The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09 Wetland & Watercourse Adherence____________________________________________________________________________________ 1 Technical Memorandum To: Rob Lateiner Virga Capital P.O. Box 1070 Bozeman, MT 59771 From: Lynn Bacon, PWS TerraQuatic, LLC 614 West Lamme Street Bozeman, MT 59715 Date: August 19, 2019 Subject: Frontage Road Aquatic Resources Delineation ________________________________________________________________________________ 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Frontage Road property is a vacant 4.3-acre parcel located along the south side of Frontage Road and east of the East Main Street Interestate-90 interchange in Bozeman, Montana (SE¼ Section 8, Township 2 South, Range 6 East; Figure 1). The property is comprised of two aspen communities along the west boundary and otherwise comprised of grass and grass-like species. The delineation and reporting efforts were initiated as part of a due-diligence investigation. 2.0 METHODS 2.1 Wetland Delineation Wetlands were originally 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 site was delineated using the 2016 National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar 2018). Data points (DP) were established within each wetland and adjacent nonwetland areas. At each data point wetland indicator data were collected and analyzed using USACE wetland determination data forms. Photographs were taken at each data point. To satisfy City of Bozeman Watercourse regulation requirements, wetland areas within 50 feet of the north, east and south property boundaries were delineated. Any wetland areas occurring west of the property boundary were estimated because access was not granted to enter that property. Frontage Road Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary August 19, 2019 ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 Figure 1. Frontage Road Property, Bozeman, Montana (estimated property boundary is indicated by the red polygon). 2.2 Nonwetland Waterways Nonwetland waterways are those scoured portions of river, stream, or ditch-associated habitat that are not vegetated with emergent species (erect, rooted, herbaceous wetland plants). Waterways, whether ephemeral, intermittent, or perennial typically exhibit scour or areas denuded of vegetation as a result of flowing water over the soil surface. Areas of ponded water with no emergent vegetation are also considered nonwetland areas. Ordinary high water marks are surveyed and linear feet (LF) calculated. N East Gallatin River (flow direction) East Main Street, Bozeman Interchange Frontage Road Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary August 19, 2019 ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 2.3 Survey Methods Hyalite Engineering surveyed the wetlands and estimated ordinary high water mark of all nonwetland waterways. Survey quality GPS equipment (Leica GS 10 Receiver) was used with horizontal coordinates on an assumed coordinate system (with the MTSU CORS Station having the following coordinates: N: 518240.13, E: 1573684.47). Horizontal coordinates presented in this report are ground, international feet. Vertical datum is City of Bozeman datum based on the City of Bozeman BM 849 with an elevation of 4810.31 feet (to convert NAVD 88 add 19.41 feet). 3.0 RESULTS A wetland (WL) and nonwetland waterway (NWW) delineation was conducted by TerraQuatic, LLC on July 25th and 26th, 2019. The aquatic resources delineation map is included in Exhibit A (Appendix A). All wetland features were photographed (Appendix B). Wetland determination data forms are included in Appendix C. NRCS soil data (2019) and Montana Natural Heritage Program (MNHP 2019) wetland and riparian map are included in (Appendix C). No aquatic features were illustrated on the Montana Natural Heritage Program map. A jurisdictional investigation map is included in Appendix E (Exhibit B). 3.1 Wetlands The Frontage Road property is comprised of 4.02 acres of wetlands within the investigation area that also includes wetlands extending into the Frontage Road right-of way. Nearly the entire property is comprised of one wetland feature and three small upland areas along the west boundary. Wetlands extend off-property to the south and west; these areas were estimated to satisfy City of Bozeman watercourse regulations requirements. Wetland identification number, wetland acreage, data point number, and positive hydrologic, soil and vegetation characteristics are listed in Table 3.1. Wetland-1 is a palustrine emergent (PEM) community comprised in order of dominance: field meadow- foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis, FAC), Baltic rush (Juncus balticus, FACW), and small patches of water smartweed (Persicaria amphibia, OBL). Minor species include Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis, OBL), woolly sedge (C. pellita, OBL), and Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense, FAC). Frontage Road Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary August 19, 2019 ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4 3.2 Nonwetland Waterways There are no nonwetland waterways within the subject property. 3.3 Jurisdictional Status An extensive investigation was conducted to determine if this wetland feature is connected to a water of the U.S. A map was devised to illustrate culvert locations, inlets/outlets and drainage patterns beyond the property boundary (Appendix E, Exhibit B). A culvert under Frontage Road conveys water from the adjoining west property to a ditch north of Frontage Road. The ditch conveys water into an upland aspen community along the south side of the railroad tracks. The drainage pattern dissipates 173 feet prior to the inlet of a culvert under Interstate-90 that leads to a large wetland complex west of the interchange. An official jurisdictional determination will be requested from the Army Corps. Table 1. Wetland Data Point Summary Wetland (WL) Likely JD Status1 Acreage Cowardin Type2 Wetland Data Point Hydric Soil Indicators3 Hydrologic Source & Positivizes Indicators Vegetation Species WL-1 Unknown 4.02 PEM DP-1w-1 A11 Source: stormwater, ground water; Positive Indicators: geomorphic position; saturation visible on aerial photograph Baltic rush (Juncus. balticus, FACW), field meadow-foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis, FAC), water smartweed Persicaria amphibia, OBL) DP-1w-2 A11, A12, Other Baltic rush, field meadow- foxtail, Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis, OBL), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense, FAC) DP-1w-3 F6 field meadow-foxtail, Canada thistle DP-1w-4 Other field meadow-foxtail, Baltic rush, Canada thistle DP-1w-5 A12, F6 field meadow-foxtail, Baltic rush, Nebraska sedge, creeping wild rye (Elymus repens, FAC) DP-1w-6 A12, F6 field meadow-foxtail, Canada thistle TOTAL 4.01 1 USACE makes the final jurisdictional (JD) determination. 2 PEM-Palustrine Emergent (Cowardin et al. 1979; MNHP 2018) 3 A11-Depleted Below Dark Surface; A12-Thick Dark Surface; F6-Redox Dark Surface; Other – see USACE Data Forms for reasoning. Frontage Road Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary August 19, 2019 ____________________________________________________________________________________ 5 4.0 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. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Site accessed December 2012: http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/wetlands/pdfs/wlman87.pdf. Lichvar, R. W. 2013. National Wetland Plant List: 2013 Wetland Ratings. Phytoneuron 2013-49:1- 241. July 17, 2013. ISSN 2153 733X. 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. Site access July, 2019: http://mtnhp.org/mapviewer/?t=8 . 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. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2019. Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for Gallatin County Area, Montana. Site accessed July, 2019: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx . APPENDIX A __________________________________________________________________________ EXHIBIT A: FRONTAGE ROAD AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION MAP __________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX B _________________________________________________________________________ WETLAND PHOTOGRAPHS _________________________________________________________________________ Photo 1. Wetland- 1, DP-1w-1, in vicinity of double-track road along south property boundary; view southwest. Photo 2. Wetland- 1, DP-1u-1 adjacent to a double-track road along south side of wetland. There is additional wetland to the south (photo right) in Interstate-90 ROW; view east. Photo 3. Wetland- 1, DP-1w-2, located in northwest area of wetland; view southwest. Photo 4. Wetland- 1, DP-1w-3, located along central east property and wetland boundary; view south. A camping area is east (photo left) of property boundary. Photo 5. Wetland- 1, DP-1w-4, located in east central area of wetland and west of DP-1w-3; view west. Photo 6. South upland aspen community, DP-1u-2, in center of feature; view north. Photo 7. South upland aspen community, DP-1u-3, in eastern edge of community along a transect in search of wetland line; view south. Photo 8. Wetland-1, DP-1w-5, east of upland aspen community and DP-1u-3; view south. South upland aspen community in photo right. Photo 9. Wetland- 1, DP-1w-6, located in Frontage Road ROW; view east. DP-1u-4 is located in Frontage Road slope (photo left, out of view). Photo 10. Culvert under interstate that is 173 feet from a defined drainage pattern (see northwest area of Exhibit B, Appendix E). APPENDIX C _________________________________________________________________________ USACE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS _________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX D _________________________________________________________________________ MNHP WETLAND AND RIPARIAN MAP AND SSURGO SOIL REPORT _________________________________________________________________________ Figure D.1. Montana Natural Heritage Program wetland and riparian map (2019); red polygon is approximate location of property boundary. Figure D.2. Soil map (SSURGO 2013); red polygon is approximate location of property boundary. APPENDIX E ________________________________________________________________________ EXHIBIT B: FRONTAGE ROAD JURISDICTIONAL INVESTIGATION MAP ________________________________________________________________________ MDT MONTANA WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM (revised March 2008) 1 1. Project Name: Frontage Road 2. MDT Project #: 3. Control #: 3. Evaluation Date: 10/2019 4. Evaluator(s): LBacon, TerraQuatic, LLC 5. Wetland/Site #(s): WL-1 6. Wetland Location(s): Township 2 S, Range 6 E, Section SE1/4 Sec 8; Township N, Range E, Section Approximate Stationing or Roadposts: Watershed: 6 - Upper Missouri County: Gallatin 7. Evaluating Agency: 8. Wetland Size (acre): 6 (visually estimated) Purpose of Evaluation: (measured, e.g. GPS) Wetland potentially affected by MDT project Mitigation wetlands; pre-construction Mitigation wetlands; post-construction 9. Assessment Area (AA) Size (acre): (visually estimated) Other fucntion of current WL footprint (see manual for determining AA) 4.08 (measured, e.g. GPS) 10. CLASSIFICATION OF WETLAND AND AQUATIC HABITATS IN AA (See manual for definitions.) HGM Class (Brinson) Class (Cowardin) Modifier (Cowardin) Water Regime % OF AA Depressional Emergent Wetland Diked Seasonal / Intermittent 100 Comments: "Diked", meaning man-enhanced wetland because it is located on 3 sides by man-made features: I-90 (south), Frontage Road (north), and trailer park (east). 