answer Comment A. Wetland boundaries are determined in accordance with Federal manuals? Yes B. Electronic and printed delineation report and raw data (if required) provided to the COB by the developer? Yes Abbreviations: COB-City of Bozeman; DNA-Does Not Apply; OHWM-Ordinary High Water mark ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.30.060. – Regulated Activities Answer Comment A. No regulated activities shall occur within a wetland (Sec.30.010) without approval by the review authority. Will any of the following activities (but not limited to) occur and reduce the size, or decrease the function of a wetland: --- 1. Placement of any materials (sand, gravel, organic material, water)? Yes Impacts limited to 0.013 ac 2. Construction, installation, placement of any structure (trail, building, boardwalks, etc)? Yes Trail will be located primarily in Zone 2. Where corners were smoothed, 130ft of the trail is proposed for Zone 1. Stormwater ponds (3) are proposed for Zone 2. 3. Removal, dredging, etc. of any materials? Yes 4. Removal of existing vegetation? Yes In permanent impact area (0.013 ac) upland parkland mix will be seeded. 5. Alteration of water table? No 6. Alteration of drainage patterns, flood retention, change in topography, etc. by any means? No [B. Allowed activities, 1-10: maintenance if activity does not alter wetland size or function: weed control, road/utility maintenance, ag practices, outdoor rec, scientific/education, pruning, mowing, debris removal, etc.] DNA Abbreviations: COB-City of Bozeman; DNA-Does Not Apply; OHWM-Ordinary High Water mark; WL-wetland ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.30.070. – Application Requirements and Procedures for Activities in Wetland Areas Answer Comment A. Review. All proposals shall be reviewed by review authority, and --- A functional assessment prepared for all wetlands. No Functional assessments deemed not necessary by TQ given impact has been largely avoided and minimized to 0.013 acre. C. Submittal Materials. Have all materials as required by 38.41.130 been submitted? Yes To the best of our ability. Abbreviations: COB-City of Bozeman; DNA-Does Not Apply; OHWM-Ordinary High Water mark; TBD-To Be Determined ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.30.080. – Review Standards Answer Comment A. Review authority may approve, conditionally approve, or deny an activity in a regulated wetland. --- Answers to this Article is included are included in the Wetland Checklist document 1. Has the applicant demonstrated all adverse wetland impacts have been avoided? Yes Wetland impacts have been minimized. 2. Has the applicant demonstrated that adverse impacts have been minimized (re: function, TES, SOC)? Yes 3. Has the applicant demonstrated that the project is in the public interest, having considered and documented: ---- Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 7 ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.30.080. – Review Standards Answer Comment a. The extent of the public need for the proposed regulated activity; Yes Wetland fill will allow completion of stormwater utilities construction and trail construction at a safe distance from a childcare playground. b. The functions and values as determined by a state accepted method of functional assessment of the wetland that may be affected by the proposed regulated activity; No Not necessary. c. The extent and permanence of the adverse effects of the regulated activity on the wetland and any associated watercourse; Yes Impacts would be permanent in southeast corner of site (0.013 ac) and seeded to upland parkland species. A Section 404 Application has been submitted (enclosed). d. The cumulative adverse effects of past activities on the wetland; and DNA e. The uniqueness or scarcity of the wetland that may be affected. No The areas of wetland impact are very low quality (likely low Class 3). Abbreviations: COB-City of Bozeman; DNA-Does Not Apply; OHWM-Ordinary High Water mark; TBD-To Be Determined; TES-Threatened Endangered Species (Federally-listed); Species of Concern (State-listing); SOC-Species of Concern (State-listing) ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.30.100. – Appeals Answer Comment Depending upon the application procedure involved, decisions related to the approval or denial of regulated activities proposed for regulated wetland areas may be appealed in accordance with the provisions of article 35 of this chapter. DNA Not necessary. Abbreviations: COB-City of Bozeman; DNA-Does Not Apply; OHWM-Ordinary High Water mark; TBD-To Be Determined ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.41.130. – Submittal Materials for Regulated Activities in Wetlands Answer Comment A. Required submittal materials: --- 1. Has a wetland and watercourse delineation been submitted to the COB if aquatic resources are present? If no resources, has a letter been submitted stating that no resources occur within the subject property? Yes Delineation report enclosed. A Jurisdictional Determination not necessary; all aquatic resources with the exception of the current south stormwater inlet are (likely) jurisdictional as determined by wetland scientist (TQ). We will not seek a determination for the south Lowes stormwater is inlet because no impacts are proposed for this feature. a. If resources, does the delineation report include the following information: --- (1) aquatic resource descriptions; Yes See delineation summary. (2) Functional assessments; No Not necessary given very limited impacts. (3) Wetland type (e.g. Cowardin, HGM); Yes See delineation summary. (4) Wetland acreages; Yes See delineation summary. (5) Maps: property boundaries, wetland, watercourse boundaries and acreages; Yes See delineation summary. (6) USACE data forms. Yes See delineation summary. 