Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1.00 General Application Materials
5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 phone: (970) 945-7988 fax: (970) 945-8454 email: kaglenwood@kumarusa.com www.kumarusa.com Office Locations: Denver (HQ), Parker, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs, and Summit County, Colorado February 22, 2024 River Restoration Attn: Quinn Donnelly P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 quinn.donnelly@riverrestoration.org Project No. 24-7-153 Subject: Geotechnical Site Review, Proposed Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvements, County Roads 109 and 154, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Quinn: As requested, Kumar & Associates, Inc. performed a geotechnical site review for the proposed Sam Caudill SWA boat ramp improvements. The study was conducted in general accordance with the subconsultant services agreement by River Restoration dated February 14, 2024. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction and conditions encountered are presented in this report. Proposed Construction: The proposed boat ramp will include a poured concrete slab for the ramp and turning area accessed by a gravel drive off County Road 154 as shown on Figure 1. Cut and fill depths for the proposed access drive and boat ramp are expected to range between about 3 to 6 feet. If conditions are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report. Site Conditions: The subject site was mostly vacant at the time of our field review. The north end of the proposed development area is occupied with a gravel boat ramp and parking area that was recently expanded with a new retaining wall. There was patchy snow cover up to about 2 inches deep at the time of our visit. The ground surface was sloping down to the southwest at grades from between 5 to 60 percent. There was a relatively flat bench approximately 7 feet lower than the road surface of County Road 154 that extended from near the south end of the proposed development area to near the existing boat ramp. The slopes up to County Road 154 and down to the Roaring Fork River were relatively steep. Vegetation consists of grass and sparse sage brush with scrub oak. There was evidence of roadway embankment fill for the grading of County Road 154 and the parking area and cut grading for the existing boat ramp. Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by observing the exposed slopes of the cut and fill grading and one pit previously excavated at the approximate - 2 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 24-7-153 location shown on Figure 1. The log of the pit is presented on Figure 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 1 foot of topsoil, consist of medium dense, silty sand, gravel and cobbles with possible boulders down to the excavated depth of 4½ feet. Results of a gradation analysis performed on a sample of silty gravelly sand (minus 3-inch fraction) obtained from the pit are presented on Figure 3. No free water was observed in the pit and the soils were moist. Foundation Recommendations: Considering the observed site conditions and subsoil conditions in the pit and the nature of the proposed development, we recommend spread footings placed on the undisturbed natural soil designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf for support of the proposed retaining walls. The soils tend to compress after wetting and there could be some post-construction foundation and wall settlement. Footings should be a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls. The topsoil, existing fill and loose disturbed soils encountered at the foundation bearing level within the excavation should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the undisturbed natural soils. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate cover above their bearing elevations for frost protection. Placement of footings at least 36 inches below the exterior grade is typically used in this area. Continuous foundation walls should be well reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Lateral Earth Pressures: Retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 40 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site soils. Backfill consisting of the onsite granular soils should be devoid of topsoil, organics, debris or rock larger than about 6 inches. All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls. Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Backfill placed in pavement and walkway areas should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density. - 3 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 24-7-153 Care should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near the wall, since this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some settlement of deep foundation wall backfill should be expected, even if the material is placed correctly, and could result in distress to facilities constructed on the backfill. The lateral resistance of retaining wall footings will be a combination of the sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure against the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.45. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 375 pcf. The coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Slabs-On-Grade: The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab-on-grade construction. A subgrade modulus “k” of 100 pci can be used for design of the slabs-on-grade for the ramp and turning area. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4-inch layer of relatively well graded sand and gravel such as CDOT Class 6 base course should be placed beneath slabs-on-grade to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 12% passing the No. 200 sieve. All fill materials for support of slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the on-site soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in the area that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of perforated PVC drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free-draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and sloped at a minimum ½% to a suitable gravity outlet. - 4 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 24-7-153 Free-draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 1½ feet deep. Site Grading: The risk of construction-induced slope instability at the site appears low provided cut and fill depths are limited. We assume the cut and fill depths will not exceed about 6 to 8 feet. Embankment fills should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density near optimum moisture content. Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be carefully prepared by removing all vegetation and topsoil and compacting to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density. The fill should be benched into the portions of the hillside exceeding 20% grade. Cut and fill slopes should be graded at 1.5 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation or other means. The risk of slope instability will be increased if under wetted or submerged conditions and flatter slopes could be needed. This office should review site grading plans for the project prior to construction. Limitations: This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based on our observations of the site, the data obtained from the exploratory pit at the location indicated on Figure 1 and to the depth shown on Figure 2, the proposed type of construction, and our experience in the area. Variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified at once so re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. Kumar & Associates Kumar & Associates Kumar & Associates Community Development Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970)945-8212 www.garfield-county.com LAND USE CHANGE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM TYPE OF APPLICATION Administrative Review Development in 100-Year Floodplain Limited Impact Review Development in 100-Year Floodplain Variance Major Impact Review Code Text Amendment Amendments to an Approved LUCP LIR MIR SUP Rezoning Zone District PUD PUD Amendment Minor Temporary Housing Facility Administrative Interpretation Vacation of a County Road/Public ROW Appeal of Administrative Interpretation Location and Extent Review Areas and Activities of State Interest Comprehensive Plan Amendment Accommodation Pursuant to Fair Housing Act Pipeline Development Variance Time Extension (also check type of original application) INVOLVED PARTIES Owner/Applicant Name: ________________________________________________ Phone: (______)_________________ Mailing Address: ______________________________________________________________________ City: _______________________________________ State: _______ Zip Code: ____________________ E-mail:_______________________________________________________________________________ Representative (Authorization Required) Name: ________________________________________________ Phone: (______)_________________ Mailing Address: ______________________________________________________________________ City: _______________________________________ State: _______ Zip Code: ____________________ E-mail:_______________________________________________________________________________ PROJECT NAME AND LOCATION Project Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Assessor’s Parcel Number: ___ ___ ___ ___ - ___ ___ ___ - ___ ___ - ___ ___ ___ Physical/Street Address: ________________________________________________________________ Legal Description: ______________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Zone District: ___________________________________ Property Size (acres): __________________ PROJECT DESCRIPTION REQUEST FOR WAIVERS Submission Requirements The Applicant requesting a Waiver of Submission Requirements per Section 4-202. List: Section: ______________________________ Section: _________________________________ Section: ______________________________ Section: _________________________________ Waiver of Standards The Applicant is requesting a Waiver of Standards per Section 4-118. List: Section: ______________________________ Section: _________________________________ Section: ______________________________ Section: _________________________________ I have read the statements above and have provided the required attached information which is correct and accurate to the best of my knowledge. ______________________________________________________ __________________________ Signature of Property Owner or Authorized Representative, Title Date OFFICIAL USE ONLY File Number: __ __ __ __ - __ __ __ __ Fee Paid: $_____________________________ Existing Use: ____________________________________________________________________________________ Proposed Use (From Use Table 3-403): ____________________________________________________ Description of Project: __________________________________________________________________ 1.The Decision you are appealing. 2.The date the Decision was sent as specified in the notice (date mailed). 3.The nature of the decision and the specified ground for appeal. Please cite specific code sections and/or relevant documentation to support your request. 4.The appropriate appeal fee of $250.00. 5.Please note a completed Appeal Application and fees must be received within 30 calendar days of the date of the final written Administrative Interpretation. For Appeal of Administrative Interpretation please include: Glenwood Springs (Area 8) Service Center 0088 Wildlife Way Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970.947.2920 Jeff Davis, Director, Colorado Parks and Wildlife Parks and Wildlife Commission: Dallas May, Chair Richard Reading, Vice-Chair Karen Bailey, Secretary Jessica Beaulieu Marie Haskett Jack Murphy Gabriel Otero Duke Phillips, IV James Jay Tutchton Eden Vardy June 17, 2024 Re: Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area – Boat Ramp Improvement Project To Whom it May Concern, Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) is working toward improving the public boat ramp facilities located on Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area on property owned by the State of Colorado, CPW. This property receives high recreational use as a major access point on the Roaring Fork River. The current facility is plagued by a degraded boat ramp surface and parking congestion that affects traffic along Garfield County Road 154. CPW has contracted with River Restoration to design and implement a new boat ramp and associated instream structures to improve functionality of facility. River Restoration is representing CPW in the submission of permit applications. Please reach out with any questions you may have. Sincerely, Matt Yamashita, Area Wildlife Manager Garfield County PAYMENT AGREEMENT FORM GARFIELD COUNTY ('COUNTY") and Property Owner ("APPLICANT")Colorado Parks and Wildlife agree as follows: L. 2. The Applicant understands and agrees that Garfield County Resolution No. 2014-60, as amended, establishes a fee schedule for each type application, and the guidelines for the administration of the fee structure. 3. The Applicant and the Cou nty agree that because of the size, natu re or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the fullextent of the costs involved in processing the application. The Applicant agrees to make payment of the Base Fee, established for the Project, and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to the Applicant. The Applicant agrees to make additional payments upon notification by the County, when they are necessary, as costs are incurred. 