11. ESTIMATED RELATIVE ABUNDANCE (of similarly classified sites within the same Major Montana Watershed Basin; see manual.) common 12. GENERAL CONDITION OF AA i. Disturbance: Use matrix below to select the appropriate response; see manual for Montana listed noxious weed and aquatic nuisance vegetation species lists. Conditions within AA Predominant Conditions Adjacent to (within 500 feet of) AA Managed in predominantly natural state; is not grazed, hayed, logged, or otherwise converted; does not contain roads or buildings; and noxious weed or ANVS cover is ≤15%. Land not cultivated, but may be moderately grazed or hayed or selectively logged; or has been subject to minor clearing; contains few roads or buildings; noxious weed or ANVS cover is ≤30%. Land cultivated or heavily grazed or logged; subject to substantial fill placement, grading, clearing, or hydrological alteration; high road or building density; or noxious weed or ANVS cover is >30%. AA occurs and is managed in predominantly natural state; is not grazed, hayed, logged, or otherwise converted; does not contain roads or occupied buildings; and noxious weed or ANVS cover is ≤15%. --- --- --- AA not cultivated, but may be moderately grazed or hayed or selectively logged; or has been subject to relatively minor clearing, fill placement, or hydrological alteration; contains few roads or buildings; noxious weed or ANVS cover is ≤30%. --- moderate disturbance --- AA cultivated or heavily grazed or logged; subject to relatively substantial fill placement, grading, clearing, or hydrological alteration; high road or building density; or noxious weed or ANVS cover is >30%. --- --- --- Comments (types of disturbance, intensity, season, etc.): few piles of fill, leaf piles ii. Prominent noxious, aquatic nuisance, and other exotic vegetation species: canada thistle iii. Provide brief descriptive summary of AA and surrounding land use/habitat: highway, frontage road, trailer park 13. STRUCTURAL DIVERSITY (Based on number of “Cowardin” vegetated classes present [do not include unvegetated classes]; see #10 above.) Existing # of “Cowardin” Vegetated Classes in AA Initial Rating Is current management preventing (passive) existence of additional vegetated classes? Modified Rating ≥3 (or 2 if one is forested) classes --- NA NA NA 2 (or 1 if forested) classes --- NA NA NA 1 class, but not a monoculture mod ←NO YES→ --- 1 class, monoculture (1 species comprises ≥90% of total cover) --- NA NA NA Comments: MDT MONTANA WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM (revised March 2008) SECTION PERTAINING TO FUNCTIONS & VALUES ASSESSMENT 2 Wetland/Site #(s): WL-1 14A. HABITAT FOR FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED THREATENED OR ENDANGERED PLANTS OR ANIMALS i. AA is Documented (D) or Suspected (S) to contain: Check box based on definitions in manual. Primary or critical habitat (list species) D S Secondary habitat (list species) D S Incidental habitat (list species) D S No usable habitat S ii. Rating: Based on the strongest habitat chosen in 14A(i) above, select the corresponding functional point and rating. Highest Habitat Level Doc/Primary Sus/Primary Doc/Secondary Sus/Secondary Doc/Incidental Sus/Incidental None Functional Point/Rating --- --- --- --- --- --- 0L Sources for documented use (e.g. observations, records): 14B. HABITAT FOR PLANTS OR ANIMALS RATED S1, S2, OR S3 BY THE MONTANA NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM Do not include species listed in 14A above. i. AA is Documented (D) or Suspected (S) to contain: Check box based on definitions in manual. Primary or critical habitat (list species) D S Secondary habitat (list species) D S Incidental habitat (list species) D S No usable habitat S ii. Rating: Based on the strongest habitat chosen in 14A(i) above, select the corresponding functional point and rating. Highest Habitat Level Doc/Primary Sus/Primary Doc/Secondary Sus/Secondary Doc/Incidental Sus/Incidental None S1 Species Functional Point/Rating --- --- --- --- --- --- .0L S2 and S3 Species Functional Point/Rating --- --- --- --- --- --- .0L Sources for documented use (e.g. observations, records): LBacon 14C. GENERAL WILDLIFE HABITAT RATING i. Evidence of Overall Wildlife Use in the AA: Check substantial, moderate, or low based on supporting evidence. Substantial: Based on any of the following [check]. Minimal: Based on any of the following [check]. observations of abundant wildlife #s or high species diversity (during any period) few or no wildlife observations during peak use periods abundant wildlife sign such as scat, tracks, nest structures, game trails, etc. little to no wildlife sign presence of extremely limiting habitat features not available in the surrounding area sparse adjacent upland food sources interview with local biologist with knowledge of the AA interview with local biologist with knowledge of AA Moderate: Based on any of the following [check]. observations of scattered wildlife groups or individuals or relatively few species during peak periods common occurrence of wildlife sign such as scat, tracks, nest structures, game trails, etc. adequate adjacent upland food sources interview with local biologist with knowledge of the AA ii. Wildlife Habitat Features: Working from top to bottom, check appropriate AA attributes in matrix to arrive at rating. Structural diversity is from #13. For class cover to be considered evenly distributed, the most and least prevalent vegetated classes must be within 20% of each other in terms of their percent composition of the AA (see #10). Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows: P/P = permanent/perennial; S/I = seasonal/intermittent; T/E = temporary/ephemeral; and A = absent [see manual for further definitions of these terms]. Structural Diversity (see #13) High Moderate Low Class Cover Distribution (all vegetated classes) Even Uneven Even Uneven Even Duration of Surface Water in  10% of AA P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A Low Disturbance at AA (see #12i) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Moderate Disturbance at AA (see #12i) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- M --- --- High Disturbance at AA (see #12i) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- iii. Rating: Use the conclusions from i and ii above and the matrix below to select the functional point and rating. Evidence of Wildlife Use (i) Wildlife Habitat Features Rating (ii) Exceptional High Moderate Low Substantial --- --- --- --- Moderate --- --- --- --- Minimal --- --- .2L --- Comments: MDT MONTANA WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM (revised March 2008) SECTION PERTAINING TO FUNCTIONS & VALUES ASSESSMENT 3 Wetland/Site #(s): WL-1 14D. GENERAL FISH HABITAT NA (proceed to 14E) If the AA is not used by fish, fish use is not restorable due to habitat constraints, or is not desired from a management perspective [such as fish entrapped in a canal], then check the NA box and proceed to 14E. Assess this function if the AA is used by fish or the existing situation is “correctable” such that the AA could be used by fish [i.e., fish use is precluded by perched culvert or other barrier]. Type of Fishery: Cold Water (CW) Warm Water (WW) Use the CW or WW guidelines in the manual to complete the matrix. i. Habitat Quality and Known / Suspected Fish Species in AA: Use matrix to select the functional point and rating. Duration of Surface Water in AA Permanent / Perennial Seasonal / Intermittent Temporary / Ephemeral Aquatic Hiding / Resting / Escape Cover Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor Thermal Cover: optimal / suboptimal O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S FWP Tier I fish species --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- FWP Tier II or Native Game fish species --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- FWP Tier III or Introduced Game fish --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- FWP Non-Game Tier IV or No fish species --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Sources used for identifying fish spp. potentially found in AA: ii. Modified Rating: NOTE: Modified score cannot exceed 1.0 or be less than 0.1. a) Is fish use of the AA significantly reduced by a culvert, dike, or other man-made structure or activity, or is the waterbody included on the current final MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of TMDL development with listed “Probable Impaired Uses” including cold or warm water fishery or aquatic life support, or do aquatic nuisance plant or animal species (see Appendix E) occur in fish habitat? YES, reduce score in i by 0.1 = or N0 b) Does the AA contain a documented spawning area or other critical habitat feature (i.e., sanctuary pool, upwelling area; specify in comments) for native fish or introduced game fish? YES, add to score in i or iia 0.1 = or N0 iii. Final Score and Rating: Comments: 14E. FLOOD ATTENUATION NA (proceed to 14F) Applies only to wetlands that are subject to flooding via in-channel or overbank flow. If wetlands in AA are not flooded from in-channel or overbank flow, check the NA box and proceed to 14F. Entrenchment Ratio (ER) Estimation (see manual for additional guidance). Entrenchment ratio = (flood-prone width) / (bankfull width). Flood-prone width = estimated horizontal projection of where 2 X maximum bankfull depth elevation intersects the floodplain on each side of the stream. / = flood prone width / bankfull width = entrenchment ratio Slightly Entrenched ER ≥ 2.2 Moderately Entrenched ER = 1.41 – 2.2 Entrenched ER = 1.0 – 1.4 C stream type D stream type E stream type B stream type A stream type F stream type G stream type i. Rating: Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to select the functional point and rating. Estimated or Calculated Entrenchment (Rosgen 1994, 1996) Slightly Entrenched C, D, E stream types Moderately Entrenched B stream type Entrenched A, F, G stream types Percent of Flooded Wetland Classified as Forested and/or Scrub/Shrub 75% 25-75% 25% 75% 25-75% 25% 75% 25-75% 25% AA contains no outlet or restricted outlet --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- AA contains unrestricted outlet --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ii. Are ≥10 acres of wetland in the AA subject to flooding AND are man-made features which may be significantly damaged by floods located within 0.5 mile downstream of the AA? YES NO Comments: Flood-prone Width Bankfull Width Bankfull Depth - pr on e A re a 2 x Bankfull Depth MDT MONTANA WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM (revised March 2008) SECTION PERTAINING TO FUNCTIONS & VALUES ASSESSMENT 4 Wetland/Site #(s): 14F. SHORT AND LONG TERM SURFACE WATER STORAGE NA (proceed to 14G) Applies to wetlands that flood or pond from overbank or in-channel flow, precipitation, upland surface flow, or groundwater flow. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to flooding or ponding, then check the NA box and proceed to 14G. i. Rating: Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to select the functional point and rating. Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows: P/P = permanent/perennial; S/I = seasonal/intermittent; and T/E = temporary/ephemeral [see manual for further definitions of these terms]. Estimated Maximum Acre Feet of Water Contained in Wetlands within the AA that are Subject to Periodic Flooding or Ponding >5 acre feet 1.1 to 5 acre feet 1 acre foot Duration of Surface Water at Wetlands within the AA P/P S/I T/E P/P S/I T/E P/P S/I T/E Wetlands in AA flood or pond  5 out of 10 years --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Wetlands in AA flood or pond < 5 out of 10 years --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- .1L Comments: 14G. SEDIMENT / NUTRIENT / TOXICANT / RETENTION AND REMOVAL NA (proceed to 14H) Applies to wetland with potential to receive sediments, nutrients, or toxicants through influx of surface or ground water or direct input. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to such input, check the NA box and proceed to 14H. i. Rating: Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to select the functional point and rating. Sediment, Nutrient, and Toxicant Input Levels within AA AA receives or surrounding land use has potential to deliver sediments, nutrients, or compounds at levels such that other functions are not substantially impaired. Minor sedimentation, sources of nutrients or toxicants, or signs of eutrophication present. Waterbody is on MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of TMDL development for “probable causes” related to sediment, nutrients, or toxicants or AA receives or surrounding land use has potential to deliver high levels of sediments, nutrients, or compounds such that other functions are substantially impaired. Major sedimentation, sources of nutrients or toxicants, or signs of eutrophication present. % Cover of Wetland Vegetation in AA  70% < 70%  70% < 70% Evidence of Flooding / Ponding in AA Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No AA contains no or restricted outlet --- .8H --- --- --- --- --- --- AA contains unrestricted outlet --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Comments: 14H. SEDIMENT / SHORELINE STABILIZATION NA (proceed to 14I) Applies only if AA occurs on or within the banks of a river, stream, or other natural or man-made drainage, or on the shoreline of a standing water body which is subject to wave action. If 14H does not apply, check the NA box and proceed to 14I. % Cover of Wetland Streambank or Shoreline by Species with Stability Ratings of ≥6 (see Appendix F). Duration of Surface Water Adjacent to Rooted Vegetation Permanent / Perennial Seasonal / Intermittent Temporary / Ephemeral  65% --- --- --- 35-64% --- --- --- < 35% --- --- --- Comments: 14I. PRODUCTION EXPORT / FOOD CHAIN SUPPORT i. Level of Biological Activity: Synthesis of wildlife and fish habitat rates (select). ii. Rating: Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to select the functional point and rating. Factor A = acreage of vegetated wetland component in the AA; Factor B = level of biological activity rating from above (14Ii); Factor C = whether or not the AA contains a surface or subsurface outlet; the final three rows pertain to the duration of surface water in the AA, where P/P, S/I, and T/E were previously defined, and A = “absent” [see manual for further definitions of these terms]. A Vegetated Component >5 acres Vegetated Component 1-5 acres Vegetated Component <1 acre B High Moderate Low High Moderate Low High Moderate Low C Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No P/P --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- S/I --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- .6M --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- T/E/A --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- General Fish Habitat Rating (14Diii) General Wildlife Habitat Rating (14Ciii) E/H M L E/H --- --- --- M --- --- --- L --- --- --- NA --- M --- MDT MONTANA WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM (revised March 2008) SECTION PERTAINING TO FUNCTIONS & VALUES ASSESSMENT 5 Wetland/Site #(s): WL-1 14I. PRODUCTION EXPORT / FOOD CHAIN SUPPORT (continued) iii. Modified Rating: Note: Modified score cannot exceed 1.0 or be less than 0.1. Vegetated Upland Buffer: Area with ≥ 30% plant cover, ≤ 15% noxious weed or ANVS cover, AND that is not subjected to periodic mechanical mowing or clearing (unless for weed control). Is there an average ≥ 50-foot wide vegetated upland buffer around ≥ 75% of the AA’s perimeter? YES, add 0.1 to score in ii = NO iv. Final Score and Rating: Comments: 14J. GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE / RECHARGE Check the appropriate indicators in i and ii below. i. Discharge Indicators ii. Recharge Indicators The AA is a slope wetland. Permeable substrate present without underlying impeding layer. Springs or seeps are known or observed. Wetland contains inlet but no outlet. Vegetation growing during dormant season/drought. Stream is a known ‘losing’ stream. Discharge volume decreases. Wetland occurs at the toe of a natural slope. Other: Seeps are present at the wetland edge. AA permanently flooded during drought periods. Wetland contains an outlet, but no inlet. Shallow water table and the site is saturated to the surface. Other: iii. Rating: Use the information from i and ii above and the table below to select the functional point and rating. Criteria Duration of Saturation at AA Wetlands FROM GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE or WITH WATER THAT IS RECHARGING THE GROUNDWATER SYSTEM P/P S/I T None Groundwater Discharge or Recharge --- .7M --- --- Insufficient Data/Information --- Comments: 14K. UNIQUENESS i. Rating: Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to select the functional point and rating. Replacement Potential AA contains fen, bog, warm springs or mature (>80 yr-old) forested wetland OR plant association listed as “S1” by the MTNHP AA does not contain previously cited rare types AND structural diversity (#13) is high OR contains plant association listed as “S2” by the MTNHP AA does not contain previously cited rare types OR associations AND structural diversity (#13) is low-moderate Estimated Relative Abundance (#11) Rare Common Abundant Rare Common Abundant Rare Common Abundant Low Disturbance at AA (#12i) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Moderate Disturbance at AA (#12i) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- .2L High Disturbance at AA (#12i) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Comments: 14L. RECREATION / EDUCATION POTENTIAL NA (proceed to Overall Summary and Rating page) Affords ‘bonus’ points if AA provides a recreational or educational opportunity. i. Is the AA a known or potential recreational or educational site? YES, go to ii. NO, check the NA box. ii. Check categories that apply to the AA: Educational/Scientific Study Consumptive Recreational Non-consumptive recreational Other: iii. Rating: Use the matrix below to select the functional point and rating. Known or Potential Recreational or Educational Area Known Potential Public ownership or public easement with general public access (no permission required) --- --- Private ownership with general public access (no permission required) --- --- Private or public ownership without general public access, or requiring permission for public access --- --- Comments: 15. GENERAL SITE NOTES: MDT MONTANA WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM (revised March 2008) FUNCTION & VALUE SUMMARY AND OVERALL RATING 6 Wetland/Site #(s): WL-1 Function & Value Variables Rating – Actual Functional Points Possible Functional Points Functional Units: Actual Points x Estimated AA Acreage Indicate the Four Most Prominent Functions with an Asterisk A. Listed / Proposed T&E Species Habitat low 0.00 1.00 B. MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat low 0.00 1.00 C. General Wildlife Habitat low 0.20 1.00 D. General Fish Habitat NA NA E. Flood Attenuation NA NA F. Short and Long Term Surface Water Storage low 0.10 1.00 G. Sediment / Nutrient / Toxicant Removal high 0.80 1.00 H. Sediment / Shoreline Stabilization NA NA I. Production Export / Food Chain Support mod 0.60 1.00 J. Groundwater Discharge / Recharge mod 0.70 NA K. Uniqueness low 0.20 1.00 L. Recreation / Education Potential (bonus point) NA Total Points 2.6 7.0 10.6 Total Functional Units Percent of Possible Score 37% (round to nearest whole number) Category I Wetland: (must satisfy one of the following criteria; otherwise go to Category II) Score of 1 functional point for Listed/Proposed Threatened or Endangered Species; or Score of 1 functional point for Uniqueness; or Score of 1 functional point for Flood Attenuation