2. If activities are planned in and/or adjacent to aquatic resources, is the following information included?: --- a. A site plan with the following: property boundary; aquatic resource boundaries; buffer boundaries; wetland functional ratings; linear feet of all watercourses; existing and proposed structures, roads, trails, easements; Yes [Except FA, deemed not necessary per wetland scientist (TQ).] (1) Direct acreage impacts to all aquatic resources; acreages for all buffers; JD status; mitigation acreages; Yes See Exhibit B. Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 8 ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.41.130. – Submittal Materials for Regulated Activities in Wetlands Answer Comment (2) Summary of all indirect impacts (dewatering, shading from boardwalks, etc); DNA b. Map of mitigation areas and buffers with corresponding table of acreages, functional assessment gain; Yes [No FA.] c. Source, type, transport, disposal of fill materials; Yes TMC of Belgrade, MT. d. Names and addresses of property owners within 200 ft of subject property; Yes See 404 Application for adjacent property owners. (1) Copies of 404 and 401 permits; Yes Enclosed Section 404 Application. (2) Copies of 310 Permits; DNA (3) Floodplain determinations; DNA (4) All other state, federal permits pertaining to wetlands; DNA (5) USACE JD determinations; No Not required, all aquatic resources are considered “likely” jurisdictional (only the USACE/EPA can make official determinations). (6) All other state joint applications. 3. If there are unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional and city-regulated wetlands, the submittal must include the following: --- a. Was a compensatory mitigation report submitted? The mitigation proposal should include following: No Not necessary; no mitigation is required for impacts <0.1 acre. (1) Applicant contact information; report author contact info; summary of indirect and direct impacts; proposed mitigation concept; identification of required permits; project vicinity map; DNA (2) Description of existing aquatic resources; surveys; FA; DNA (3) Assessment of changes to wetland hydroperiod, how to minimize; DNA (4) Description and map of mitigation and buffer areas; DNA (5) Assessment of existing conditions in area of proposed mitigation (veg, soil, hydroperiod, wetland functions); DNA (6) Field data to support #5 above; DNA (7) Planting schedule by community type, hydrologic regime, size, species plant materials, plant spacing, quantities, hydrologic requirements and measures taken to support, weed control, plant protection (e.g. fencing) [80% of seeded or planted must be native species]; DNA (8) Mitigation monitoring must be at least 3 years and an invasive vegetation management plan must be in place; DNA (9) Mitigation performance criteria for wetlands and buffers must state specific goals and timing; DNA (10) Contingency plans must be clearly stated in the event mitigation criteria goals and timing are not met. DNA b. Scaled plan sheets must include the following: --- (1) Existing and proposed aquatic resource impacts and mitigation boundaries; DNA (2) Surveyed topography at 1- to 2-ft intervals and cross-sections of proposed mitigation aquatic resources and buffers; DNA (3) Required buffers for existing and mitigation aquatic resources. DNA Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 9 ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.41.130. – Submittal Materials for Regulated Activities in Wetlands Answer Comment c. Discussion of management practices that will protect and maintain nonimpacted and mitigation aquatic resources and their buffers. DNA Abbreviations: COB-City of Bozeman; DNA-Does Not Apply; OHWM-Ordinary High Water mark; TBD-To Be Determined; JD-USACE Jurisdictional; CWA-Clean Water Act; FA-functional assessments; WL-wetland; USACE-U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; TQ-TerraQuatic ARTICLE 41. – SUBMITTAL MATERIALS AND REQUIREMENTS Section 38.41.020. – Streambed, Streambank, and/or Wetland Permits Answer Comment A. Environmental permitting requirements, copies of permits, or communications indicating said permit is not required (concerning wetlands or watercourses). --- 1. Montana Stream Protection Act (SPA 124 Permit). Administered by the Habitat Protection Bureau, Fisheries Division, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks. DNA 2. Stormwater discharge general permit. Administered by the water quality bureau, state department of environmental quality. No Pending initiation of project construction. 3. Montana Natural Streambed and Land Preservation Act (310 Permit). Administered by the board of supervisors, county conservation district. DNA 4. Montana Floodplain and Floodway Management Act (Floodplain Development Permit). Administered by the city engineering department. DNA 5. Federal Clean Water Act (404 Permit). Administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Yes Application enclosed. 