4. The Base Fee shall be in addition to and exclusive of any cost for publication or cost of consulting service determined necessary by the Board of County Commissioners for the consideration of an application or additional County staff time or expense not covered by the Base Fee. lf actual recorded costs exceed the initial Base Fee, the Applicant shall pay additional billings to the County to reimburse the County for the processing of the Project. The Applicant acknowledges that all billing shall be paid prior to the final consideration by the County of any Land Use Change or Division of Land, I hereby agree to pay all fees related to this application: Billing Contact Person Matt Yamashita Phone 970 947-2927 Billing Contact Address 0088 Wildlife Way City Glenwood Springs State: Co Zip code:81601 Billing contact Email: m?tt.yamashita@state.co. us Printed Name of Person Authorized to Sign Matt Yamashita The Applicant has submitted to the County an a Sam Caudill Boat Ramp lmprovements pplication for the following Project: Project Wat/analAa '(signature) 6117124 (Date) Sam Caudill SWA – Boat Ramp Improvement Project A5 – Property Owners Sam Caudill SWA – Boat Ramp Improvement Project A5 – Property Owners Parcel Physical Address Owner Account Num Mailing Address 218535400017 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS GARFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS R060074 108 EIGHTH STREET, SUITE 101 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 218535400025 4185 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS THREE GS LLC R060093 PO BOX 821 VAIL, CO 81658 218535400059 RAILROAD R.O.W. GLENWOOD SPRINGS ROARING FORK TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY R060105 1340 MAIN STREET CARBONDALE, CO 81623 218535404001 160 RIVER RIDGE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS DOUGLAS, DAVID MICHAEL & JUDY ANN R081019 160 RIVER RIDGE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 218535404002 192 RIVER RIDGE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS HAJENGA, STANLEY R & COE, ANNE M R081020 192 RIVER RIDGE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 218535404003 224 RIVER RIDGE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS ROJO, ARTURO R081021 224 RIVER RIDGE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 218536300011 4600 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS KIRKHAM, ANALEE R005377 4600 COUNTY ROAD 154 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601-9319 218536300012 4602 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS SUZUKI, JAMES D R005376 4602 COUNTY ROAD 154 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601-9319 218536300014 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS DIVISION OF PARKS AND WILDLIFE PARKS AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION R083369 6060 BROADWAY DENVER, CO 80216 218536300015 4424 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS OCHOA, PALOMA & CRUZ, OMAR DE LA R083370 4424 COUNTY ROAD 154 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 218536313002 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOB DIVISION OF PARKS AND WILDLIFE AND PARKS AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION R083372 1313 SHERMAN STREET DENVER, CO 80203 218536314001 Not available null 218536314002 4412 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS BLACK RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS OWNERS ASSN R084284 6800 HIGHWAY 82, SUITE 1 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 218536314003 Not available null 218536314004 4412 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS BLACK RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS OWNERS ASSN R084286 6800 HIGHWAY 82, SUITE 1 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 218536314005 Not available null 218536314006 4412 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS BLACK RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS OWNERS ASSN R084288 6800 HIGHWAY 82, SUITE 1 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 218536314008 4412 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS BLACK RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS OWNERS ASSN R084290 6800 HIGHWAY 82, SUITE 1 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 239501200126 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS SCHARD, BRYAN P & AMANDA JO R100057 PO BOX 696 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 239501210003 128 RIVER RIDGE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS JOYCE, GREGORY M & AMY A R081018 128 RIVER RIDGE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 ROW Not available null ROW Not available null Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvements Project A5 - Property Owners Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvement Project A6 – Mineral Rights The project involves two properties, purchased by Colorado Parks and Wildlife in 2013 and 2020. Both deeds included “any and all minerals owned by Grantor”. No additional mineral rights research was performed. Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvement Project A6 – Mineral Rights The project involves two properties, purchased by Colorado Parks and Wildlife in 2013 and 2020. Both deeds included “any and all minerals owned by Grantor”. No additional mineral rights research was performed. Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvement Project A6 – Mineral Rights The project involves two properties, purchased by Colorado Parks and Wildlife in 2013 and 2020. Both deeds included “any and all minerals owned by Grantor”. No additional mineral rights research was performed. Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvement Project A9 – Project Description The Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements involves upgrades to the boat ramp located in the Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area (SWA) between Glenwood Springs and Carbondale in Garfield County. This heavily used ramp on the Roaring Fork River is also sometimes referred to as “Ironbridge, Black Bridge, or Westbank”. The project is being designed in cooperation with Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW), who own and maintain the property the ramp and staging area are located on. As part of the planning process, CPW staff are designing a new access road, off County Road 154 (CR 154) and additional staging/parking which will serve the proposed boat ramp. The design and construction of the in-channel components, including ramp, river training structures, tie-off points and other bankside amenities are being funded by Pitkin County Healthy Rivers. The improvements are being made to address concerns associated with vehicle and pedestrian flow patterns and heavy maintenance required to maintain the ramp through runoff each year. The ramp is the busiest ramp on the Roaring Fork, especially as flows decrease in August and September. The ramp is also heavily used by commercial fishing and whitewater guides, with some guides and customers coming from as far away as Vail, the Front Range and out of state. The current configuration can become a choke point during busy periods, sometimes creating conflicts between users and traffic on CR 154. The proposed boat ramp improvements include: A realigned and widened boat ramp with a concrete driving surface. An access point for hand carried watercraft, demarcated by boulders. A pair of boulder river training structures intended to reduce flow velocities in the vicinity of the ramp and hand carried access point. A widened staging/rigging area downstream of the proposed ramped, aided by a small boulder retaining wall between the river and the proposed access road. A series of boulders, placed along the bank to provide boulder tie off for staging rafts and dories. Planting of willow stakes and other appropriate riparian vegetation along disturbed banks. Restoration of construction access to pre-project conditions. A one-way access road that will separate the ramp traffic from CR 154. This work will include several retaining walls (designed and constructed by CPW). Shoulder widening on the south side of CR 154 to provide additional parking (designed and constructed by CPW). 1 Community Development Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-8212 www.garfield-county.com PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 2185-363-13-002 & 2185-363-00-014 PREPARED: 5/31/24 PROJECT: CPW Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp OWNERS/APPLICANT: Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW), Matt Yamashita REPRESENTATIVE: RiverRestoration, Quinn Donnelly & Francois Escorihuela PRACTICAL LOCATION: Off County Road 154, east of the County Road 109 Intersection adjacent to the Historic “Iron Bridge” and Roaring Fork River ZONING: Residential Suburban (RS) TYPE OF APPLICATION: Flood Plain Development Permit I. GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant’s Representatives have provided detailed plans for boat ramp improvements adjacent to and within the Roaring Fork River. Improvements within the 100-year floodplain include boulder wing walls, to create eddies, an improved concrete boat ramp and access, and additional launch areas for other river users. Other project elements outside the floodplain include additional parking areas and improved County Road access. An excerpt from the Plan Set is attached. Table 3-301 outlines permitted uses within the floodplain and floodway including bank restoration, driveways, parking areas and recreational structures (not for human habitation). The proposed improvements fall within several of these permitted use categories. The Applicant’s Representatives have indicated that construction is anticipated to occur during low flow periods between August 15 and October 1st. A nationwide permit from the Army Corp of Engineers has been applied for. The project will include some vege tation and tree remove, mitigated by revegetation and restoration plans. 2 The project is being planned by CPW with funding support from Pitkin County Healthy Rivers. Initial engineering/modelling has supported a zero-rise determination. In addition to a floodplain development permit additional County Permits anticipated will include Grading Permit and County Road Access Permits. Revegetation and restoration of disturbed areas is proposed and would be required as part of the County Permitting process. Coordination with the County Vegetation Manager is anticipated. II. REGULATORY PROVISIONS APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, as amended (LUDC) including the following Sections: • Section 3-301 – Floodplain Overlay Regulations including but not limited to 3-301(D), 3-301(E)(3), and 3-301(G) • Table 3-301 – Floodplain Overlay Use Restrictions Table • Section 4-109 – Development in the 100 Year Floodplain, including review criteria • Table 4-102 – Common Review Procedures and Required Notice • Table 4-201 – Submittal Requirements • Section 4-203 – Submittal Requirements as appropriate • Section 4-203 (O) – Flood Plain Analysis • Section 4-118 – Waiver from Standards (if needed) • Section 7-203(B) & (C) – Protection of Water Bodies VICINITY MAP 3 III. REVIEW PROCESS The Floodplain Development permit will be processed pursuant to Section 4 -103, Administrative Review Process and consistent with Table 4-102 Common Review procedures for Floodplain Development, summarized as follows: A. Pre-application Conference B. Application Submittal C. Determination of Completeness D. Schedule the Director’s Decision Date E. Application sent to referral agencies F. Public Notice for the Director’s Decision completed . Includes certified mailing to adjacent property owners within 200 ft. and certified return receipt requested mailing to mineral rights owners on the applicant’s property. G. Evaluation by Director/Staff resulting in a Staff Report H. Director’s Decision I. 10 day call up period, after which the Director’s Decision become final unless the decision is called up the BOCC for their review J. Once all conditions of approval have been satisfied the Floodplain Development Permit can be issued. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND NOTICE Public Hearing notices shall be posted, mailed and published pursuant to Section 4-101.E. _X __No Public Hearing (Director’s Decision with mailed notice only) ____ Planning Commission ____ Board of County Commissioners ____ Board of Adjustment Referral agencies may include but are not limited to: Garfield County Consulting Engineer, Garfield County Attorney, FEMA, Army Corp of Engineers, Garfield County Road and Bridge, Roaring Fork Conservancy. V. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. General Application Materials including o Application Form including signatures o Proof of ownership (deed and/or title information) o Authorization to represent as appropriate o Statements of authority o List of owners of property within 200 ft. with addresses (to be reviewed and accepted by the County Attorney’s Office) o List of owners of mineral rights on the subject property and/or description of how this was researched. o Payment of fees 4 o Agreement to Pay Form o Project Description – narrative o Copy of Pre-Application Summary B. Vicinity Map – formatted on 8 ½ x 11 size for use with public notice C. Site Plan – to applicable scale, including all proposed improvements and significant features. D. Floodplain Analysis – meeting the requirements of the Land Use and Development Code including Sections 3-301 and 4-203 (O) as applicable. The Flood Plain Analysis/memo needs to be completed by a qualified licensed professional engineer and needs to include the engineer’s stamp. Some elements may not be applicable based on the type of project. An explanation – justification in those cases should be provided. E. The Application will need to include details and plans for the proposed improvements. F. The Analysis will need to address the lack of any impacts from the proposed improvements (i.e. no impact on flooding potential – Zero Rise Determination) G. The Analysis will need to include information on construction practices including staging areas, stock piling areas, protection of water quality from sediment or erosion potential, and equipment to be used. Revegetation and restorations plans need to be provided as appropriate. H. The submittals need to address compliance with the Review Criteria contained in Section 4-109 as applicable. I. The submittals need to include any other reports, studies, and permits including but not limited to any current review by the Army Corp of Engineers and wetlands analyses. J. The submittals need to generally address compliance with Section 7 -203 (B), Protection of Water Bodies, Structures Permitted in Setbacks. Any significant removal of vegetation should be addressed in the submittals with waivers if needed requested and restoration plans provided. Follow-up conversations with Staff is an option if additional questions come up regarding the submittal requirements. As noted above some elements of the Floodplain Analysis may not be applicable and the Application submittals should reflect that representation. The Application submittal needs to include 3 hard copies of the entire Application and 1 Digital PDF Copy of the entire Application (on a CD or USB Stick). Both the paper and digital copies should be split into individual sections and properly labelled. Please refer to this pre- application summary for submittal requirements that are appropriate for your Application. VI. APPLICATION REVIEW FEES This application will be subject to the following fees and deposit requirements: Planning Review Fees: $ 400 (Additional Staff time charged at hourly rate of $40.50) Referral Agency Fees: $ tbd (Review fees associated with consulting engineer review) 5 Total Deposit: $ 400 (additional fees to be determined by hourly rates) VII. GENERAL APPLICATION PROCESSING The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the County. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. This summary does not create a legal or vested right. The summary is valid for a six-month period, after which an update should be requested. The Applicant is advised that the Application submittal once accepted by the County becomes public information and will be available (including electronically) for review by the public. Proprietary information can be redacted from documents prior to submittal. Pre-application Summary Prepared by: 6/6/24 Glenn Hartmann, CFM Date Community Development Director 6 Note: The notice requirement in Step 4 has been changed to 15 days pursuant to Section 4-103 of the LUDC. 7 EXCERPT FROM PLAN SET 8 VIEW OF THE SITE So urces: Esri, H ERE, Garmin, Intermap, increm ent P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NP S, NRCAN , G eoBa se, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Su rvey, Esri Japan, M ETI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMa p co ntributors, and the GIS User Co mmunity, Sources: Esri, Garmin, USGS , NPS . PROJECT LOCATION 0 4,000 8,0002,000 Fee t R o arin g F ork Riv er SAM CAU DILL SWA BOAT RAM PIMPROVEMENTS PROJECT © 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS SAM CAUDILL SWA BOAT RAMP IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT JUNE 2024 CONTACTS Lisa MacDonald. Healthy Rivers Program Director Pitkin County Healthy River 530 E. Main St, Suite 301 Aspen, CO 81611 Quinn Donnelly, P.E. Project Engineer RiverRestoration.org, LLC. 970.947.9568 Francois Escorihuela Project Designer RiverRestoration.org, LLC. 970.947.9568 Sarah J. Smith Associate Ecologist, CERP Logan Simpson 720.390.0273 Walter Gorra, MS, PE Project Manager Glenwood Structural and Civil, Inc. 970.928.0135 G01 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLE COVER SHEET R01 LOCATION MAP VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEX R02 G02 BASEMAP & HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN CW01 CARE OF WATER PHASE 1 AND 2 D01 D02 RIVER & BANK IMPROVEMENTS, PLAN VIEW BOAT RAMP AND PUT IN, PLAN, PROFILE AND SECTIONS BOULDER STRUCTURE DETAILS (1/2) TIE OFF ANCHOR DETAILS CARE OF WATER DETAILS CARE OF WATER DETAILSCW04 EROSION CONTROL DETAILS FINAL DESIGN CW05 CW02 CW03 D03 EROSION CONTROL MATTING DETAILS CARE OF WATER - STAGING AREA R03 BOULDER WINGS, PLAN, AND SECTIONS D04 BOAT RAMP CONCRETE DETAIL (SECTIONS) L01 L02 PLANTING PLAN - NOTES PLANTING PLAN L03 R04 SMALL CRAFT STEP DOWNS AND ACCESS ROAD BOULDER WALL, PLAN, AND SECTIONS D05 BOULDER STRUCTURE DETAILS (2/2) L04 SEED MIX AND PLANT PALETTES L05 TYPICAL DETAILS S2.1 RAMP SLAB - PLAN AND GENERAL NOTES S2.2 SLAB DETAILS NOTE: ITEMS CALLED OUT "BY CPW" IN THIS PLANSET IS A REFERENCE TO A SEPARATELY BID AND CONSTRUCTED PROJECT THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF THIS ONE. THESE "BY CPW" ITEMS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS BID. EROSION CONTROL PLAN NTS G01 N CO V E R S H E E T FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ G 0 1 _ C o v e r S h e e t . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ G 0 2 - B a s e m a p . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 N 1" = 40' (FULL SIZE) G02 BA S E M A P & H O R I Z O N T A L CO N T R O L P L A N SCALE: 1" = 40' 80'40'0 FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ C W 0 1 - 0 2 _ C o W _ P h a s e s . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 20' (FULL SIZE) CW01 CA R E O F W A T E R PH A S E 1 & 2 N 20' SCALE: 1" = 20' 0 40' FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ C W 0 1 - 0 2 _ C o W _ P h a s e s . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 10' (FULL SIZE) CW02 CA R E O F W A T E R ST A G I N G A R E A N 10' SCALE: 1" = 10' 0 20' FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ C W 0 3 - 0 5 _ C o W _ D e t a i l s a n d E C . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PRE L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 CW03 CA R E O F W A T E R D E T A I L S NTS FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ C W 0 3 - 0 5 _ C o W _ D e t a i l s a n d E C . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 CW04 CA R E O F W A T E R D E T A I L S NTS FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ C W 0 3 - 0 5 _ C o W _ D e t a i l s a n d E C . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PRE L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 CW05 ER O S I O N C O N T R O L DE T A I L S NTS 1 R02 2 R03 1 R03 2 R02 1 R04 2 R04 FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 20' (FULL SIZE) R01 RI V E R & B A N K I M P R O V E M E N T S PL A N V I E W N 20' SCALE: 1" = 20' 0 40' 1 R02 2 R02 5890.93 5891.87 5898.69 5898.24 5901.25 5902.61 5904.07 5880 5890 5900 5910 5920 5880 5890 5900 5910 5920 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+41 5880 5890 5900 5910 5920 5880 5890 5900 5910 5920 0+00 0+50 0+88 FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 10' (FULL SIZE) R02 BO A T R A M P A N D P U T I N P L A N , PR O F I L E A N D S E C T I O N N 10' SCALE: 1" = 10' 0 20' 2 R03 5893.64 5893.29 5893.11 5893.25 5893.37 5893.52 5893.87 5893.33 5880 5890 5900 5910 5880 5890 5900 5910 0+00 0+50 1 R03 5898.24 5902.61 5904.07 5893.00 5892.50 5894.32 5894.71 5892.73 5894.72 5895.12 5893.50 5896.12 5896.47 VERT. SCALE: 1" = 10' 5880 5890 5900 5910 5880 5890 5900 5910 0+00 0+50 0+64 FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 10' (FULL SIZE) R03 BO U L D E R W I N G S P L A N & S E C T I O N S N 10' SCALE: 1" = 10' 0 20' 1 R04 2 R04 5893.64 5893.29 5893.11 5893.25 5893.37 5893.52 5893.87 5893.33 5880 5890 5900 5910 5880 5890 5900 5910 0+00 0+32 5880 5890 5900 5910 5880 5890 5900 5910 0+00 0+40 FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 R04 SM A L L C R A F T A C C E S S B O U L D E R S T E P DO W N S A N D A C C E S S R O A D B O U L D E R WA L L P L A N & S E C T I O N S N 10' SCALE: 1" = 10' 0 20' 1" = 10' (FULL SIZE) BO U L D E R S T R U C T U R E D E T A I L S ( 1 / 2 ) NTS D01 FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ D 0 1 - 0 5 _ D e t a i l s . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 BO U L D E R S T R U C T U R E D E T A I L S ( 2 / 2 ) NTS D02 FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ D 0 1 - 0 5 _ D e t a i l s . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 TI E - O F F A N C H O R D E T A I L S NTS D03 FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ D 0 1 - 0 5 _ D e t a i l s . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 ER O S I O N C O N T R O L M A T T I N G DE T A I L S NTS D05 FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ D 0 1 - 0 5 _ D e t a i l s . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 2'0" MIN BO A T R A M P C O N C R E T E D E T A I L S (S E C T I O N S ) NTS D05 FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ D 0 1 - 0 5 _ D e t a i l s . d w g Da t e : 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 DR A F T D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S PROJECT NO T E S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements Logan Simpson 213 Linden St. Ste. 300 Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.logansimpson.com Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Topsoil Salvage and Storage Stockpiled or salvaged topsoil should be used to ensure grading contours match 100% construction documents. BMP’s and specifications for topsoil removal and storage are as follows: •Stockpile locations shall be at least 25 feet from waterways, wetlands, or drainage/sewer systems. •Sediment control shall be placed around stockpiles (e.g., silt fencing, sediment control logs, straw bales, or sandbags). •Depth of topsoil shall be field verified to determine appropriate excavation depth. •Stockpiled soil shall not exceed 10 feet in height. •Soils stockpiled for 30-60 days shall be stabilized with surface roughening, erosion control blankets or mulch, or soil binders. •Soils stockpiled for more than 60 days shall be seeded and mulched with a temporary seed mix within 7 days. Seedbed Preparation For all disturbed areas that will undergo temporary and/or permanent seeding, to increase the likelihood of successful seed establishment, the following appropriate soil/seedbed preparation specifications and BMPs shall be used. Decompaction •All ripping and tilling shall be done in a direction which follows the natural contour of the land. •Prior to spreading salvaged topsoil and/or seeding, thoroughly till or rip to a depth of 12 inches all areas compacted by access, staging, or construction traffic. Other, non-compacted areas shall be tilled to a depth of 6 inches. Soils shall be worked until no clods greater than 3 inches in diameter remain. Rocks and other objects 3 inches and greater in any dimension shall be removed. •Areas receiving salvaged topsoil shall be spread to depths required to meet grades and elevations as shown in the 100% construction drawings. •Prior to seeding, areas to be seeded shall be graded as depicted in the 100% construction drawings. Shallow ridges and furrows shall be left to create microsites for seed germination. Soil Amendments •A representative soil test shall be sent to a laboratory to determine pH, organic matter content, electrical conductivity, and concentrations of carbon, phosphorus, and nitrogen to determine appropriate soil amendment product for application. •Soil amendments shall be applied on the surface of the spread topsoil and/or decompacted soils and tilled thoroughly to a depth of 4 inches, prior to seeding. •Soil amendments, such as Richlawn or Biosol, shall be applied at a rate of 500 lbs per acre. •If organic compost or humic acid is deemed necessary, the material shall be applied at a rate of 15 cubic yards per acre. Seeding The seed mix shall be certified weed-free of noxious and undesirable species, obtained from local vendors, and comprised of native cultivars that originate from within 500 feet elevation of the Project site (locally adapted). Seeding should follow the PLS guidelines provided by the seed vendor. The ideal times to seed are in the fall before the first major freeze of the season. Broadcast Seeding •Seed shall be uniformly broadcast at twice the specified PLS per acre and covered with soil to a depth of ¼ inch to ½ inch by hand raking or harrowing by some other means acceptable. •Broadcast seeding shall be accomplished using hand-operated “cyclone type” seeders or rotary broadcast equipment attached to construction or revegetation machinery. All machinery shall be equipped with metering devices. •Broadcasting by hand shall be acceptable on small, isolated sites. Prior to hand broadcast seeding, the seed shall be divided into two halves, with the first half of the seed being applied, followed by the second half of the seed to ensure complete coverage. •When using hopper type equipment, seed shall be frequently mixed within the hopper to discourage seed settling and uneven planting distribution of species. •Broadcast seeding shall take place immediately following the completion of final seedbed preparation techniques. • Broadcast seeding shall not be conducted when wind velocities would prohibit seed to soil contact and/or even seed distribution (wind speeds higher than 8 mph). Seed Vendor Requirements To reduce the likelihood of additional non-native and/or noxious species being introduced to the Project site, seed shall be purchased with the following specifications and BMPs: •Seed shall be purchased from a recommended vendor (see recommendations below) and all seed shall be reported in Pure Live Seed per pound. •Vendor shall provide weed content by species for each seed lot. If any noxious species occur within an individual lot, the species shall be removed from use and % mix shall be adjusted to accommodate the loss. •Vendor shall provide dormancy and germination information for each lot. •Vendor shall disclose if any stratification or other seed preparation is required prior to applying seed on site. •Recommended Vendor: Western Native Seed, Coaldale, Colorado. Stevenson Intermountain Seed, Inc. Ephraim, Utah. Post Seeding Soil Surface Protection and Erosion Control To reduce the potential for fugitive dust, erosion, and/or loss of applied seed, soil surface protection/erosion control techniques and BMPs shall be implemented after seeding is completed. Three soil surface protection/erosion control methods are recommended: certified weed-free straw, erosion control blanket (ECB), or wood straw. Erosion Control Blanket (ECB) ECB shall be manufactured with fully biodegradable materials, such as jute, hemp, or coconut fibers. Photodegradable ECB shall not be utilized, such as the photonetting traps wildlife. •Slopes of 3:1 or steeper, concave areas, drainage swales, or areas along the edges of hard surfaces (e.g., trails, roads), and any other areas with the potential to rill, shall have ECB installed. •All clods and rock shall be removed from area, and grade shall be smoothed prior to installation of ECB so that blanket to soil contact is maximized and potential for holes/pockets is minimized. •The edges of the fabric shall be secured by 2-foot wooden stakes, installed 2 feet on center along all edges and seams. •Seams shall overlap 1 foot and the body of the fabric shall be further secured to the soil surface with 12-inch eco-stakes in a diamond pattern 3 feet on center. •The top of ECB shall be trenched with 2-foot wedge stakes 2 feet on center. •Recommended Vendors: Grainger Industrial Supply, Fort Collins, Colorado, Ferguson Waterworks, Aurora, Colorado, American