and answer to Question 14E.ii is "yes"; or Percent of possible score > 80% (round to nearest whole #). Category II Wetland: (Criteria for Category I not satisfied and meets any one of the following criteria; otherwise go to Category IV) Score of 1 functional point for MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat; or Score of .9 or 1 functional point for General Wildlife Habitat; or Score of .9 or 1 functional point for General Fish Habitat; or "High" to “Exceptional” ratings for both General Wildlife Habitat and General Fish/Aquatic Habitat; or Score of .9 functional point for Uniqueness; or Percent of possible score > 65% (round to nearest whole #). Category III Wetland: (Criteria for Categories I, II, or IV not satisfied) Category IV Wetland: (Criteria for Categories I or II are not satisfied and all of the following criteria are met; if not go to Category III) "Low" rating for Uniqueness; and Vegetated wetland component < 1 acre (do not include upland vegetated buffer); and Percent of possible score < 35% (round to nearest whole #). OVERALL ANALYSIS AREA (AA) RATING: Check the appropriate category based on the criteria outlined above. I II III IV STST>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>LOT 2MINOR SUB 182LOT 1MINOR SUB 182LOT 5MINOR SUB 308LOT 4MINOR SUB 308SEWSEWSEWSEWSEWSEWSEWSEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW GASGASGASGASFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO FO FO UGPUGPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPINTERSTATE 90FRONTAGE ROADWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWAT47884788N0° 06' 12"E291.44'N0° 05' 40"E221.81'N0° 09' 01"E42.21' N14° 3 6 ' 3 4 " E 515.06'L=442.68,R=8675.00D=2°55'26"S70° 31' 56"E211.09'S70° 31' 11"E90.49'47 8 6 47864785 47 8 447874788 4 7 88 4 7 87 0'40'80'120'1 OF1AS NOTEDWETLAND IMPACTBVHEC Sep 21, 2020 - 4:21pmCAD FILE: M:\193190\Drawings\Construction Drawings\1 - SITE.dwg REVISIONSDATEPROJECT NUMBERHYALITE Engineers, PLLC2304 N 7th Ave. Ste. LBozeman, MT 59715Tel: (406) 587.2781w w w . hyaliteeng. comFax: (406) 522.92252018E. FRONTAGE ROADBOZEMAN, MT 59715VIRGA CAPITAL09/21/2020193190REVIEW SET - 22x34 originalsSCALESHEET TITLEDESIGN BYPO BOX 1070BOZEMAN, MT 59771COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTMDT R.O.W. (TYP.)EXISTING CULVERTEXISTING PAVED APPROACHPROPOSEDAPPROACHEG CONTOURLABELS (TYP.)FG CONTOURLABELS (TYP.)BIOFILTRATION SWALE,UTILIZE EXISTING WETLANDTOPSOIL AND VEGETATION (TYP.)DETENTION POND (UTILIZINGEXISTING WETLANDS)EARTHEN BERM TOTRANSITION INTOEXISTING GRADEEARTHEN BERM SURROUNDINGEXISTING WETLAND AREAEXISTING WATER MAINEXISTING SEWER MAINSTORM OUTLETPIPEPROPOSEDCULVERTOUTLETSTRUCTUREPRESERVE ALL EXISTING WETLANDSWEST OF PARKING AREAPRESERVED ASPEN/SNOWBERRYUPLAND BUFFER (TYP.)LEGENDSUBJECT PROPERTY4.4 ACRES TOTALNONJURISDICTIONAL WETLAND: 4.08 AC TOTAL-ON-SITE: 3.94 AC-OFF-SITE (BORROW DITCH): 0.14 ACPRESERVED WETLAND: 0.74 AC TOTAL(INCLUDING STORMWATER POND)-ON-SITE: 0.62 AC-OFF-SITE (BORROW DITCH): 0.12 ACBIOSWALES/STORMWATER FACILITY: 0.46 AC TOTAL-STORMWATER POND: 0.30 AC-BIOFILTRATION SWALES: 0.16 ACIMPACTED NONJURISDICTIONAL WETLAND: 3.34 AC TOTAL(INCLUDING BIOFILTRATION SWALES)-ON-SITE: 3.32 AC-OFF-SITE (BORROW DITCH): 0.02 ACNON-WETLAND AREA: 0.46 AC August 19, 2019 Todd Tillinger US Army Corps of Engineers Helena Regulatory Office 10 West 15th Street, Suite 2200 Helena, MT 59626 RE: Frontage Road Property Jurisdictional Determination Request Dear Todd, Enclosed is a wetland and non-wetland waterway delineation report for a 4.3-acre property located on Frontage Road (SE¼ Section 8, Township 2 South, Range 6 East; Figure 1). The project proponents are in the process of conducting a due-diligence investigation prior to property investment. An extensive jurisdictional investigation was conducted and results are presented in the enclosed Frontage Road Aquatic Resources Delineation Technical Memorandum. We would like to request an official jurisdictional determination. Please contact me at your earliest convenience to schedule a site visit. However, we would be unable to conduct the site visit September 5th-16th. Please contact me with any questions: (406) 580-6993 or lbacon@terraquaticllc.com . Thank you, Todd. Sincerely, Lynn M. Bacon, PWS TerraQuatic, LLC 614 W. Lamme Street Bozeman, MT 59715 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT HELENA REGULATORY OFFICE 10 WEST 15TH STREET, SUITE 2200 HELENA, MONTANA 59626 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF December 10, 2019 Regulatory Branch Montana State Program Corps No. NWO-2012-01604-MTH Subject: C&H Engineering & Surveying Inc.– Frontage Road Property Brian Gallik Spring Street Partners 35 North Grand Avenue Bozeman, Montana 59771-6580 Dear Mr. Gallik: We are responding to your request for an approved jurisdictional determination regarding the above-referenced project. The approximate 4.3 acre survey area is located on or near Story Mill Creek, within Section 8, Township 2 S, Range 6 E, Latitude 45.677755°, Longitude -111.015883°, Gallatin County, Montana. Based on the wetland delineation provided, an approved jurisdictional determination has been completed for the areas identified in your request and is enclosed for your information. We concur with the estimate of waters of the United States, as depicted on the enclosed map, dated July 29, 2019, entitled E. FRONTAGE ROAD WETLAND DELINEATION EXHIBIT A. The 4.02-acre water identified as “Wetland-1" is an intrastate isolated water with no apparent interstate or foreign commerce connection. As such, this water is not currently regulated by the Corps of Engineers. This disclaimer of jurisdiction is only for Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. Other Federal, State, and local laws may apply to your activities. If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. A Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) and Request for Appeal (RFA) form is enclosed. If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the Northwestern Division Office at the following address: Regulatory Appeals Review Officer US Army Corps of Engineers Northwestern Division Post Office Box 2870 Portland, Oregon 97208-2870. In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 C.F.R. part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by February 8, 2020. It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this letter. -2- This determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps of Engineers' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site identified in this request. This determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service prior to starting work. This determination is valid for five (5) years from the date of this letter, unless new information warrants revision of the determination before the expiration date. Please refer to identification number NWO-2012-01604-MTH in any correspondence concerning this project. If you have any questions, please contact Jade Metzler at 10 W 15th Street, Suite 2200, Helena, MT, 59626, by email at jade.m.metzler@usace.army.mil, or by telephone at (406) 441-1365. Sincerely, Sage L. Joyce Acting Montana Program Manager Enclosures: NAP/RFA Delineation Map Copy Furnished: Lynn Bacon, TerraQuatic LLC, 614 W. Lamme Street, Bozeman, MT 59715 ___________________________________________________________________________________ 1 DRAFT Preliminary Submittal Frontage Road LLC – City of Bozeman Watercourse Regulations Adherence Submitted By: Mike Stenberg, PE, Hyalite Engineers, PLLC; Lynn M. Bacon, PWS, TerraQuatic, LLC Date: October 12, 2020 _____________________________________________________________________________________ The following DRAFT Preliminary Submittal: Frontage Road City of Bozeman Watercourse Regulations Adherence is a compilation of information provided for the City’s consideration of proposed regulated activities on the Frontage Road Property as related to a nonjurisdictional wetland. The Frontage Road Property is located on the south side of the Frontage Road to the west of the Bozeman Trail Campground and RV Park (“Campground”). Interstate 90 forms the boundary to the south and west. Vacant land with a cul-de-sac is adjacent to the west boundary. The undeveloped site is zoned M-1 Light Manufacturing (“M- 1”) and includes the majority of a 4.08-acre1 nonjurisdictional wetland. Almost 90 percent of the 4.4-acre site is comprised of a nonjurisdictional wetland (see Sheet 1 of 1, Wetland Impact). These wetlands do not have a 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)” nor a “direct connection to a water of the U.S.”, but do exhibit positive wetland indicators. Sec. 38.610.010, Bozeman Municipal Code (“Code”). The nature of the wetlands would not prohibit physical development of the site but are subject to the City of Bozeman wetland regulations. The nonjurisdictional wetlands appear to be created by wholly manmade water sources, including the Frontage Road, Interstate 90, and the Campground, however, do not appear to meet the exemption provided by the Code. Sec. 38.610.010, Code. This document is a Draft and is intended to facilitate dialogue with the City, to explain proposed regulated activities as related to the nonjurisdictional wetland to satisfy City requirements. The following information and documents are included in the compilation: ● Information to address City of Bozeman Review Standards (Sec. 38.610.070, Sec. 38.610.080, Sec. 38.610.090, Sec. 38.220.130); ● Wetland Review Required Materials Checklist; ● City of Bozeman Development Review Conformance: Wetland and Watercourse Regulations Worksheet; ● TerraQuatic Aquatic Resources Delineation Summary; ● MDT Montana Wetland Assessment Form; ● Frontage Road Stormwater Detention Pond_Buffer Seed Mix ● Letter to the USACE requesting a Jurisdictional Determination; and, ● USACE Jurisdictional Determination Response Letter. Sec. 38.610.080. - 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 1 At this time, proposed impacted acreages are approximate. Frontage Road City of Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal September 22, 2020 ___________________________________________________________________________________ 2 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. The applicant is minimizing adverse impacts to nonjurisdictional wetland functioning to the degree possible while still allowing development of the site. Landscaped stormwater detention ponds will be constructed to replace the functionality of the nonjurisdictional