6. Federal Rivers and Harbors Act (Section 10 Permit). Administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. DNA 7. Short-term Water Quality Standard for Turbidity (318 Authorization). Administered by state department of environmental quality. DNA 8. Montana Water Use Act (Water Right Permit and Change Authorization). Administered by the water rights bureau, state department of natural resources and conservation. --- Abbreviations: USACE-U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; DEQ- MT Department of Environmental Quality Other important regulations to consider during project conformance analysis: ARTICLE 41. – SUBMITTAL MATERIALS AND REQUIREMENTS Section 38.30.090. – Wetland Permits Conditions A. The review authority may recommend conditions of approval for proposed regulated activities, and the city may conditionally approve proposed regulated activities, subject to the following conditions: 1. Requiring the provision of a wetland buffer of a size appropriate for the particular proposed activity and the particular regulated wetland area; 2. Requiring that structures be appropriately supported and elevated and otherwise protected against natural hazards; 3. Modifying waste disposal and water supply facilities; 4. Requiring deed restrictions or covenants regarding the future use and subdivision of lands, including but not limited to the preservation of undeveloped areas as open space and restrictions on vegetation removal; 5. Restricting the use of an area, which may be greater than the regulated wetland area; 6. Requiring erosion control and stormwater management measures; Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD May 4, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 10 ARTICLE 41. – SUBMITTAL MATERIALS AND REQUIREMENTS Section 38.30.090. – Wetland Permits Conditions 7. Clustering structures or development; 8. Restricting fill, deposit of soil and other activities which may be detrimental to a wetland; 9. Modifying the project design to ensure continued water supply to the regulated wetland; and 10. Requiring or restricting maintenance of a regulated wetland area for the purpose of maintaining wetland functions. 11. A yearly mitigation monitoring report to be submitted to the review authority on a yearly basis, with the due date to be determined on a case-by-case basis. 12. A deed restriction to be filed with the county clerk stating the measures that will be taken to protect all water resources, mitigation, and buffer areas in perpetuity. 13. That all reasonable effort has been made to limit indirect impacts to vegetation, faunal interspersion and connectivity, and hydrological connectivity in the site design (e.g., any structures, boardwalks, viewing platforms, or bridges, which are constructed within wetlands will have at least a two-foot space between the bottom chord of the structure and the wetland surface elevation to limit shading impacts and allow wetland vegetation to persist). 14. The review authority may recommend conditions to mitigate for locally-regulated (wetlands not connected to a water of the U.S.) infringement upon watercourses, buffers, or negative indirect or direct effects on the functionality of wetlands, watercourses or buffers. Abbreviations: USACE-U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; DEQ- MT Department of Environmental Quality Analysis completed by: ______________________________________________ ___________May 4, 2020________________________ Lynn M. Bacon, Professional Wetland Scientist Date _______________________________________________________________________________________ 1 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: Keith Waring, PE TD&H Engineering 234 E Babcock St Bozeman, MT 59715 From: Lynn Bacon, PWS TerraQuatic, LLC 614 East Lamme Street Bozeman, MT 59715 Date: October 11, 2019 Subject: Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary ________________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION At the request of TD&H Engineering, TerraQuatic, LLC completed the aquatic resources delineation within the proposed Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD (Lot 3A of Minor Subdivision 407A and Saccocia Common Open Space of Minor Subdivision 407). The proposed project site is located in the NW of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 5 East (Figure 1). With the exception of the pond and creek riparian areas, nearly 100 percent of the remaining project site has historically been used to support agricultural grass hayland. METHODS Wetlands were delineated using the 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast (Version 2.0) (U. S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE] 2010). The 2016 National Wetland Plant List was used to determine vegetation indicator status rating (Lichvar et al. 2016). Data points (DP) were established within wetlands (WL) and adjacent uplands (UPL), i.e. nonwetland areas. In general, an area qualifies as a wetland if a site exhibits positive wetland indicators for three parameters: vegetation, soils, and hydrology. Photographs of all aquatic resources are included in Appendix B. At each data point wetland indicator data were collected and analyzed using USACE wetland determination data forms (Appendix C). NRCS (2019) soil map and data and Montana Natural Heritage Program wetland inventory (MNHP 2019) map are included in Appendix D. Wetland boundaries and nonwetland waterway (NWW) ordinary highwater mark (OHWM) were surveyed by TD&H Engineering. The OHWM is estimated by considering several factors, Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD October 11, 2019 Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary _______________________________________________________________________________________ 2 Figure 1. Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD project site location (red polygon), Bozeman, Montana. including the vegetation/open water boundary, sediment deposits, and debris lines that result from ordinary high water (USACE 2005). TD&H Engineering surveyed the wetlands and estimated ordinary high water mark of all nonwetland waterways. Survey quality GPS equipment (Trimble R10 Receiver) was used with horizontal coordinates on an assumed coordinate system (with the MTSU CORS Station having the following coordinates: N: 500,000.00, E: 600,000.00). Horizontal coordinates presented in this report are ground, international feet. Vertical datum is NAVD 88 based on the MSTU CORS Station with an elevation of 4942.21 feet. RESULTS The aquatic resources delineation was conducted on June 2, 2019. The proposed project site is comprised of two channels with associated wetland fringe and one man-made stormwater pond. The aquatic resource delineation map is included in (Exhibit 1; Appendix A). Channel linear feet (LF), wetland acreage, Cowardin type, hydric soil indicators, source of hydrology, and dominant vegetation are included in Table 1. Walton Ditch N Tschache Lane Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD October 11, 2019 Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary _______________________________________________________________________________________ 3 Table 1. Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary Wetland Acreage Cowardin Type1 Likely JD Status2 Data Point (DP) Hydric Soil Indicators3 Hydrologic Source Description and Dominant Vegetation Species4 WL-1 0.48 R2UB1/ PEMAB/ PSSAB Yes DP-1w Other Surface and ground water: Walton Ditch reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), willow (Salix spp.) (off project site) WL-2 0.48 PEM Yes DP-2w Other Stormwater/ Groundwater reed canary grass, narrow-leaf willow (Salix exigua, FACW), wood rose (Rosa woodsii, FACU) TOTAL 0.96 Stormwater Pond 0.85 AB Yes - - Stormwater - Nonwetland Waterway Linear Feet - JD - - Source Average Channel Width NWW-1 458 - Yes - Walton Ditch 10 NWW-2 262 Yes Stormwater/ Groundwater 2 TOTAL 710 1 PEM-Palustrine Emergent, Temporarily Flooded (A), Saturated (B); PSS-Palustrine Scrub-Shrub; R2-Riverine Lower Perennial; UB1-Unconsolidated Bottom, cobble-gravel; AB-Aquatic Bed (Cowardin et al., 1979, USFWS 2012) 2 USACE makes the final jurisdictional (JD) determination. 3 Other: See USACE Data Forms for explanations Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD October 11, 2019 Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary _______________________________________________________________________________________ 4 General Aquatic Resource Descriptions Walton Ditch (NWW-1, 458 LF) flows perennially and has the appearance of a natural streambed (i.e. not a straight trench) and includes a well-developed and in some areas a very wide (>100 feet) wetland fringe (WL-1). The stormwater pond inlet channel (NWW-2, 262 LF) and shallow stormwater pond (0.85 acre, <2 feet deep) are considered one system and includes a narrow (average 8-foot wide) wetland fringe (WL-2). The NWW-2/WL-2/stormwater pond system connects to Walton Ditch system (NWW-1/WL-1), which eventually flows into the East Gallatin River. Wetland-1 (WL-1, 0.48 ac) is the wetland fringe along the perennial Walton Ditch channel. The north third of the wetland fringe is comprised of a dominant shrub community; the south two-thirds of the creek wetland system is comprised of emergent vegetation. Wetland-2 (WL-2; 0.48 ac) is comprised of the wetland fringe around the circumference of the stormwater pond (0.85 acre), the fringe along the pond’s south inlet channel (NWW-2, 262 LF) fringe, the wetland within the north inlet (no channel), and the south pond outlet. The inlets are on the west side of the pond and these two features join prior to entering the pond. There are two outlets on the east side of the pond. The south outlet is a surface overflow and the north outlet is conveyed through a culvert. The wetland feature east of the north culverted outlet is outside of the property boundary. The south outlet wetland is comprised of 100 percent shrubs. The pond is likely less than two feet deep. The pond was originally constructed to collect stormwater and to satisfy wetland mitigation requirements. This feature would require a City of Bozeman 50-foot setback because of its mitigation history; if it had been constructed solely to collect stormwater no setback would have been required. SUMMARY The project site is comprised of two wetland systems (0.96 acres), two channel bed systems (710 LF), and a shallow stormwater pond (0.85 acre). The following environmental permitting or concerns would apply to this project site: • All systems are likely federally jurisdictional and will require a Section 404 permit to fill; • Impacts to Walton Ditch bed or bank would require a MT310 Permit; • City of Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance regulations concerning watercourses and wetlands would apply to all aquatic features within the project site. Arrowleaf Park and Perennial Park in the Lowe's-Saccoccia PUD October 11, 2019 Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary _______________________________________________________________________________________ 5 REFERENCES Cowardin, L., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C. Lichvar, R.W., M. Banks, W.N., 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. Montana Natural Heritage Program (MNHP). 2019. Wetland and Riparian Mapping http://mtnhp.org/mapviewer/?t=8 , site accessed June 2019. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2019. Soil Survey, Hydric Rating by Map Unit. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx , site accessed June 2019. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2005. Regulatory Guidance Letter, No. 05-05: Ordinary High Water Mark Identification: http://www.nap.usace.army.mil/Portals/39/docs/regulatory/rgls/rgl05-05.pdf . U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J.S. Wakely, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats Mapping Codes, http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Documents/Wetlands-and-Deepwater-Habitats-Mapping- Codes.pdf , site accessed July 2014.