HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.3_6590 Davis Lane WetlandReviewChecklist6590 Davis Lane - Wetland Review Checklist Sundog Ecological Inc.
Wetland Review Checklist
1. A wetland and watercourse delineation report must be submitted to the city for all
projects, if aquatic resources are present. When required to determine applicability and
scope of wetland location and function the delineation shall go beyond the boundary of
the property. If no aquatic resources are present, a letter must be submitted to the city
stating that there are no water resources within the subject property. A complete
aquatic delineation has been submitted.
2. If activities are planned in and/or adjacent to aquatic resources the following information
is required:
a. A site plan that shows the property boundary; delineated wetland and
watercourse boundaries; buffer boundaries (this is an irrigation facility and does
not require the setback/buffer); 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. See the submitted site plan- these are irrigation
facilities, not waterways, and no setback is required
i. All direct impacts to wetlands, watercourses, and buffers must be
highlighted and summarized in a table on the site plan. The water
resource and buffer summary table must include wetland/watercourse
identification number; corresponding buffer width and acreage; total site,
wetland, watercourse, ditch, and buffer acreages; jurisdictional status;
impacts to all water resources and buffers; and mitigation types and
acreages. See the submitted site plan-these are irrigation facilities,
not waterways, and no setback is required
ii. All indirect impacts must be summarized in the document. All impacts
are summarized on the wetland impacts map.
b. A map with all proposed mitigation areas and their required buffers. Not
applicable, on-site mitigation is the least desirable mitigation pathway
option with ACOE.
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 listed in Section 38.220.020.
Not applicable – all fill being removed from the site will be via haul trucks.
d. Copies of the following:
i. And floodplain determination for the proposed site Not applicable
ii. Any ACOE jurisdictional determinations received 06/24/2024
iii. Any other required permits
1. SPA 124 (FWP) Not applicable
2. Stormwater discharge Pending
3. 310 Permit (GCD) Not applicable
4. Floodplain Permit Not applicable
5. 404 Permit (ACOE) Pending
6. Section 10 Permit Not applicable
7. 401/318 Permit (DEQ) Pending
8. Navigable Waters (DNC) Not applicable
6590 Davis Lane - Wetland Review Checklist Sundog Ecological Inc.
9. Water rights changes (DNRC) Not applicable
3. If, during 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 Act permit, then the following information must be submitted to the city in
a compensatory mitigation report for all federal jurisdictions and city-regulated wetlands
(see Section 38700.210 for definition) in a compensatory mitigation report. Impacts will
be mitigated via mitigation bank. The bank will be determined after the permit has
been approved by ACOE. On-site mitigation is the least desirable mitigation
pathway option with ACOE and no mitigation monitoring would be required.
a. The descriptive narrative must include, at a minimum:
i. The name and contact information of the applicant; the name,
qualifications, and contact information for the primary author of the
compensatory mitigation report; a description of the proposal; summary of
the direct and indirect impacts and proposed mitigation concept;
identification of all the local, state, and federal wetland/stream-related
permit required for the project; and, a vicinity map for the project.
ii. A description of the existing wetland, watercourse and buffer areas that
will be impacted including area based on professional surveys; dominant
vegetation; and functional assessments and wetland ratings for the entire
wetland and the portions proposed to be impacted.
iii. An assessment of the potential changes in wetland hydroperiod for the
proposed project and how the design has been modified to avoid,
minimize or reduce impacts to the wetland hydroperiod.
iv. A description of the proposed conceptual mitigation actions for wetland,
watercourse and buffer areas. Provide specifications (including buffers)
for all proposed mitigation for wetland/watercourse/buffer impacts. Include
a map with all proposed mitigation areas and their required buffers. Maps
with property boundaries, wetland and watercourse boundaries and
acreages
v. An assessment of existing conditions in the zone of the proposed
mitigation including vegetation community structure and composition,
existing hydroperiod, existing soil conditions, and existing wetland
functions.
vi. Field data that was collected to document the existing conditions of the
proposed mitigation sites and on which the future hydrologic and soil
conditions of the mitigation wetlands are based (e.g., hydrologic
conditions: piezometer data, staff/crest gage data, hydrologic modeling,
visual observations; soil conditions: data from handdug or mechanical soil
pits or boring results). The applicant may not rely on soil survey data for
establishing existing conditions.
vii. A planting schedule by proposed community type and hydrologic regime,
size and type of plant material to be installed, spacing of plants, “typical”
clustering patterns, total number of each species by community type,
timing of installation, nutrient requirements, watering schedule, weed
control, and where appropriate measures to protect plants from
6590 Davis Lane - Wetland Review Checklist Sundog Ecological Inc.
destruction. Native species must comprise 80 percent of the plants
installed or seeded within the mitigation site.
viii. The mitigation monitoring plan must include a period of not less than
three years, and establish the responsibility for long-term removal of
invasive vegetation.
ix. Wetland mitigation performance criteria (measurable standards reflective
of expected development goals established for each year after the
mitigation site is established, i.e., “At the end of three years there will be
an 80 percent survival of the planted shrubs and trees.”) for mitigation
wetlands and buffers, a monitoring schedule, reporting requirements to
the city, and maintenance schedule and actions for each year of
monitoring.