wetlands. Nonjurisdictional delineated wetlands total 4.08 acres. Of the total 4.08 acres, approximately 3.94 acres occur within the property boundary and 0.14 acre occur within the Frontage Road and interstate borrow ditches. Approximately 0.74 acre of nonjurisdictional wetlands would be preserved (0.62 acre onsite and 0.12 acre off site); 0.30 acre of preserved wetlands would be used as a stormwater facility. Impacted wetlands would total 3.34 acre, which include 0.02 acre off-site borrow ditch and 0.16 acre converted to bioswales. The stormwater detention ponds will provide aquifer recharge, water storage, flood control and storage, sediment control, nutrient removal from runoff, and erosion control consistent with the purposes of wetland functions. Sec. 38.610.020.A, Code. The nonjurisdictional wetlands do not provide habitat for fish, wildlife and plants (including endangered and threatened), nor recreation, education or research functions, nor is the site a designated open space. Sec. 38.610.020.B, Code. The site is currently an undeveloped field. Visual and aesthetic values will be improved by the landscaped stormwater detention ponds. Sec. 38.610.020.B, Code. Historical, cultural and archaeological resources are not expected, and if identified during site development, the City and State Historic Preservation Office will be contacted. Sec. 38.610.020.B, Code. Stormwater detention ponds would be installed along the west boundary to maintain functions of the current wetland. Wetland vegetation in these areas would be stockpiled and tamped into the fringe areas of the depressions. To diversify the stormwater pond wetland vegetation community, willow species such as narrow-leaf (Salix exigua, FACW), yellow (S. lutea, OBL) and gray (S. bebbiana, FACW) would be installed along the edges of the ponds to enhance migratory bird diversity. No willows currently occur within the site. The stormwater facilities are not proposed as mitigation for the nonjurisdictional wetland impact, rather to show that the adverse impacts have been minimized and the proposed activity will result in minimal impact or impairment to wetland function. Major effort has been invested into the design of these stormwater ponds to replace wetland function and diversify the hydrophytic vegetation community. The shrub plantings would not be disturbed during routine facility maintenance (removal of sediment). 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 There are no TES concerns on this site. 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 There are no SOC concerns on this site. 3. The applicant has demonstrated that the project is in the public interest, having considered and documented: Frontage Road City of Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal September 22, 2020 ___________________________________________________________________________________ 3 a. The extent of the public need for the proposed regulated activity; The property is situated at the base of the highway interchange at the first exit in city limits off of I-90 westbound and offers unparalleled access, visibility, and proximity to the Downtown Core. The location and unique nature of the site lends itself to development, with existing access on East Frontage Road. Development of the property will stimulate economic growth, create jobs, expand and increase tax revenue, and efficiently utilize existing city infrastructure as an infill site. The Bozeman 2019 Community Plan prioritizes infill development, and its goals, objections, and actions include removal of regulatory barriers to infill.2 By utilizing an infill location, the proposed development will provide efficient use of land and infrastructure. 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; The wetland classifies as a low Class III (37%) per MDT Functional assessment. The cut- off for a Class IV wetland is <35% (wetland does not qualify at 37%), <1 acre (does not qualify at 4.08 acre), and low uniqueness (qualifies). The wetland essentially functions as a “man-enhanced” stormwater detention basin because three of its borders are immediately adjacent to large continuous fill slabs: 1) to the south: I-90/four lane interstate highway, 2) north: Frontage Road, two-laned paved road, and 3) east: paved Campground. To the west 1,000 feet I-90 forms the final “detention pond berm”. Surface water may enter the site from two sides, Frontage Road and Campground). Surface water runoff from I-90 is captured by the interstate borrow ditch, however groundwater from this ditch definitely infiltrates under I-90 into the subject property. Water also likely flows overland into the southwest/west corner of the property from the adjacent property to the west. Interstate runoff is also likely recharging groundwater stores. The functions and values of the nonjurisdictional wetland will be maintained by utilizing the area as shown; while adding storm water treatment for development of the site. c. The extent and permanence of the adverse effects of the regulated activity on the wetland and any associated watercourse; Permanent impact to the nonjurisdictional wetland would total 3.34 acres, which includes 0.02 acre located in a road borrow ditch. Approximately 0.74 acre of wetland would be preserved, which includes 0.30 acre preserved as a stormwater detention basin to maintain the functions of the current nonjurisdictional wetland. The nonjurisdictional wetland is at minimum a “man-enhanced” feature and appears to have been “created” because of adjacent man-made features which have essentially detained ground and surface water on the site. East of the subject property is a large fill slab under a campground, Interstate 90 is south and west, and Frontage Road is along the north boundary. It is unlikely this area was a wetland prior to the construction of these roads and adjacent campground given that areas to the north of Frontage Road, all the way to the East Gallatin River, are upland. d. The cumulative adverse effects of past activities on the wetland; and Unknown if this wetland has been historically impacted. e. The uniqueness or scarcity of the wetland that may be affected. The nonjurisdictional wetland is not unique or rare. The nonjurisdictional emergent wetland is comprised primarily of Baltic rush (native, Juncus balticus, FACW), field meadow-foxtail (non-native, Alopecurus pratensis, FAC) and creeping wild rye (nonnative, Elymus repens, FAC). These wetland types are very common in the City of Bozeman and 2 City of Bozeman Community Plan, pp. 10, 18, 20 (DCD-2.2), Frontage Road City of Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal September 22, 2020 ___________________________________________________________________________________ 4 State of Montana. The dominant species typically proliferate in areas of marginal hydrology with a history of grazing, haying, and/or disturbance. Sec. 38.610.090. - 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 area extends up to the edge of the east, north (Frontage Road borrow ditch) and south (I-90 borrow ditch) property boundaries. On property, there is a narrow (<10 feet wide) upland double track road between the I-90 borrow ditch and the main body of the wetland. There are three small upland areas along the west boundary (approximately 120ft). These uplands areas (50 to 98 feet wide) would qualify as wetland buffers. The remaining west boundary is comprised of the nonjurisdictional wetland that crosses the property boundary. A formal delineation was not conducted west of the subject property because access was denied by that property owner. Where wetlands cross the west boundary, we are not proposing to fill wetland to provide a “protective upland buffer” (nonsensical). In lieu of this buffer fill, stormwater detention ponds and protected buffer area are purposefully proposed along the entire west boundary. 2. Requiring that structures be appropriately supported and elevated and otherwise protected against natural hazards; Although natural hazards in this area are limited, structures consisting of building, parking facilities, etc. are planned to be elevated along with appropriate foundations to protect from natural hazards. The proposed storm water pond outlet structure will be elevated for continued maintenance. 3. Modifying waste disposal and water supply facilities; The project will consist of a typical waste disposal container upon completion of future buildings, etc. Waste collection is only anticipated at the site, with waste hauled from the site. Water supply is from the City Municipal water system; and there is no need for modifying 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; Does not apply. 5. Restricting the use of an area, which may be greater than the regulated wetland area; Does not apply. 6. Requiring erosion control and stormwater management measures; Stormwater detention ponds are proposed along the west boundary in areas of current nonjurisdictional wetlands to fulfill City of Bozeman requirements. 7. Clustering structures or development; Development is proposed from the east boundary toward the west boundary. Wetlands and upland shrub and tree communities along the west boundary would be preserved. Wetland and stormwater detention basin hydrology would subirrigate wetlands west of the property boundary. Frontage Road City of Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal September 22, 2020 ___________________________________________________________________________________ 5 8. Restricting fill, deposit of soil and other activities which may be detrimental to a wetland; Approximately 0.30 acre of the nonjurisdictional wetland would be converted to a stormwater detention basin to maintain and replace wetland function. Fill material within the 0.30 acres is not anticipated, rather an earthen berm around the north and west edges of the pond to create the desired storm water detention volume. A total of 0.74 acre nonjurisdictional wetland would be preserved. 9. Modifying the project design to ensure continued water supply to the regulated wetland; and Stormwater detention basins would be located in the lowest topographic area of the project site and will collect ground and surface water from the interstate and proposed project site. The stormwater detention basin is intentionally situated in the northwest corner of the project site to preserve the woody vegetation communities along the west property boundary that will serve as a “buffer” to wetlands west of the property (also likely nonjurisdictional). Groundwater from these detention basins would also continue to supply water to wetlands west of the property boundary. 