Excelsior, Arlington, Texas Wood Straw •Wood straw shall be applied at a rate of 276 bales per acre and shall be spread to achieve 70% ground cover. •No crimping or tackifier is required for wood straw application (unless using aspen straw). •Wood straw shall only be utilized on flat areas or slopes less than 3:1. •Recommended Vendor: Mountain Pine Manufacturing, Craig, Colorado L1 DR A F T D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 JUNE 2024 SAM CAUDILL SWA BOAT RAMP IM P R O V E M E N T S PROJECT - PL A N T I N G P L A N Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements Logan Simpson 213 Linden St. Ste. 300 Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.logansimpson.com Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Feet 0 40 80 L2 DR A F T D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 JUNE 2024 SAM CAUDILL SWA BOAT RAMP IM P R O V E M E N T S PROJECT ER O S I O N C O N T R O L P L A N Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements Logan Simpson 213 Linden St. Ste. 300 Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.logansimpson.com Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Feet 0 40 80 L3 DR A F T D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 JUNE 2024 SAM CAUDILL SWA BOAT RAMP IM P R O V E M E N T S PROJECT SE E D M I X E S A N D P L A N T PA L E T T E S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements Logan Simpson 213 Linden St. Ste. 300 Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.logansimpson.com Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 L4 DR A F T D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 JUNE 2024 SAM CAUDILL SWA BOAT RAMP IM P R O V E M E N T S PROJECT TY P I C A L DETAILS Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements Logan Simpson 213 Linden St. Ste. 300 Fort Collins, CO 80524 www.logansimpson.com Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 4 dormant buds min. Soil (dry) Max 6’ above ground 8” min.Min. 2/3 of cutting below ground 6” min. Capillary fringe Low-season water table COTTONWOOD POLE PLANTING CROSS SECTION (TYPICAL)NOT TO SCALE WILLOW CUTTING CROSS SECTION NOT TO SCALE 8-12” above ground surface Willow cutting NOTES: 1. All willow cuttings shall be sound, healthy specimens. Plant materials that have serious injuries, insect pests, diseases or are overly dry, will be rejected. 2. 3. 4. 5. If harvested, cuttings shall be obtained from approved sources using a sharp tool. Cuttings shall be long enough to reach depth of 6” into the groundwater during the driest times of the year. Cutting shall have a basal end of 0.50-1.5” in diameter. The top ends shall be blunt and butt ends shall be cut at 45 degrees. They shall be stripped of all but two or three healthy terminal stems. The contractor shall provide for the proper care, storage, and handing of the cuttings. During all stages of construction, the cuttings shall be protected from exposure to wind and direct sunlight. Prior to installation, the contractor shall ag all planting locations for approval by owner’s rep. Adjustments to these locations may be required to meet eld conditions. 6. If cuttings cannot be installed directly into the required depth due to soil conditions, a dibble bar, auger or other tool shall be used to create a pilot hole. Space around hole must be eliminated to ensure good soil-stem contact. 7. Additional industry standards should be followed to ensure high survival rates. Pilot hole Existing soil Lowest seasonal groundwater level 6” min Min 8” of soil above low season groundwater Pack soil against planted cutting. SHRUB PLANTING CROSS SECTION NOT TO SCALE 25 - 50% Deeper than rootball 2x Rootball diameter 2x depth of mulch Irrigation berm Undisturbed soil Amended backll Container shrub NOTES: 1. Broken or crumbling rootballs will be rejected. 2. 3. 4. Care should be taken to not damage the shrub or rootball when removing it from the container. Backfill around rootball with soil that does not exceed specifications in restoration notes. Excavate planting pit 2x the diameter of the rootball and 25 - 50% deeper then height of the rootball. 5. Add backfill around the rootball in 2" layers, watering each layer before applying the next layer of soil. 6. Add 2" of mulch to cover 18" of the ground/ dripline, leaving 1" open around trunk of shrub. 7. Use part of the excavated soil to build an irrigation berm at the edge of the dripline, about 1 - 2" high and 3 - 4" wide. Import soil as needed from nearby harvest sites. L5 PRELIMINARY DATE: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 6/12/24 CPW Plans for access road and parking improvements. Will be bid/constructed as a separate project. C N T Y R D 1 5 4 SAM CAUDILL SWA ONE WAY PRELIMINARY DATE: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 6/12/24 D CNTY RD 154 PRELIMINARY DATE: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 6/12/24 D CNTY RD 154 PRELIMINARY DATE: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 6/12/24 PRELIMINARY DATE: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 6/12/24 PRELIMINARY DATE: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 6/12/24 PRELIMINARY DATE: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 6/12/24 RETAINED SOIL MIDDLE BLOCK (28M) BOTTOM BLOCK (28B) BOTTOM BLOCK (28B) BOTTOM BLOCK (28HB) TOP BLOCK (28T) HALF CORNER GARDEN TOP (HCGT) PRELIMINARY DATE: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 6/12/24 PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Floodplain Compliance | Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project 1 June 21, 2024 Glenn Hartmann, Principal Planner Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, Suite #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Floodplain Compliance for the Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements – Garfield County, CO Dear Mr. Hartmann, The Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements involves upgrades to the boat ramp located in the Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area (SWA) between Glenwood Springs and Carbondale in Garfield County. This heavily used ramp on the Roaring Fork River is also sometimes referred to as “Ironbridge, Black Bridge, or Westbank”. The project is being designed in cooperation with Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW), who own and maintain the property the ramp and staging area are located on. As part of the planning process, CPW staff are designing a new access road, off County Road 154 (CR 154) and additional staging/parking which will serve the proposed boat ramp. The design and construction of the in-channel components, including ramp, river training structures, tie-off points and other bankside amenities are being funded by Pitkin County Healthy Rivers. A vicinity map of the Project is shown below in Figure 1. Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Floodplain Compliance | Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project 2 The improvements are being made to address concerns associated with vehicle and pedestrian flow patterns and heavy maintenance required to maintain the ramp through runoff each year. The ramp is the busiest ramp on the Roaring Fork, especially as flows decrease in August and September. The ramp is also heavily used by commercial fishing and whitewater guides, with some guides and customers coming from as far away as Vail, the Front Range and out of state. The current configuration can become a choke point during busy periods, sometimes creating conflicts between users and traffic on CR 154. The Project would achieve these goals without increasing post-project 100-yr water surface elevations (WSE) above the existing condition 100-yr Water Surface Elevations (WSE). Hydrographic Survey RiverRestoration performed detailed hydrographic survey of the Roaring Fork riverbed in April 2023 using GPS RTK. Additional Water surface elevations (WSE) were collected throughout the 2023-2024 hydrologic season. The flowrate on the day of our survey was 935 cfs, based on the USGS stream gauge in Glenwood Spring, downstream of the project site. (USGS Gauge #09085000). Water surface elevations (WSE) were gathered throughout the reach on the day of survey and used for the hydraulic model calibration. This hydrographic survey data was used in combination with LiDAR data and previous topographic survey provided by CPW. to develop a base map of the project site. The base map is included in the final design plan set included with this permit application and is shown below in Figure 2. Hydrology Hydrologic input to the HEC-RAS hydraulic models was obtained from FEMA’s Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for unincorporated Garfield County, revised effective date January 1986. The Project is located upstream of the corporate limits of the Town of Glenwood Springs. Per the FIS, the 100- year discharge on the Roaring Fork River is 20,900 cfs in Glenwood Springs. While there are numerous small, ungaged tributaries between the site and the gaging station, 20,900 cfs was used as the design flow to remain conservative. No additional hydrologic investigations were performed as part of this analysis. A copy of the relevant pages of the FIS discussing hydrology is included as Attachment A. Existing Site Conditions The Effective Base Flood Elevation (BFE) profile was obtained from the City of Glenwood Springs, Garfield County FIS report, January 1986. The water surface elevation (WSE) profile in these reports represents the most current FEMA data for the Roaring Fork River within the project reach. The BFE was obtained from the current FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps. FIS cross section station-elevation data were not available, so an existing conditions HEC-RAS 2D model of the project reach was developed using LiDAR data received from the State of Colorado’s Office of Information Technology in 2018 and recent topographic and hydrologic survey data collected by RiverRestoration and CPW in 2023-2024. PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Floodplain Compliance | Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project 3 The 100-year flow rate of 20,900 cfs was used as the upstream boundary condition. The WSE at the downstream end of the model was taken from the FIS report. The effective BFE profile is in the vertical datum National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29); therefore, a vertical shift of +4.33 feet was applied to convert elevations to into the project’s vertical datum, North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). This datum shift was determined using the USACE’s Corpscon v6. The output of the conversion is included as Attachment B. Figure 2. Existing Sam Caudill Boat Ramp on the Roaring Fork River. Proposed Project The proposed boat ramp improvements include: A realigned and widened boat ramp with a concrete driving surface. An access point for hand carried watercraft, demarcated by boulders. A pair of boulder river training structures intended to reduce flow velocities in the vicinity of the ramp and hand carried access point. A widened staging/rigging area downstream of the proposed ramped, aided by a small boulder retaining wall between the river and the proposed access road. A series of boulders, placed along the bank to provide boulder tie off for staging rafts and dories. Existing Access to Sam Caudill boat launch PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Floodplain Compliance | Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project 4 Planting of willow stakes and other appropriate riparian vegetation along disturbed banks. Restoration of construction access to pre-project conditions. A one-way access road that will separate the ramp traffic from CR 154. This work will include several retaining walls (designed and constructed by CPW). Shoulder widening on the south side of CR 154 to provide additional parking (designed and constructed by CPW). See the plan set included with this application for more details on the proposed design. In the in-channel work and boat ramp, the project includes 802 CY of excavation below Ordinary High-Water Mark (OHWM) and 1230 CY excavation for the Project overall. The fill quantities include 766 CY below OHWM and 1,051 CY total. The fill includes 528 CY of boulder fill for river training structures and footers and 523 CY of coarse cobble backfill, concrete, aggregate base for the ramp, and topsoil. A percentage of the boulder and concrete quantities reflected above are subsurface of the existing channel bed for scour and erosion resistance. The project does not narrow the existing river channel as is shown by the hydraulic modeling effort discussed below. For the CPW designed access road, retaining wall. and shoulder work includes 1,045 CY of fill and 309 CY of excavation. All of the access road related earthwork is outside the OHWM, but some is within the 100-yr floodplain. This work will be bid and constructed as part of a separate project. Project team staff coordinated with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) regarding the CWA Section 404 permit and concluded the project would qualify for a Nationwide Permit 36 – Boat Ramps. Please note the proposed ramp is 22 feet wide, 2 feet wider than the maximum width permitted by NWP-36. The project team requested and received a waiver for the additional width. The application number is SPA-2024-00149. Relevant information regarding the USACE is included in Attachment C. The full pre-construction notification (PCN) package (100+ pages) is available upon request. Floodplain Analysis The project site is in a section of the Roaring Fork River that has not had a detailed study performed, meaning that a hydraulic model, such as HEC-RAS was not used for delineating the 100-year floodplain boundary. As such, the 100-year Floodplain is categorized as Zone B (now referred to as Zone A). Also note that a floodway has not been delineated or mapped through the project reach. As such a floodway analysis was not performed. A copy of the current FIRM panel is included as Figure 3. For the both existing and proposed conditions, the project team used the US Army Corps Engineer’s HEC-RAS v6.5 to perform two-dimensional hydraulics analysis. The two-dimensional analysis allows for varied water surface elevations across the river channel/floodplain and provides insight into flow patterns, water velocity, and shear stresses. All