x. Contingency plans which clearly define course of action or corrective
measures needed if performance criteria are not met.
b. The scaled plan sheets for the compensatory mitigation must contain, at a
minimum:
i. i. Existing wetland and buffer surveyed edges; proposed areas of wetland
and buffer impacts; and, location of proposed wetland and buffer
compensation action.
ii. ii. Surveyed topography at one- to two-foot contour intervals in the zone
of the proposed compensation actions if any grading activity is proposed
in the compensation area. Provide existing and proposed mitigation
design cross section for the wetland and/or buffer compensation areas.
iii. iii. Required wetland buffers for existing wetlands and proposed mitigation
areas;
c. A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect and maintain the
non-impacted and mitigation wetland, watercourse and buffer areas in perpetuity.
6590 Davis Lane - Wetland Review Checklist Sundog Ecological Inc.
Narrative and Discussion
All applications that propose changes to wetlands must provide a narrative response and
discussion to the following:
1. The applicant has demonstrated that all adverse impacts on a wetland have been
avoided; or Wetland impacts have been minimized to the extent possible while still
making development on the site possible. The wetlands associated with this
project are manmade and the result of irrigation infrastructure,
inadequate/undersized culverts under roadways/driveways, winter icing, and a
railroad berm (See manmade documentation). These wetlands are not scarce or
unique and have been piped both upstream and downstream of this location. The
piping of Section Line Ditch and the resulting impacts of this piping (and resulting
wetland impacts) are City Right of Way impacts. The remaining wetland impacts
have been limited to the extent possible. See the attached alternative project
layouts.
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
continued existence of, the following. Multiple design layouts were investigated.
Current design was most feasible for meeting other City requirements. Over 20
different layouts were analyzed for feasibility, a selection of these are attached.
The majority of the impact to on-site wetlands will result from the extension of the
City of Bozeman street grid across the project site, required street alignments,
right-of-way widths, and street sections have been determined by city staff
according to their transportation master plan and block length requirements. The
remaining wetland impact will result from the construction of a proposed
apartment building and required parking areas.
In order to have adequate parking for the number of units on site, this was the
most feasible plan and design. The location of the building and parking lots on
the project site have been determined based on City of Bozeman block frontage
standards, which require buildings to make up the majority of the frontage along
city streets. Parking cannot be “stacked” or placed underground in this location
due to site conditions. Underground parking on the property to reduce the site’s
impervious footprint is unfeasible due to seasonal high groundwater elevations.
Groundwater monitoring was conducted from spring to fall of 2023 and indicated
that seasonal high groundwater ranged from approximately 5 feet below ground
surface (bgs) to approximately 2 feet bgs.
a. Plant, animal or other wildlife species listed as threatened or endangered (TES) by
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; and/or See attached T&E species
report from USFWS.
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 See attached Gallatin County
Species of Concern List from MT Natural Heritage Program.
3. The applicant has demonstrated that the project is in the public interest, having
considered and documented:
a. The extent of the public need for the proposed regulated activity; See attached
Bozeman, MT Community Housing Needs Assessment, February 2019
6590 Davis Lane - Wetland Review Checklist Sundog Ecological Inc.
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;
See attached MDT Wetland Assessment Forms
c. The extent and permanence of the adverse effects of the regulated activity on the
wetland and any associated watercourse; Impacts to Irrigation Facility and
wetlands are permanent.
d. The cumulative adverse effects of past activities on the wetland; and -No previous
impacts to wetlands at this address. This is not clearly defined in the city
code. Impacts are 1.38 acres of wetland fill and these are ACOE jurisdictional
wetlands. Of these 1.38 acres, 0.28 acres are impacts resulting from required
infrastructure improvements. The calculation of cumulative impacts in the
region or the city is a moving target. How do you suggest we calculate this
number and what City boundary are you basing the calculation off of? Where
are we supposed to find the information to be able to do these calculations?
Without the City providing further information, context, boundary and data
this in an unattainable question to answer.
e. The uniqueness or scarcity of the wetland that may be affected. See attached MDT
Wetland Assessment Forms; the wetland is classified as a Type III wetland; it
is not scarce or unique.
4. The source, type and method of transport and disposal of any fill materials to be used and
certification that the placement of fill material will not violate any applicable State of
Federal Statues and Regulations. All fill will be removed from the site via haul trucks.
5. Are deed restrictions or covenants regarding the future use and subdivision of land,
including but not limited to the preservation of undeveloped areas as open space, and
restrictions on vegetation removal proposed? No- this is a site plan, not a subdivision.
However, covenants can address the preservation of undeveloped areas. Deed
restriction is not necessary.
6. Are deed restrictions proposed to be filed with the county clerk and recorder stating the
measures that will be taken to protect all water resources, mitigation, and buffer in
perpetuity? No- this is a site plan, not a subdivision. However, covenants can
address the preservation of undeveloped areas. Deed restriction is not necessary.
7. Are any of the other relevant wetland permit conditions in Section 38.610.090 BMC
proposed with this application? No