10. Requiring or restricting maintenance of a regulated wetland area for the purpose of maintaining wetland functions. The stormwater detention facility would require periodic maintenance. The future maintenance efforts may include removal of sediment build-up over time. However, effort is being placed into creating bio-swales to collect initial storm run-off from parking areas to remove suspended solids prior to the storm pond. The bio-swales are planned to be vegetated with wetland sod removed from the impacted wetland area, increasing diversity of the site. Additionally planting willows along the banks of the storm basin is planned to further increase diversity. These efforts are intended, in good faith, to create real stormwater treatment and utilizing sod from the site to improve function. 11. Requiring 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. 12. Requiring 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. Requiring 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). Of the total 4.08 acres nonjurisdictional wetland, 0.74 acre would be preserved, which would include the 0.30-acre stormwater detention pond. Please note that the bottom of the proposed storm basin or pond is planned to be left native and excavation is not planned in this area. An earthen berm around the north and west edges is planned to create the necessary detention volume. Effort has been made to maintain wetland function as stormwater treatment and hydrological connection; while limiting impacts to existing woody debris. 14. Requiring conditions that mitigate 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. Frontage Road City of Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal September 22, 2020 ___________________________________________________________________________________ 6 As locally-regulated nonjurisdictional wetlands, the owner is offering the following condition. The project engineer (Mike Stenberg, PE, Hyalite Engineers) calculated the worth of the wetland based on its current function as a stormwater detention basin (Exhibit C) for groundwater with minor surface water infiltration. The cost of constructing a stormwater detention pond to treat stormwater runoff area that is likely “treated” by the current nonjurisdictional wetland is $5,781 (see Exhibit C). This dollar valuation of $5,781 will be offered to the City of Bozeman as mitigation for impacts to this nonjurisdictional wetland to provide support for maintenance of the wetlands within Story Mill Park or other wetlands within the City’s jurisdiction. Sec. 38.610.070. - Application requirements and procedures for activities in wetland areas. C. Submittal materials. The information required in 38.220.130 shall be submitted for all regulated activities proposed for regulated wetland areas. See Sec. 38.220.130 responses below. Sec. 38.220.130. - Submittal materials for regulated activities in wetlands. 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. a. This wetland and watercourse delineation report shall include, but not be limited to, the following: (1) Wetland and watercourse descriptions; SUBMITTED (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); SUBMITTED (3) Wetland types, as determined by a state-accepted functional assessment method (i.e., Cowardin et al 1979); SUBMITTED (4) Wetland acreages (by a licensed surveyor); SUBMITTED (5) Maps with property boundaries, wetland and watercourse boundaries and acreages; and SUBMITTED (6) Wetland data forms (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers data forms). SUBMITTED 2. If activities are planned in and/or adjacent to aquatic resources the following information is required: Frontage Road City of Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal September 22, 2020 ___________________________________________________________________________________ 7 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. SUBMITTED, DRAFT Preliminary Submittal* (Sheet W1.00): Note: the upland “islands” along the west boundary would serve as wetland buffers. The proposed stormwater detention basins are within 50 feet of the wetlands to the west. This is the best option to providing a buffer to wetlands to the west. The other option is to place the stormwater ponds in another location away from the west boundary and fill the entire west boundary in order to preserve and buffer wetlands; nonsensical. The wetland buffer is illustrated on Sheet W1.00. (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. SUBMITTED, DRAFT Preliminary Submittal* (2) All indirect impacts (e.g., shading from boardwalks or public utility well drawdown) shall be summarized in the document. Does Not Apply b. 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 and a description of the functional unit gain of the wetland mitigation (as determined by a state- accepted functional assessment method). Does Not Apply 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 38.220.020. During development of the site a majority of the excess on site materials (clays & topsoil) are proposed to be hauled from the site. There will be minor areas of topsoil stockpiles to be used for final grading, which will be secured to minimize erosion. Off-Site fill material will consist of pit-run and crushed road base gravels along with asphalt; all of which are planned to be hauled to the site and placed same day as delivered. Given the overall site disturbance will exceed 1.0 acre during construction a Storm Water Permit associated with construction activities will be needed to protect the site from on-site erosion and sediment transport. The transport of material will not violate the SWPPP permit and there are no other permits anticipated to be necessary for this project as listed in 38.220.020. d. Copies of the following: (1) Any Clean Water Act (CWA) section 404 and 401 permits; Does Not Apply (2) Any MT 301 permits; Does Not Apply (3) Any floodplain determinations for the proposed site known to the applicant; Does Not Apply Frontage Road City of Bozeman Water Course Regulation Adherence Submittal September 22, 2020 ___________________________________________________________________________________ 8 (4) Any other applications, state or federal, for wetlands permits regarding the proposed site; Does Not Apply (5) Any U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional determinations regarding wetlands on the proposed and adjacent site; and Enclosed (6) If relevant, any Montana state joint applications for the proposed project site. Does Not Apply e. A completed wetland review checklist. Submitted 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 must be submitted to the city for all federal jurisdictional and city-regulated wetlands (see section 38.700.210 for definition) in a compensatory mitigation report: Does Not Apply3 3 Sec. 38.220.130.A.3 subparts not included as this subsection 3 does not apply. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>HEC Apr 09, 2020 - 10:40amCAD FILE: M:\193190\Drawings\Catchment Area-Flow Pattern.dwg REVISIONSDATEPROJECT NUMBERHYALITE Engineers, PLLC2304 N 7th Ave. Ste. LBozeman, MT 59715Tel: (406) 587.2781w w w . hyaliteeng. comFax: (406) 522.92252018E. FRONTAGE ROADBOZEMAN, MT 59715VIRGA CAPITAL04/03/2020193190REVIEW SET - 22x34 originalsSCALESHEET TITLEDESIGN BYPO BOX 1070BOZEMAN, MT 59771COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT0'200'400'600'EXHIBITCAS NOTEDFLOW PATTERNSMSACCESS ROAD (BERM)INTERSTATE 90FRONTAGE ROADGALLATIN SUBARUHOSPITALITY WAYLEGEND:>DRAINAGE PATTERNCATCHMENT AREA (±9 ACRES)DETENTION POND-2,400 CF DETENTION-6,700 CF RETENTIONCOST OF POND CONSTRUCTION, ASSUMING 1 FOOTDEEP EXCAVATION AND BERMING-EXCAVATION = $2,481-POND OUTLET STRUCTURE = $2,200-MISC. (SEEDING, TOPSOIL, ETC.) = $1,100 TOTAL = $5,78182'x82' POND SIZE SHOWN STST>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>LOT 2MINOR SUB 182LOT 1MINOR SUB 182LOT 5MINOR SUB 308LOT 4MINOR SUB 308SEWSEWSEWSEWSEWSEWSEWSEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW SEW GASGASGASGASFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO FO FO UGPUGPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPINTERSTATE 90FRONTAGE ROADWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWATWAT47884788N0° 06' 12"E291.44'N0° 05' 40"E221.81'N0° 09' 01"E42.21' N14° 3 6 ' 3 4 " E 515.06'L=442.68,R=8675.00D=2°55'26"S70° 31' 56"E211.09'S70° 31' 11"E90.49'47 8 6 47864785 47 8 447874788 4 7 88 4 7 87 0'40'80'120'1 OF1AS NOTEDWETLAND IMPACTBVHEC Sep 22, 2020 - 4:09pmCAD FILE: M:\193190\Drawings\Construction Drawings\1 - SITE.dwg REVISIONSDATEPROJECT NUMBERHYALITE Engineers, PLLC2304 N 7th Ave. Ste. LBozeman, MT 59715Tel: (406) 587.2781w w w . hyaliteeng. comFax: (406) 522.92252018E. FRONTAGE ROADBOZEMAN, MT 59715VIRGA CAPITAL09/22/2020193190REVIEW SET - 22x34 originalsSCALESHEET TITLEDESIGN BYPO BOX 1070BOZEMAN, MT 59771COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTMDT R.O.W. (TYP.)EXISTING CULVERTEXISTING PAVED APPROACHPROPOSEDAPPROACHEG CONTOURLABELS (TYP.)FG CONTOURLABELS (TYP.)BIOFILTRATION SWALE,UTILIZE EXISTING WETLANDTOPSOIL AND VEGETATION (TYP.)DETENTION POND (UTILIZINGEXISTING WETLANDS)EARTHEN BERM TOTRANSITION INTOEXISTING GRADEEARTHEN BERM SURROUNDINGEXISTING WETLAND AREAEXISTING WATER MAINEXISTING SEWER MAINSTORM OUTLETPIPEPROPOSEDCULVERTOUTLETSTRUCTUREPRESERVE ALL EXISTING WETLANDSWEST OF PARKING AREAPRESERVED ASPEN/SNOWBERRYUPLAND BUFFER (TYP.)LEGENDSUBJECT PROPERTY4.4 ACRES TOTALNONJURISDICTIONAL WETLAND: 4.08 AC TOTAL-ON-SITE: 3.94 AC-OFF-SITE (BORROW DITCH): 0.14 ACPRESERVED WETLAND: 0.74 AC TOTAL(INCLUDING STORMWATER POND)-ON-SITE: 0.62 AC-OFF-SITE (BORROW DITCH): 0.12 ACBIOSWALES/STORMWATER FACILITY: 0.46 AC TOTAL-STORMWATER POND: 0.30 AC-BIOFILTRATION SWALES: 0.16 ACIMPACTED NONJURISDICTIONAL WETLAND: 3.34 AC TOTAL(INCLUDING BIOFILTRATION SWALES)-ON-SITE: 3.32 AC-OFF-SITE (BORROW DITCH): 0.02 ACNON-WETLAND AREA: 0.46 ACPROPERTY BOUNDARY (TYP.) WR Wetland Review Application WR Page 1 of 1 Revision Date 1-28-20 Required Forms: A1 Recommended Forms: Required Forms: WETLAND REVIEW REQUIRED MATERIALS APPLICATION SETS One set is required that include 1 copy of every item below bound or folded into 8½ x 11 or 8½ x 14 sets if the wetland review is independent of another review. If the wetland review is part of another type of application, such as a subdivision or site plan review, provide the number of sets and copies required by the primary application checklist. Complete and signed development review application form A1. Only if independent of another review. Plan sets that include all required items listed on the wetland checklist listed below. Standard application sets required plan sizes: Plans may be 24 x 36 inch or 11 x 17 inch or 8 1/2 x 11 inch in size depending on project type. Larger, more complex projects may require larger plans. STATUTE The following information must be submitted for all activities proposed in or adjacent to regulated wetland areas. Section 38.30 BMC includes the wetlands regulations for the City of Bozeman. The regulations provide specific guidelines and methods to identify whether an area is a wetland and to determine the boundary between wetlands and uplands. The city’s wetlands regulations apply to both wetlands with a direct hydrologic connections to “waters of the U.S.” and to isolated wetlands with no direct connection to a water of the U.S. and that exhibit positive wetland indicators for all three wetland parameters. APPLICATION FEE No fee required WETLAND REVIEW CHECKLIST 1. A description of the proposed activity. 