of these factors are important in a dynamic river environment such as the Roaring Fork River through the project reach. PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Floodplain Compliance | Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project 5 Figure 3 - FEMA flood hazard map for the project site. Existing Conditions Hydraulic Analysis Since an Effective Hydraulic model is not available, the design team developed an Existing Conditions model of the project reach for comparison to Proposed Conditions. Manning’s roughness and other model parameters were selected from the range provided in the Garfield County’s effective Flood Insurance Study (0802051465B, January 1986) and then adapted based on engineered judgment using the values in Table 1 (from Chow, 1959). Table 1 - Manning’s roughness used in modeling existing and proposed conditions. Description Manning’s n value Riverbed 0.035 Boulders 0.045 Gravel Road 0.03 County Road 0.016 Concrete 0.018 PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Floodplain Compliance | Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project 6 Description Manning’s n value Vegetated Bank 0.055 The incoming 100-year flow rate was set at 20,900 cfs as per the FIS published flow. The downstream boundary conditions for the model were established from the closest BFE’s. Converted to NVAD-88, this downstream water surface elevation is 5907.33. Figure 4 shows the mesh extents and 100-year model run for Existing Conditions. Figure 4 - 2D Flood Model Mesh (5’x5’cells) and 100-year Existing Conditions Velocity Results (ft/s) PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Floodplain Compliance | Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project 7 Proposed Conditions Hydraulic Analysis A Proposed Conditions model was developed by modifying the existing conditions model to represent the channel and floodplain changes under proposed conditions. The proposed grade was inserted into the mesh and re-run for post project conditions. Manning’s values were changed where appropriate. Boundary conditions and other modeling assumptions were kept identical from the Existing Conditions model. Figure 5 shows the results of the proposed conditions 100-year model. Figure 5 - 2D Flood Model Mesh (5’x5’cells) and 100-year Proposed Conditions Velocity Results (ft/s) To demonstrate compliance with Garfield County and federal floodplain development guidelines, 100-year flood elevations calculated from the Proposed Conditions model were compared to the Existing Conditions model. No increases in the 100-year water surface were observed. PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Floodplain Compliance | Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project 8 The water surface profile shown in Figure 6 compares the existing and proposed 100-year water surface elevation down the middle of the river channel. The Existing Conditions 100-year water surface elevation is at or above the Proposed Conditions along the entire project. The max water surface difference is of -0.12 feet where proposed terrain behind the proposed access road is lower than existing ground. The typical water surface difference along the profile is of -0.02. A plan view comparison of water surfaces between Existing and Proposed Conditions is included as Figure 7. Note how Proposed Conditions WSE are at/below Existing Conditions across the entire reach as reflected by the gray (no change) and green (lower WSE) shading in the comparison figure. Figure 6 - 100-year Water Surface Profile Comparison and detail. PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Floodplain Compliance | Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project 9 Figure 7 - Existing to Proposed Conditions 100-year Water Surface Elevation Comparison. Gray is no measurable change in water surface elevation. Green is a decrease in water surface, yellow, orange and red are increases. Conclusion The results of the hydraulic analysis performed demonstrate that the Proposed Conditions are not anticipated to adversely affect adjacent properties or increase the elevation or quantity of flood waters over Existing Conditions. The 2D hydraulic model demonstrates that the 100-year water surface elevation is not anticipated to increase because of the proposed Project. The Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project is expected to improve low and high-flow watercraft river access within the project reach without posing a threat to public safety. Based on the results presented in this report, RiverRestoration has determined that the Project complies with Garfield County floodplain development guidelines. I certify that the attached technical data supports the fact that the proposed Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project will not impact the 100-yr flood elevations on the Roaring Fork River at the published sections in the Flood Insurance Study for Garfield County dated January 3, 1986, and will not impact the 100-year flood elevation, floodway elevations, or floodway widths at the unpublished cross-sections in the vicinity of the project. PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Floodplain Compliance | Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area Boat Ramp Improvements Project 10 Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments regarding this Floodplain Compliance Letter. Sincerely, Quinn Donnelly, PE River Engineer, RiverRestoration.org, LLC quinn.donnelly@riverrestoration.org (970) 947-9568 References 1. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). “Flood Insurance Study.” Garfield County, Colorado Unincorporated Areas, January 1986. 2. Manning’s n Roughness Coefficient for Channels (Chow, 1959) Attachments (1) Attachment A - FIS report, relevant pages (2) Attachment B - USACE CORPSCON v6 Vertical Datum conversion (3) Attachment C – USACE Correspondence about NWP-36 (SPA #2024-00149) FI N A L D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 JUNE 2024 SA M C A U D I L L S W A B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S P R O J E C T Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 20' (FULL SIZE) EX01 OR D I N A R Y H I G H W A T E R L I N E A N D 10 0 Y E A R F L O O D E X T E N S I O N L I M I T S N 20' SCALE: 1" = 20' 0 40' PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Attachment A - FIS report, relevant pages Project Site PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Attachment B - USACE Corpscon v6 Vertical Datum conversion 10 June 2024 INPUT OUTPUT State Plane, NAD83 0502 - Colorado Central, U.S. Feet Vertical - NGVD29 (Vertcon94), U.S. Feet State Plane, NAD83 0502 - Colorado Central, U.S. Feet Vertical - NAVD88, U.S. Feet Sam Caudill SWA Datum Conversion 1604590.5 5900 -1 07 33.67548 0.999957711 0.999677886 Northing/Y: Easting/X: Elevation/Z: Convergence: 2496081.05 Northing/Y: Elevation/Z: Convergence: Scale Factor: Combined Factor: Easting/X:2496081.050 5904.327 -1 07 33.67548 0.999957711 0.999677679 Scale Factor: Combined Factor: Grid Shift (U.S. ft.): X/Easting = 0.0, Y/Northing = 0.0 Sam Caudilll SWA 1604590.500 1/5 1604555.66 5900 -1 07 36.32495 0.999957698 0.999677873 Northing/Y: Easting/X: Elevation/Z: Convergence: 2495750.92 Northing/Y: Elevation/Z: Convergence: Scale Factor: Combined Factor: Easting/X:2495750.920 5904.327 -1 07 36.32495 0.999957698 0.999677667 Scale Factor: Combined Factor: Grid Shift (U.S. ft.): X/Easting = 0.0, Y/Northing = 0.0 Sam Caudilll SWA 1604555.660 2/5 1604555.66 5900 -1 07 36.32495 0.999957698 0.999677873 Northing/Y: Easting/X: Elevation/Z: Convergence: 2495750.92 Northing/Y: Elevation/Z: Convergence: Scale Factor: Combined Factor: Easting/X:2495750.920 5904.327 -1 07 36.32495 0.999957698 0.999677667 Scale Factor: Combined Factor: Grid Shift (U.S. ft.): X/Easting = 0.0, Y/Northing = 0.0 Sam Caudilll SWA 1604555.660 3/5 1604555.66 5900 -1 07 36.32495 0.999957698 0.999677873 Northing/Y: Easting/X: Elevation/Z: Convergence: 2495750.92 Northing/Y: Elevation/Z: Convergence: Scale Factor: Combined Factor: Easting/X:2495750.920 5904.327 -1 07 36.32495 0.999957698 0.999677667 Scale Factor: Combined Factor: Grid Shift (U.S. ft.): X/Easting = 0.0, Y/Northing = 0.0 Sam Caudilll SWA 1604555.660 4/5 Corpscon v6.0.1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Remark: 10 June 2024 INPUT OUTPUT State Plane, NAD83 0502 - Colorado Central, U.S. Feet Vertical - NGVD29 (Vertcon94), U.S. Feet State Plane, NAD83 0502 - Colorado Central, U.S. Feet Vertical - NAVD88, U.S. Feet Sam Caudill SWA Datum Conversion 1604555.66 5900 -1 07 36.32495 0.999957698 0.999677873 Northing/Y: Easting/X: Elevation/Z: Convergence: 2495750.92 Northing/Y: Elevation/Z: Convergence: Scale Factor: Combined Factor: Easting/X:2495750.920 5904.327 -1 07 36.32495 0.999957698 0.999677667 Scale Factor: Combined Factor: Grid Shift (U.S. ft.): X/Easting = 0.0, Y/Northing = 0.0 Sam Caudilll SWA 1604555.660 5/5 Corpscon v6.0.1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Remark: PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 - (970) 947-9568 Attachment C – USACE Correspondence about NWP-36 (SPA #2024-00149) 1 Quinn Donnelly From:Frank, Robert CIV USARMY CESPA (USA) <Robert.W.Frank@usace.army.mil> Sent:Monday, April 22, 2024 11:19 AM To:Quinn Donnelly Cc:Sabrina Kleinman; Sarah Smith Subject:RE: SPA-2024-00149 - Sam Caudhill concept plan w/ quantities Good morning Quinn, I have discussed this with my supervisor, and we will be able to grant a waiver since the proposed project isn’t too over the threshold of the NWP 36. As for the cultural resources, I would not think it would be necessary to conduct a report or survey due to the previous impacts of natural river funcƟons and other disturbances. I did noƟce one officially eligible site that is very close to the area of potenƟal effect so we will likely need to consult with SHPO on this maƩer. It will be very helpful to have a map illustraƟng all impacts of the project in waters of the United States, as well as stagging and access areas. Finally, for the boulder wings impacts and other associated structures, please illustrate how the structures will be Ɵed into the boat ramp so we can issue these impacts under NWP 36. Please reach out if you have any other quesƟons. Best, Robert Frank Regulatory Project Manager, NW Colorado Branch Albuquerque District, US Army Corps of Engineers 400 Rood Avenue, Room 224 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 (970) 243-1199 X 1017 (office) (970) 837-6870 (cell) From: Quinn Donnelly <quinn.donnelly@riverrestoration.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 11:23 AM To: Frank, Robert CIV USARMY CESPA (USA) <Robert.W.Frank@usace.army.mil> Cc: Sabrina Kleinman <skleinman@logansimpson.com>; Sarah Smith <ssmith@logansimpson.com> Subject: [Non-DoD Source] SPA-2024-00149 - Sam Caudhill concept plan w/ quantities Good morning Robert, Thanks for the pre-application meeting and information yesterday. As we discussed, I’ve attached an updated concept plan with all of the materials identified and quantified. Based on the quantity calculations for the boulder wings and tie oƯ points, we are going to be over the 25 cy cutoƯ for NWP-18. These are a little oversized to be conservative on the impact quantities, but I don’t think we’ll be able to get under that threshold. Please let me know what you think on that and if there are other avenues we can take for that component of the project. A couple of things you were going to chat with your boss about or research before our formal PCN submittal. 1) Client is hoping to have a 22’ wide boat ramp to allow for two full lanes. NWP-36 max is 20’, but a waiver can be given. Wanted to see if that was a possibility on this project. 2 2) Cultural resources – wanted to see if a cultural resource inventory and report will be required. The site has been heavily disturbed by river processes and construction and maintenance of the existing boat ramp and adjacent bridges. I’ve attached a google earth pin on the location. Thanks again for all of your help and guidance. Please let Sarah, Sabrina, and myself know if you have any questions or concerns. V/R, Quinn -- Quinn Donnelly, PE www.RiverRestoration.org PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 970-947-9568 (o) PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 (970) 947-9568 Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvement Project Supplemental Information 1 June 24, 2024 Community Development Department Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Floodplain Development Permit Application for the Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvement Project The purpose of this memorandum is to request a Floodplain Development Applications approval from Garfield County for the Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvement Project. This memo intends to provide supplement information required for the Floodplain Development Permit that is not covered under other documents included with the application, such as the plans and floodplain compliance memo. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) is the applicant for the floodplain development and also the land owner. The application preparation performed by RiverRestoration is being funded by Pitkin County Healthy Rivers. D - Floodplain Analysis Section 3-301 Compliance A. Use Restrictions in the Floodplain Overlay The project is a “Recreational and Open Space structures and uses not requiring permanent or temporary structures designed for human habitation.” This type of project is permitted in Floodways and 100-year floodplains so long as there is compliance with all other applicable standards of the Code. B. General Standards (1 & 2 applicable) The Proposed improvements will be constructed with concrete, large boulder, and native cobble. Materials were selected and sized and will be placed to prevent floatation, collapse or lateral movement. These materials will be resistant to flood damage. C. Specific Standards – None applicable to this project. D. Floodway A “No-rise” Evaluation and Certification Letter is included in this submittal as part of this application. It meets all requirements listed in 3-301 D. E. Standards for Areas of Shallow Flooding Hydraulic modeling and evaluation of flow rates ranging from low-flow conditions up to the 100-yr flood flow have been performed. The results of this evaluation indicate that the proposed Project would not result in an increase in areas of shallow flooding, or in drainage that would adversely impact adjacent properties. F. Properties Removed from the Floodplain by Fill – Not applicable to this project. PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 (970) 947-9568 Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvement Project Supplemental Information 2 G. Alteration of a Water Course The included “No-rise” Evaluation and Certification Letter is included in the application addressing all items listed in this section. The project was designed and will be sealed by a qualified professional engineer. H. Standards for Critical Facilities – Not applicable to this project. Section 4-203 (O) Compliance The project is located within a Special Flood Hazard Area and a Floodplain Analysis was completed. See the attached Floodplain Compliance Memo included with the application. Also included in the application is a site plan with all of the items listed in Section 4-203 (O). The project was designed by a qualified and Colorado licensed professional engineer. The floodplain compliance memo concludes that the proposed project will not create a rise in water surface elevations associated with the 100-year floodplain of the Roaring Fork River or change the extents of the 100-year floodplain boundary. E – Details and plans of the Proposed Improvements A detailed design and construction plans were developed for the project for the purposes of planning, permitting, bid, and construction. The plans include existing conditions, care of water during construction, permanent improvements, and landscape restoration. See the plan set included in this application for more information. F – Zero Rise Determination The hydraulic analysis of the proposed project demonstrated that the improvements do not impact flood conveyance through the project reach (i.e. zero rise). The floodplain compliance memo is included in this application for more information. G – Construction Practices The construction plans submitted as part of this application include plans for staging/stockpiling areas, erosion and sediment control, care of water, and revegetation/restoration plans. Additional information related to the construction practices is itemized below. Construction Schedule: Bid advertisements are expected to be issued in early July 2024, mobilization in early-mid August, and in- river work between August 15 and October 1, 2024. The upland work associated with the CPW designed access road and County Road 154 improvements will be completed in fall and early winter 2024. The project is expected to be completed by the end of February 2024. Erosion and Sediment Control: Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) BMPs will be implemented to minimize impacts to the Roaring Fork River and its riparian area. These BMPs include access ramps, silt fence, oil booms, turbidity PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 (970) 947-9568 Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvement Project Supplemental Information 3 curtains, and dewatering filters. See the CW Sheets in the attached plan set for more details on the ESC plan. Estimated Cost: The total estimated construction cost for the project, including soft costs and contingency is $850,000. A detailed engineer’s cost opinion is available upon request. Stormwater Management Plan: The site is less than 1 acre, so a Stormwater Construction Permit issued by CDPHE is not required. The contractor will be required to submit for and receive a construction dewatering permit through CDPHE. Reclamation, Revegetation and Soil Plan: Willow staking along disturbed banks will be done upon completion of proposed grading. The harvesting and installation of the willow stakes are described in the plans and specifications. Construction access will be restored to pre-project conditions to the satisfaction of CPW (owner). Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures: From the project specifications: a. A Spill Cleanup Plan is wholly the responsibility of the CONTRACTOR and shall be posted and available at all times on site for all work areas prior to any construction activities and shall include coordination with local emergency response agencies. CONTRACTOR shall submit Spill Cleanup Plan to ENGINEER for review 5 days prior to the start of construction. b. A release of any chemical, oil, petroleum product, sewage, etc., which may enter waters of the State of Colorado (which include surface water, ground water and dry gullies or storm sewers leading to surface water) shall be reported to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment immediately (25-8-601 CRS) and form http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hm/spillselfreportform.pdf and/or Toll-Free 24-hour Environmental Emergency Spill Reporting Line 1-877-518-5608 may be used. Written notification to the Department shall follow within five (5) days (5 CCR 1002-61, Section 61.8(5)(d)). Releases of petroleum products and certain hazardous substances listed under the Federal Clean Water Act (40 CFR Part 116) must be reported to the National Response Center as well as to Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment as required under the Clean Water Act and the Oil Pollution Act. Furthermore, contact must be made immediately, reporting any spill incident, with CPW, the OWNER and ENGINEER. c. Any incident spills that do not threaten water resources shall be reported to: Colorado Emergency Planning Committee (CEPC)(members include Colorado Department of Health and Environment - Hazardous Waste Division, Colorado Department of Public Safety - Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, and Colorado Department of Public Safety - Colorado State Patrol), at Toll-Free 24-hour Colorado Environmental Release and Incident Reporting Line 1-877-518-5608, https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wq-environmental-spills. Furthermore, contact must be made immediately, reporting any spill incident, with the Town New Castle Public Works Department, the OWNER and ENGINEER. The CONTRACTOR shall submit within 14 calendar days of knowledge of the release a written description of: the release (including the type PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 (970) 947-9568 Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvement Project Supplemental Information 4 and estimate of the amount of material released), the date that such release occurred, the circumstances leading to the release, the measures taken and/or planned to be taken to clean up the release, and steps to be taken to minimize the chance of future occurrences to the Executive Secretary H – Compliance with review criteria in Section 4-109 1. The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage; The project was designed to remain stable during high water/erosive flow events, with the use of large boulder, concrete, and coarse alluvium where appropriate. 2. The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner; The project was designed to remain stable during high water/erosive flow events, with the use of large boulder, concrete, and coarse alluvium where appropriate. 3. The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury of others; With its location adjacent to the water’s edge. There is limited risk that materials will be swept onto other lands and cause injury to others. Boulders are sized/placed to remain stable. Alluvium that did transport off the site would be of a similar size and to the alluvium that is transported in the Roaring Fork annually. 4. The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development; Project will be constructed within the Sam Caudill SWA, a site previously designated for river access. It is not anticipated to impact existing and future development. The proposed addition parking along County Road 154 will provide some relief to existing congestion during busy times at the ramp. 5. The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles; The boat ramp and associated facilities were designed to provide access to the river at all flows. Emergency vehicles could use the ramp as a launch point for upstream/downstream response. 6. The costs of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including maintenance and repair of streets and bridges, and public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems; CPW will be responsible for repair of the project if damage occurs during a flood event. No services would be required during a flood event. 7. The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters and the effects of wave action, if applicable, expected at the site; The project was designed hydraulically to handle the expected impacts of floodwater and wave action. These include the use of durable materials such as boulder and concrete and the placement of river training structures to limit velocities and sediment transport capacity in critical areas. 8. The necessity to the facility of a waterfront location, where applicable; By its nature, a boat needs to be adjacent to the river to provide access to the water. PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 (970) 947-9568 Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Improvement Project Supplemental Information 5 9. The availability of alternative locations, not subject to flooding or erosion damage, for the proposed use By its nature, a boat needs to be adjacent to the river to provide access to the water. 10. The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Plan for that area. N/A I – Additional Reports, Studies, and Permits A geotechnical report and an aquatic resource delineation report were produced in support of the project. These are included in the digital copy and are available in hard copy upon request. J - Section 7-203 (Protection of Waterbodies) Compliance A. Minimum Setback. Proposed project needs to be placed in the setback to provide access to the river for recreational use. B. Structures Permitted In Setback. Proposed project needs to be placed in the setback to provide access to the river for recreational use. C. Structures and Activity Prohibited in Setback. Unless otherwise permitted or approved, the following activities and development shall be prohibited in the 35 foot setback: 1. Project does remove riparian trees and thus will require a waiver. Proposed improvements do include a revegetation plan. See plans for more information. 2. N/A. D. Compliance with State and Federal Laws. Project has applied for and is anticipating a USACE verification for the use of NWP-36 for compliance with the Clean Water Act, Section 401/404. Please contact me at the email address or phone number below with any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Quinn Donnelly, P.E. Project Manager, RiverRestoration.org, LLC quinn.donnelly@riverrestoration.org (970) 947-9568 Sam Cauditt SWA- Boat Ramp lmprovement Project A5 - Property Owners 2r85363000{}5 I 2185363oo0t2 AccoEnf R0333/? Ovmer COLOR,T,DC DEPAR-|il31'1T OF l',rAtUiAL RESCURCES FOE DIV151CI.1 O' PARKS AIJD W|LDLIFE Ai"JD FAF$ AI.iD !YI:-DLiFE Fhysicol Addres Nc: cvsijcble L,:! : gt JU' JtXil r!-J D : il r lloiling Address I 3 l,iiiE?1,1 il. !-i::: l:\Viq. CO BO2CG lsnd Acres 1 -i{1i??F7 2024 Unfi levy 73.2?60 ?t&s36300r1o5 .it. 73?501)OO',l 26 231501?tooo5 a$I5aooo5t ? t65354a,400I tla53540do{t? ?rt935ito{so3 + I r 853 tdooo?g if9sor ?'r o00.} t3tso?103m9 2ta$35{}3020 {) #.lr lrjjr f:jiii$arosora Garficld Coung : laa i_r+^-^a ^-^ ,,-.;+. a .irD 9 .{+E' ^ ,+i^n S,ollck pc'cei cn jrrsc, io ouiie. 5ec rcn: tr:;-tl *3J ,1 Excel ; i PDF Frint icopT Resulls Forcd 218S3S4lXtl7 2t E;3i40332i ,I 8S$-!CCCgP : 5eclmh Owner 'ilAi\SPO i:Al CN A!iicatY GAFFI:.D COUNTY soaiS 3: cou\* coit[1i!sioNEFs Plry5i,col Addr6s 5,lo'evc;oble sselrGi 4ig; t:4 cors;Y Ec s59i\ GS RAILiOED Distance: 2c0 L,eyen h4essule Bo:emrp - @c;mercfounr,rLand! x ftut*-o:-r:-lsts x fte,0stnffRepor: x GlqPublir.net-Garfieidi x OGarfieidCountydlerk x + + ': G fi !i maps.Earfield-county,com/landexpiorer/ {\antoCe:k-U:erP,o.. (f Urulr -Quinr9cnne,.. fr imcoriec @Ankvlosingsrord.,,lr,., fih'laii -qcornelly@n,, @Repl cor H Fireisxtisi [[Flaybcarcgane:c,,.D *J,*ri trX Bufier PEeoa oeGsfield County Colorodo lond ExplorerI Elsnd rPSrl 218536313{n2 E re9st S tc B Fl6 Sam Cauditt SWA - Boat Ramp ln;rrol'ement Project A5 - Property O',vners Owner li'r"iS Oi, OF lAq{S Alll f{rLir:ii! f,i,?t(j A.i.]C',,li:i-l -iFE :O[tl,,1is! C " Physicol Addre$ l.1c^ o'r'ciicbl- ;'_=1i!1l3cD 5PHil'JL:5 6r 6irl Moilins Addres 6f oO ?ROAll"lAY DEI'itER, ,:C E02i 5 unl Lond Acres I,5i59?!?! 2022t Mill l-evy 73.2Fcl + 239i,(}121 0005 o30'18 !--z:!l@rrrrfu 214535/rO{OO2 3 ir*ror troool Coun4, - (c;.Re:ui:sur,t/LEn6i x $Lttt*.C:-':.f:ta x fui.gst-affFepcn x eldlb;c..Ei-Sadele x @Garferoas6-.:ale:k x + +g6lSrnaps.Earfleld-county.com/iandexplc,er' )i trX * rLt"' ' l5r i.i^--- ^... , 'F,:: -, .-;.-r.^1'^- ^^ -1-- -^ .- ij5' :r8535:C)lt: 2 1 3S3S!14)0 i Resu lls cTl r ] e*.er I aer I Print i r 5+c r: lr utsran::::-J Kl?