2. A description of why avoidance and less damaging alternatives have been rejected, if applicable. 3. Wetland delineation report complying with the requirements of Section 38.30 BMC. 3. 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. 4. The exact locations and specifications for all proposed regulated activities and the direct and indirect impact of such activities. 5. 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. 6. Copies of any Section 404 wetland permits submitted or already obtained for the site. 7. Any historical information regarding wetland permitting or mitigation on the site. CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net X X X RESPONSE Frontage Road Virga Capital Wetland Review Checklist April 23, 2020 1. A description of the proposed activity. The wetland was classified as nonjurisdictional by the USACE on December 10, 2019. The proposed project would result in filling of 3.8 acres emergent wetland; approximately 0.35 acre would be converted to stormwater detention ponds enhanced with willows and wetland sod removed from the emergent wetland. The wetland is a low quality Class III (10.45 Functional Units). 2. A description of why avoidance and less damaging alternatives have been rejected, if applicable. The applicant is minimizing adverse impacts to non-jurisdictional wetland functioning to the degree possible while still allowing development of the site. Landscaped stormwater detention ponds will be constructed to replace the functionality of the non-jurisdictional wetlands. 3. Wetland delineation report complying with the requirements of Section 38.30 BMC. 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. Enclosed. 5. The exact locations and specifications for all proposed regulated activities and the direct and indirect impact of such activities. Enclosed. 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. The source for fill material (pit run, finish gravel, etc) as well as for the disposal of any excavation material will be the Spanish Peaks gravel pit located on Alaska Road in Belgrade, MT. We do certify that the placement of fil material will not violate any applicable state or federal statutes and regulations. 7. Copies of any Section 404 wetland permits submitted or already obtained for the site. No Section 404 Permit is required for this property; nonjurisdictional determination letter is enclosed. No MT 310 Permit is required for the proposed work; there are no streams within the proposed project site. 8. Any historical information regarding wetland permitting or mitigation on the site. The site has presumedly not been used for mitigation given its present condition. ______________________________________________________________________________________ 1 City of Bozeman Development Review Conformance: Wetland and Watercourse Regulations Worksheet Project: Frontage Road, Virga Capital Conformance Review by: Lynn Bacon, TerraQuatic, LLC (Project’s Wetland Consultant’s Analysis) Date Received: LBacon has completed this table in an effort to provide a complete Wetlands and Watercourse Adherence Submittal Package to the City. Date Review Completed: April 23, 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 materials have been provided to the City. 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? All materials have been provided to the City. Conformance to regulations have been adhered to, to the maximum extent possible given the situation, that being, a nonjurisdictional wetland of this size has not been valuated, impacted or mitigated for within the City limits. (Note: Ultimate adherence analysis is of course up to the City of Bozeman.) 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. Frontage Road, Virga Capital (Project’s Wetland Consultant’s Analysis) April 23, 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 An estimated 3.8 acres of nonjurisdictional wetland would be impacted by the proposed development, of which 0.12 acre is within the Frontage Road borrow ditch. Approximately 0.35 acre of wetland would be transformed into stormwater facilities. 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: 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. No 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 July 25/26th, 2019. Report submitted to Virga Capital on August 19, 2019. Frontage Road, Virga Capital (Project’s Wetland Consultant’s Analysis) April 23, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 3 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 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; No The subject property wetland is nonjurisdictional, as well as wetlands within the property to the west. Three upland islands along the west property boundary will be largely maintained to serve as buffers along the constructed stormwater ponds, which in turn will serve as a buffer for nonjurisdictional wetlands to the west property. (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. No The area of fill will be restricted to the berms around the stormwater ponds and under the proposed parking lot and building. Wetlands to the west would be buffered along the entire west boundary by stormwater detention basins and undisturbed upland “islands”. Per request of the wetland scientist (L. Bacon, TerraQuatic) and to provide buffers for wetlands west of the property boundary, the project was purposefully designed to incorporate stormwater treatment ponds along the entire west boundary while not disturbing the upland aspen and snowberry islands. Preserved upland areas along the west boundary range from 50 to 98 feet wide. In essence, wetlands will not be filled to provide protection (i.e. upland buffers) for wetlands, this type of activity is nonsensical. Frontage Road, Virga Capital (Project’s Wetland Consultant’s Analysis) April 23, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 4 ARTICLE 23. – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Section 38.23.100. – Watercourse Setback Answer Comments (5) All watercourse setbacks shall be measured from the OHWM. If indiscernible, setbacks shall be measured from the top of the streambank. DNA No watercourses occur within the subject property. 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. No Setbacks (i.e. wetland buffers), except where there are upland islands (aspen and snowberry communities) will be provided by naturalized stormwater detention basins (see 4d above). 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 Stormwater facilities would be located between the building pad and the west boundary to provide protection and hydrology for wetlands west of the property boundary. The entire area between the west property boundary, the stormwater detention ponds and east berm (0.74 acre) would serve as buffer for the nonjurisdictional wetlands to the west. (2) Trail Improvements: (a) Zone 2: signage, benches; DNA (b) Zone 1: limited non-looping spur trails to the water’s edge, interpretative signs, benches at terminus; DNA (c) Zone 1 special circumstances (topography, avoidance of wetlands, other constraints: <300% watercourse setback per 500LF watercourse (includes spurs, etc, and applies per side) DNA (d) Sedimentation, bank instability, pollution runoff, etc minimized? DNA (e) Crossings allowed in all zones, must have all applicable local, state, federal permits. DNA (3) Streets, sidewalks, utility crossings (a) minimized? Yes Approximately 95% of the delineated wetland would be filled or altered. (b) crossings at 90 degrees where feasible? DNA (c) crossings withstand 100-year flood event? DNA (d) grading and drainage designed to prevent untreated stormwater from entering watercourse? (Yes) There is no watercourse within the subject property and wetlands are nonjurisdictional. Stormwater ponds will be constructed along the west boundary to provide protection to wetlands west of the property (though these wetlands are also likely nonjurisdictional) and to treat stormwater for the proposed project. (e) bank stabilization plan approved by the City for all crossings? DNA (4) Stormwater treatment facilities may pass through all zones, are all pertinent permits acquired to discharge to a watercourse? (Yes) Stormwater facilities will be constructed along the west boundary of the proposed project site to capture runoff from the development. (5) Is there a noxious weed control program in place (acceptable in all zones)? DNA There is less than 5 percent noxious weeds within the site, primarily Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense, FAC). Frontage Road, Virga Capital (Project’s Wetland Consultant’s Analysis) April 23, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 5 ARTICLE 23. – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Section 38.23.100. – Watercourse Setback Answer Comments 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. DNA The stormwater detention pond banks will be seeded with upland species and wetland sod removed during the excavation of the ponds will be tamped into the lower interior banks. Seed mix enclosed. (2) Zone 2: new or existing grass species. 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.] DNA Woody species plantings are not required when a true watercourse is not present. However, to increase diversity of hydrophytic woody species within the site willows would be planted along the edge of the stormwater ponds where disturbance of maintenance activities would not damage the plants. Currently only aspen (Populus tremuloides, FACU) and snowberry (Symphoricarpus occidentalis, FAC) occur within the upland (and in fact wetland) areas of the site. (5) Was the site seeded as soon as was feasible to prevent noxious weed invasion and soil erosion? Seeding will take place as soon as is feasible once construction disturbance is stabilized. (6) Where all plants/seeds native to Gallatin Valley? Seeds will be native or naturalized species typically used in low maintenance grassed areas. (7) Were native species used in all disturbed areas (crossings. trails, utilities)? Seeds will be native or naturalized species typically used in low maintenance grassed 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 See above responses to issues regarding buffers. 3. Other Provisions: a. Were watercourse setbacks depicted on preliminary and final plats and plans? No See above responses to issues regarding buffers. 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. No Are there wetlands within the proposed project area that are known nonjurisdictional Yes The entire wetland has been qualified as nonjurisdictional (correspondence enclosed). The wetland qualifies as palustrine emergent. Frontage Road, Virga Capital (Project’s Wetland Consultant’s Analysis) April 23, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 6 wetlands? If so, list identification /Cowardin type. A. Were wetlands discovered during the development review process? Yes Delineation conducted on July 25th/26th, 2019 and report completed 8/19/2019. 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 By TerraQuatic, LLC. 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 above. 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? Yes Nonjurisdictional wetland mitigation actions. Does this Article impose more stringent restrictions than the USACE under the 404 CWA? Yes City-required mitigation required for nonjurisdictional wetlands is more stringent than Federal Section 404 regulations. 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) 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 2. Construction, installation, placement of any structure (trail, building, boardwalks, etc)? Yes 3. Removal, dredging, etc. of any materials? Yes 4. Removal of existing vegetation? Yes 5. Alteration of water table? Unknown 6. Alteration of drainage patterns, flood retention, change in topography, etc. by any means? Yes Stormwater ponds would be constructed along the west boundary to intercept and treat stormwater entering the site. Frontage Road, Virga Capital (Project’s Wetland Consultant’s Analysis) April 23, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 7 ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.30.060. – Regulated Activities Answer Comment [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. Yes Enclosed: Class III, 10.45 Functional Units C. Submittal Materials. Have all materials as required by 38.41.130 been submitted? Yes 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 Approximately 3.82 acres of the nonjurisdictional wetland is proposed for impact. However, 0.35 acre would be converted to stormwater detention basin ‘wetlands’ diversified with hydrophytic woody species. The detention basins would be located within 0.74 acre wetland buffer area. 2. Has the applicant demonstrated that adverse impacts have been minimized (re: function, TES, SOC)? Yes There are no SOC or TES issues. 3. Has the applicant 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; Yes Situated between I-90 and East Frontage Rd, this property's visibility and accessibility to the highway and downtown make it well-suited for development. Development of the property will provide economic stimulus by creating jobs and expanding the tax base. As an infill lot, development of the property increases property tax revenue per acre efficiently utilizing existing infrastructure. 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; Yes Essentially the 10.4 functional units (37% Very Low Class III) would be eliminated. Though 0.35 acre of the wetland will be replaced by constructed stormwater ponds, these ponds are not technically “mitigation” wetlands, but will replace the current nonjurisdictional wetland function as stormwater (ground and surface) detention area. c. The extent and permanence of the adverse effects of the regulated activity on the wetland and any associated watercourse; Yes There are 4.01 acres of delineated wetland within the entire project site, of which 3.87 acres is within the subject property and 0.14 acre is within the Frontage Road borrow ditch. Impacts to approximately 3.82 acres of the wetland would be permanent. Stormwater detention ponds within the proposed wetland buffer would total approximately 0.74 acre or approximately 20% percent of the permanently impacted area. Frontage Road, Virga Capital (Project’s Wetland Consultant’s Analysis) April 23, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 8 ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.30.080. – Review Standards Answer Comment d. The cumulative adverse effects of past activities on the wetland; and Yes Some areas along the edge of the wetland within the property boundary have been historically filled, it is unknown if this fill was placed in wetland area, or if the wetland “grew” to this size because of the “restricted outlet” (Frontage Road, interstate, trailer park). There is a 2-track road along the south side of the wetland that was likely placed in wetland historically given wetland occurs up to the top of road prism. It is very probable the wetland was man- created because of Interstate-90, Frontage Road, and trailer park fill along three sides of the property. e. The uniqueness or scarcity of the wetland that may be affected. Yes Low Class III wetland with marginal Function Units (10.45); very common, definitely man-enhanced and perhaps man-made. 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. TBD The project proponent will review City-imposed requirements regarding nonjurisdictional wetland setbacks and mitigation. The right and initiation of the project proponent to file an appeal is To Be Determined 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, maps, jurisdictional determination request, and final USACE jurisdictional determination are enclosed. a. If resources, does the delineation report include the following information: --- (1) aquatic resource descriptions; Yes (2) Functional assessments; No Enclosed as a separate document with this submittal. (3) Wetland type (e.g. Cowardin, HGM); Yes (4) Wetland acreages; Yes (5) Maps: property boundaries, wetland, watercourse boundaries and acreages; Yes (6) USACE data forms. Yes 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 (1) Direct acreage impacts to all aquatic resources; acreages for all buffers; JD status; mitigation acreages; Yes (No mitigation acreage, DNA.) (2) Summary of all indirect impacts (dewatering, shading from boardwalks, etc); No b. Map of mitigation areas and buffers with corresponding table of acreages, functional assessment gain; DNA Frontage Road, Virga Capital (Project’s Wetland Consultant’s Analysis) April 23, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 9 ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.41.130. – Submittal Materials for Regulated Activities in Wetlands Answer Comment c. Source, type, transport, disposal of fill materials; No Not at this time. d. Names and addresses of property owners within 200 ft of subject property; DNA (1) Copies of 404 and 401 permits; DNA Wetlands nonjurisdictional. (2) Copies of 310 Permits; DNA No watercourses. (3) Floodplain determinations; DNA Project site not in a floodplain. (4) All other state, federal permits pertaining to wetlands; DNA (5) USACE JD determinations; Yes Wetland is nonjurisdictional. (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 Project proponents valuated the function of the nonjurisdictional wetlands as a “stormwater detention” basin” at $5,781 (Exhibit C). This amount will be granted to the City by project proponents to assign to the maintenance of wetlands within Story Mill Park. (1) Applicant contact information; report author contact info; summary of indirect and direct impacts; proposed mitigation concept; identification of required permits; project vicinity map; Yes (2) Description of existing aquatic resources; surveys; FA; Yes (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 c. Discussion of management practices that will protect and maintain nonimpacted and mitigation aquatic resources and their buffers. DNA Frontage Road, Virga Capital (Project’s Wetland Consultant’s Analysis) April 23, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 10 ARTICLE 30. – WETLAND REGULATIONS Section 38.41.130. – Submittal Materials for Regulated Activities in Wetlands Answer Comment 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. TBD 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. DNA 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; 7. Clustering structures or development; Frontage Road, Virga Capital (Project’s Wetland Consultant’s Analysis) April 23, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________________________ 11 ARTICLE 41. – SUBMITTAL MATERIALS AND REQUIREMENTS Section 38.30.090. – Wetland Permits Conditions 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: Lynn Bacon, PWS, Wetland Consultant for Virga Capital ______________________________________________ _________4/23/2020____________________________ Date Wetland Seed Mix Species Common Name PLS Pounds/acre Grasses Deschampsia caespitosa tufted hairgrass (FACW) 1.81 Poa palustris fowl bluegrass (FAC) 1.23 Elymus trachycaulus “Revenue” Slender wheatgrass (FAC) 7.1 Puccinella distans alkaligrass (FACW) 1.06 Hordeum brachyantherum meadow barley (FACW) 9.65 Eleocharis palustris creeping spikerush (OBL) 1.03 Juncus balticus Baltic rush (FACW) 0.13 Total 22.10 PLS/acre1 1 Based on hand-broadcasting rate. Upland Bank Seed Mix Species Common Name PLS Pounds/acre Pascopyrum smithii Western wheatgrass (Rosanna) 8 Elymus lanceolatus Streambank Wheatgrass (Sodar) 6 Elymus trachycaulus Slender Wheatgrass (Pryor) 5.5 Trifolium repens White Clover (Dutch) 0.55 Festuca ovina Sheep Fescue (Covar) 1.5 Poa compressa Canada Bluegrass 0.75 Hordeum vulgare Barley (annual for green-up purposes) 10 Gaillardia aristata Blanket Flower 1 Linum lewisii Blue Flax 1.5 Total 34.8 PLS/acre1 1 Based on hand-broadcasting rate.