(:A'rr riiK-Ai 1 i = c'ch: Physi.ol Addr€s r {3 irv-:F irDc: 3i ir!. G3 ;ci::-'if Lcr cie Bcserncr: Brfis I 9cgo@ oeGorfield County Colorodo lond Explorer @ Pll{ 2t85363tr014 Brsr Stc Eln6 gsrd A5 - Sam Caudill SWA - Property Owner List Updated List July 23,2024 MailinEAddress 108 EIGHTH STREET, SUITE 101 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. CO 81601 PO BOX 821 VA|L. CO 81658 1340 MAIN STREET CARBONDALE, CO 81623 160 RIVER RIDGE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRtNGS. CO 81601 192 RIVER RIDGE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 224 RIVER RIDGE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRtNGS. CO 81601 460O COUNTY ROAD 154 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. CO 81601-9319 4602 COUNW ROAD 154 GLENWOOD SPRtNGS, CO 81601-9319 6060 BROADWAY DENVER, CO 80216 4424 COUNry ROAD 154 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. CO 81601 1313 SHERMAN STREET DENVER, CO 80203 4412 Count Rd 154, Gtenwood Springs, co 81601 6800 HIGHWAY 82, SUITE 1 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. CO 81601 4414 County Rd 154, Gtenwood Springs, co 81601 6800 HIGHWAY 82, SUITE 1 GLENWOOD SPRtNGS. CO 81601 4416 County Rd 154, Gtenwood Springs, co 81601 6800 HIGHWAY 82, SUITE 1 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 6800 HIGHWAY 82, SUITE 1 GLENWOOD SPRtNGS, CO 81601 PO BOX696 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 128 RIVER RIDGE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Account Num R060074 R060093 R060105 R081019 R081020 R081021 R005377 R005376 R083369 R083370 R083372 R084283 R084284 R084285 R084286 R084287 R084288 R084290 R100057 R081018 Owner GARFIELD COUNIY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THREE GS LLC ROARING FORK TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY DOUGLAS. DAVID MICHAEL & JUDYANN HAJENGA, STANLEY R & COE, ANNE M ARTURO KIRKHAM, ANALEE SUZUKI,,JAMES D DIVISION OF PARKS AND WILDLIFE PARKS AND WILDLIFE COM14ISSION OCHOA- PALOMA & CRUZ. OMAR DE LA coLoRADo DEPARTI4ENT oF NATURAL RESoURCES FOB DIVISION 0F PARKS AND WILDLIFE AND PARKS AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION Kentz, Gib A & Hesper E BLACK RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS OWNERS ASSN M Justin & Kara BLACK RIDGE CONDOMINIUI.4S OWNERS ASSN Garneau, Bryan & Atexa BLACK RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS OWNERS ASSN BLACK RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS OWNERS ASSN BRYAN P & AMANDAJO JOYCE, GREGORY M & AMY A Physical, Address Not avaiIabLe GLENWOOD SPRINGS 4].85 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS RAILROAD R.O.W. GLENWOOD SPRINGS 160 RIVER RIDGE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS 192 RIVER RIDGE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS 224 RIVER RIDGE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS 460O 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 4602 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 4363 154 Countv Rd, Gtenwood Springs, CO 4424 154 COUNry RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 4363 154 Countv Rd. GLenwood Sorinss. CO 4412 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 4412 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 4412 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 4412 154COIJNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 4412 154 COUNW RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 4412 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 4412 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS Not avaitable GLENWoOD SPRINGS 128 RIVER RIDGE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS Not avaitabte nutl Not avaitabte nut[ Parcel 218535400017 218535400025 218535400059 218535404001 218535404002 218535404003 218536300011 218536300012 218536300014 218536300015 218536313002 218536314001 218536314002 218536314003 218536314004 218536314005 218536314006 218536314008 239501200126 239501210003 ROW ROW updated .luly 23, 2024 May 7, 2024 U.S Army Corps of Engineers Albuquerque District 400 Rood Avenue, Room 224 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 Subject: SPA-2024-00149, Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp CC: Robert Frank, Regulatory Project Manager, NW Colorado Branch Dear Regulatory Engineer: On behalf of Pitkin County, Logan Simpson is submitting this request to your office for consideration of approval of a Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 36 – Boat Ramps determination for proposed development of the Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project located in Garfield County, Colorado. We are submitting the following information to support your office’s consideration of approving an NWP 36 determination for the Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp project: 1.Nationwide Permit Pre-Construction Notification with Supplementary Information (Attachment A) 2.Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project Supplementary Ordinary High Water Mark Summary Report, May 2024 (Attachment B) 3. 60% plan drawings for the Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project (Attachment C) As presented in the attached project information, Pitkin County would minimize impacts to Waters of the US within the project area. No other impacts to aquatic features are anticipated as no wetland features were identified or delineated within the project area. Please let us know if any further information is required to support this request or if you have any questions that we may address. Sincerely, Sarah J. Smith Associate Ecologist ssmith@logansimpson.com Attachments: Attachment A – Nationwide Permit Pre-Construction Notification Supplementary Information Attachment B – Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project Supplementary Ordinary High Water Mark Summary Report Attachment C – 60% Plan Set 213 Linden Street, Suite 300 Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Phone: 970.449.4100 Fax: 480.966.3232 www.logansimpson.com Attachment A – Nationwide Permit Pre-Construction Notification Supplementary Information Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area West Bank Boat Ramp Improvements Corps File No. SPA-2024-00149 Supplemental Information for Preconstruction Notification ENG 6082 Form Box 19. Description of the Proposed Nationwide Permit Activity Project Description The Project includes realignment and resurfacing of an existing boat ramp to improve traffic flow and pedestrian/vehicle conflicts, installation of two boulder training structures and several boulder tie off points to improve eddy access and boat rigging, and enhancement of riparian restoration in areas within and adjacent to the area of disturbance. Purpose and Need The existing boat ramp is composed of rock, gravel, and soil. Natural erosion and heavy use over time has created ruts and ledges, making entry of trailered rafts and boats down the ramp to the river difficult for recreational boaters and local fishing guides. There are also conflicts between vehicles with trailers and river users with hand carried watercrafts. Constricted access to the one lane ramp causes traffic hazards on adjacent County Road 154. Eddy access to the ramp at higher flows is marginal, resulting in boats taking out at the ramp missing the eddy occasionally and floating downstream. Construction The project, which is focused on the river right bank of the project reach, will be constructed with large construction equipment, primarily excavator and front-end loaders. Temporary cofferdams may be used for work isolation during pouring of the concrete ramp and footer placement at the toe of the boat ramp and boat rigging area. These cofferdams will not be river spanning and will minimize flow restrictions such that a temporary change in flows does not create adverse effects to the aquatic system. BMPs will be implemented and maintained in effective operating condition throughout construction. All exposed soil and other fills, as well as any work below the OHWM, will be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. All disturbed areas, including the riparian and upland buffer zones, will be revegetated with native species to prevent erosion. Box 20. Description of Proposed Mitigation Measures Describe any mitigation measures being implemented in the work and project to reduce disturbance or discharge into the proposed waters. Overall, work within the Waters throughout the project area would be limited to the minimum area necessary to complete construction objectives. All disturbed areas will be stabilized appropriately, including with site appropriate vegetation. Box 22. Quantity of Wetlands, Streams, or Other Types of Waters Directly Affected by Proposed Nationwide Permit Activity Describe the area to be filled at each location. Identify surface areas, or parts thereof, to be filled. Include the means by which discharge is to be done (backhoe, dragline, etc.). If dredged material is to be discharged on an upland site, identify the site and the steps to be taken to prevent runoff from the dredged material back into a waterbody. If more space is needed, attach an extra sheet of paper 60% Total Qty Unit Qty Below OHWM Unit Channel and Bank Improvements General Excavation and Stockpile (all others) 24 CY 24 CY General Excavation (river training structure 1) 134 CY 133 CY General Excavation (river training structure 2) 24 CY 24 CY General Excavation (Boulder Wall @ Put In) 109 CY 96 CY Alluvial Backfill (river training structure 1) 29 CY 27 CY Alluvial Backfill (river training structure 2) 9 CY 9 CY Alluvial Backfill (Boulder Wall @ Put In) 37 CY 34 CY Haul Off and Dispose Alluvial Material 193 CY 183 TON Furnish and Install Boulder (bank terrace) 45 TON 45 TON Furnish and Install Boulder (river training structure 1) 335 TON 320 TON Furnish and Install Boulder (river training structure 2) 92 TON 92 TON Furnish and Install Boulder (Boulder Wall @ @ Put In) 111 TON 84 TON Furnish and Install Boulder (anchor boulders) 30 TON 30 EA Anchor Bolts 7 EA 0 SY 8-oz non-woven filter fabric 238 SY 218 SY Boat Ramp and Access Areas Clear and grub 694 SY 77 EA Removal of Tree 3 EA 0 CY General Excavation and Stockpile 154 CY 0 CY Over Ex for Boat Ramp 180 CY 73 CY General Backfill 27 0 CY Haul Off and Dispose Alluvial Material 307 CY 72 CY Aggregate Base (Class 6) 62 CY 31 CY Aggregate Base (Class 2) 62 CY 31 CY Concrete Boatramp 93 CY 46.5 CY Concrete Thickened Edges 14 CY 7 CY Concrete Center Cutoff Wall 2 CY 1 SY 8-oz non-woven filter fabric 369 SY 184.5 TON Furnish and Install Boulder 151 TON 151 TON Site Restoration and Landscape Furnish and Install Topsoil 55 CY 0 SY Riparian Seed Mix 324.89 SY 0 SY Erosion Control Blanket 325 SY 0 EA Willow Stakes 50 EA 0 EA Containerized Tree 7 EA 0 LS Temporary Irrigation 1 LS Summary 60% Total Qty Unit Below OHWM Unit Total Cut 625 CY 350 CY Total Fill 762 CY 207 CY with boulders 372 CY 20 CY without boulders 390 CY 187 CY Net -137 CY 143 CY Box 26. List the name(s) of any species listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act that might be affected by the proposed NWP activity or utilize the designated critical habitat that might be affected by the proposed NOW activity. Sam Caudill SWA Wildlife Survey Results Summary, April 3, 2024 Summary The Project area is within a highly disturbed and developed riparian corridor along the Roaring Fork River in Glenwood Canyon, Colorado (Figure 1). A moderate amount of human waste (litter) is present throughout the Project area. The Roaring Fork River in this area is spanned by two bridges: one concrete and one metal (Figure 1). Both provide nesting habitat (birds and wasps). Photographs of the survey results are available upon request. The following observations were noted during the 2.5-hour survey (Figure 1): • One inactive squirrel nest in small Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii) tree was observed. • One active rock dove (Columba livia) nest in metal bridge over the Roaring Fork River was observed. Two adults flew from the nest when disturbed. • One inactive cliff swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota) nest colony is present under the concrete bridge over the Roaring Fork River. Cliff swallows were not present because they have not yet returned from migration. • One small burrow was observed on the river bench. • Two scat piles were observed on the river bench. It was not possible to determine whether they were from wild predators (fox, coyote) or domestic dogs. • One dried raccoon (Procyon lotor) skull was observed. • No sign (scat or tracks) of big game or other wildlife species was observed. • One historic (falling apart) paper wasp (Polistinae sp.) nest was observed on the metal bridge. • Small bird scat (whitewash) was present on the rocks at the river’s edge. • Incidental observations were made of the following species within and near the Project site: o Five rock doves flying over the area; two individuals also flew from the nest on the bridge o Two American crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos) were observed flying and calling. o One black-billed magpie (Pica hudsonia) was observed flying over the river. o One black-capped chickadee (Pica hudsonia) was documented through audio identification. Figure 1. Wildlife survey results at Sam Caudill SWA. Based on results from USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) and Colorado’s Conservation Data Explorer (CODEX), threatened, endangered, and sensitive species with potential to occur in the project area are summarized in Table 1. Table 1. Threatened, endangered, and sensitive species with potential to occur within the Project area. Species Status General Habitat Comments Federally Listed and Candidate Species Mammal Species Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) Threatened Moist boreal forests with cold, snowy winters and a high-density snowshoe hare prey base (USFWS 2024b). Suitable habitat and prey base are not present in the Project area. The likelihood of this species being present in the Project area is low. Gray wolf (Canis lupus) EXPN Lone, dispersing gray wolves may be present throughout the State of Colorado. The species has recently been reintroduced in northwestern Colorado. The gray wolf is a habitat generalist and requires large prey species (ungulates) (USFWS 2024c). A suitable prey base for the gray wolf is not present near the Project area. The likelihood of this species being present in the Project area is low. Bird Species Mexican spotted owl (Strix occidentalis lucida) Threatened Mexican spotted owls inhabit mature forests that possess complex structural components (uneven aged stands, high canopy closure, multi-storied levels, high tree density). Canyons with riparian or conifer communities are also important components (USFWS 2024d). Suitable nesting habitat is not present in the Project area. The species is not documented to nest in Garfield County (Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership 2016). The likelihood of this subspecies being present in the Project area is low. Yellow -billed cuckoo (Western Distinct Population Segment) (Coccyzus americanus) Threatened Yellow -billed cuckoos use wooded habitat with dense cover and water nearby, including woodlands with low, scrubby, vegetation, and dense thickets along streams and marshes (USFWS 2024e). Suitable habitat is potentially present near the Project area. The species is not documented to nest in Garfield County (Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership 2016). The likelihood of this species being present in the Project area is low. Fish Species Species Status General Habitat Comments Bonytail (Gila elegans) Endangered The bonytail is documented to occur in Garfield County. This species only needs to be considered if the following condition applies: Water depletions in the upper Colorado River Basin adversely affect this species (USFWS 2024f). The Project would not remove water from the Upper Colorado River Basin. Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus lucius) Endangered The Colorado pikeminnow is documented to occur in Garfield County. This species only needs to be considered if the following condition applies: Water depletions in the upper Colorado River Basin adversely affect this species (USFWS 2024g). The Project would not remove water from the Upper Colorado River Basin. Humpback chub (Gila cypha) Threatened The humpback chub is not documented to occur in Garfield County. This species only needs to be considered if the following condition applies: Water depletions in the upper Colorado River Basin adversely affect this species (USFWS 2024h). The Project would not remove water from the Upper Colorado River Basin. Razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus) Endangered The razorback sucker is documented to occur in Garfield County. This species only needs to be considered if the following condition applies: Water depletions in the upper Colorado River Basin adversely affect this species (USFWS 2024i). The Project would not remove water from the Upper Colorado River Basin. Invertebrate Species Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) Candidate Suitable habitat for the monarch butterfly includes milkweed (Asclepias spp.). No milkweed populations were documented in the Project area. The species is documented to occur inn Garfield County (USFWS 2023j). The likelihood of this species being present in the Project area is low. Species Status General Habitat Comments Silverspot butterfly (Speyeria nokomis nokomis) Threatened Suitable habitat for the silverspot butterfly includes streamsides. Caterpillars require a host plant called the northern bog violet (Viola nephrophylla) (Butterflies and Moths of North America 2023). No populations of the northern bog violet were documented in the Project area. The species is documented to occur in Garfield County (USFWS 2023k). The likelihood of this species being present in the Project area is low. Plant Species Ute ladies’-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis) Threatened, PGCN Tier 1 Suitable habitat for the Ute ladies’-tresses includes perennial stream terraces such as in the Project area. No populations of the Ute ladies’-tresses were documented in the Project area. The species is documented to occur in Garfield County (USFWS 2024l). The species has been documented within 1.0 mile of the Project area (CNHP 2024). The likelihood of this species being present in the Project area is low and it was not observed during site assessments. Species of Greatest Conservation Need, Other Species of Concern Mammal Species Big free-tailed bat (Nyctinomops macrotis) SGCN Tier 2 Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the overall range for this species (CNHP 2024). Black bear (Ursus americanus) Big Game Species Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the following CPW- designated habitats for black bear: human conflict area and fall concentration area (CNHP 2024). Dwarf shrew (Sorex nanus) SGCN Tier 2 Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the overall range for this species (CNHP 2024). Species Status General Habitat Comments Elk (Cervus canadensis) Big Game Species Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the following CPW- designated habitats for elk: overall range, highway crossing, severe winter range, and winter concentration area. Hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) SGCN Tier 2 Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the overall range for this species (CNHP 2024). Fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes) SGCN Tier 1 Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the overall range for this species (CNHP 2024). Little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus) SGCN Tier 1 Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the overall range for this species (CNHP 2024). Mountain lion (Puma concolor) Big Game Species Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the overall range for this species (CNHP 2024). Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) Big Game Species Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the following CPW- designated habitats for mule deer: highway crossing, resident population area, severe winter range, and winter concentration area. Snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus) SGCN Tier 2 Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the overall range for this species (CNHP 2024). Southern red-backed vole SGCN Tier 2 Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the overall range for this species (CNHP 2024). Species Status General Habitat Comments (Myodes gapperi/ Clethrionomys gapperi) White-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus townsendii) SGCN Tier 2 Suitable habitat for this species is not present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the overall range for this species (CNHP 2024). Bird Species Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) BGEPA, SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable foraging habitat is present in the Project area (Roaring Fork River). Winter foraging habitat is present within the Project area (CNHP 2024). Band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). Black rosy-finch (Leucosticte atrata) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the winter range for this species (CNHP 2024). Brewer’s sparrow (Spizella breweri) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). Brown-capped rosy- finch (Leucosticte australis) SGCN Tier 1, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the overall range for this species (CNHP 2024). Canada goose (Branta canadensis) Game species Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area (Roaring Fork River). The Project area is within a CPW- designated production area for this species (CNHP 2024). Species Status General Habitat Comments Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) BGEPA, SGCN Tier 1, MBTA Suitable foraging habitat is present in the Project area. Gray vireo (Vireo vicinior) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. Juniper titmouse (Baeolophus ridgwayi) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the CPW-designated breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). Lazuli bunting (Passerina amoena) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the CPW-designated breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). Lewis’s woodpecker (Melanerpes lewis) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the CPW-designated breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). Northern harrier (Circus hudsonius) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is not present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the CPW-designated breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). Olive-sided flycatcher (Contopus cooperi) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the CPW-designated breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). Purple martin (Progne subis) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the CPW-designated breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). Species Status General Habitat Comments Rufous hummingbird (Selasphorus rufus) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the CPW-designated migration range for this species (CNHP 2024). Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the CPW-designated breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). Veery (Catharus fuscescens) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the CPW-designated breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). Virginia’s warbler (Vermivora virginiae) SGCN Tier 2, MBTA Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The Project area and a 1.0-mile buffer around it are within the CPW-designated breeding range for this species (CNHP 2024). Fish Species Bluehead sucker (Catostomus discobolus) SGCN Tier 1 Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The species is documented within 1.0 mile of the Project area (CNHP 2024). Colorado River Cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkia) SGCN Tier 1 Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The species is documented within 1.0 mile of the Project area (CNHP 2024). Flannelmouth sucker (Catostomus latipinnis) SGCN Tier 1 Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. The species is documented within 1.0 mile of the Project area (CNHP 2024). Plant Species Species Status General Habitat Comments Huber's Pepperweed (Lepidium huberi) PGCN Tier 1 Suitable habitat for this species is present in the Project area. Modeled habitat for this species is documented within 1.0 mile of the Project area. Table Acronyms: BGEPA = Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, EXPN = Experimental Population, Non-essential, MBTA = Migratory Bird Treaty Act, SGCN = Species of Greatest Conservation Need, PGCN = Plant of Greatest Conservation Need Additional Comments • No designated critical habitats are within the Project area (USFWS 2024a). • Special Habitats within one mile of the Project Area (CNHP 2024): o Mule deer severe winter range o Mule deer winter concentration area o Roaring Fork at Carbondale Potential Conservation Area (PCA) (Important Plant Area). B2: Very high biodiversity significance o Roaring Fork River at Red Canyon PCA, B4: Moderate biodiversity significance Note that the field survey was conducted in early April. For this reason, no evidence of returned migrants (e.g., warblers, sparrows, swallows) was noted within or from the Project area. References Butterflies and Moths of North America. 2024. Species Profile for Silverspot Butterfly. Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership. 2016. The Second Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas. 727pp. Colorado Natural Heritage Program. (CNHP). 2023. Colorado Rare Plant Guide. Available online at: https://cnhp.colostate.edu/rareplant.Rare Plant Details (colostate.edu). Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 2024. Colorado’s Conservation Data Explorer (CODEX). Project Review Report. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). 2015. Colorado State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP). Chapter 2: Species of Greatest Conservation Need. Available online at: https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/WildlifeSpecies/SWAP/CO_SWAP_Chapter2.pdf. NatureServe Explorer. 2024. Various Species Profiles. Available online at: NatureServe Explorer. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2024a. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2024b through 2024l. Environmental Conservation Online Service (ECOS). Species Profiles for federally listed and candidate species with potential to occur in or near the Project area. Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 2024. Colorado 213 Linden Street, Suite 300 Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Phone: 970.449.4100 Fax: 480.966.3232 www.logansimpson.com Attachment B – Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project Supplementary Ordinary High Water Mark Summary Report Jurisdictional Delineation Report For Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project Garfield County, Colorado USACE File Number: SPA-2024-00149 May 2024 Jurisdictional Delineation Report Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project USACE File Number: SPA-2024-00149 Prepared by: Logan Simpson 213 Linden Street, Suite 300 Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Submitted to: RiverRestorationOrg May 2024 Jurisdictional Delineation Report Including Wetlands for Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project May 2024 i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Location ................................................................................................................................................. 4 2. Purpose .................................................................................................................................................. 4 3. Location Description ............................................................................................................................. 4 4. Methods ............................................................................................................................................... 10 5. Results ................................................................................................................................................. 11 6. Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 12 7. References ........................................................................................................................................... 12 8. Signature .............................................................................................................................................. 13 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Summary of Open Water and Other Waters of the United States ........................................... 11 Table 2. Summary of Waters Type and Amount of Proposed Waters of the United States ................. 12 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. State Location Map .................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2. Topographic map ....................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 3. 100-Year Floodplain map ........................................................................................................... 8 Figure 4. Aerial Overview map .................................................................................................................. 9 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A. Vegetation Community Map (Figure 5) and Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineation (Figure 6) APPENDIX B. JD Ground Photographs (April 23, 2024) APPENDIX C. JD Physical Characteristics and Other Information Table APPENDIX D. NRCS Custom Soil Resource Report APPENDIX E. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Institute Wetland Map May 2024 4 Jurisdictional Delineation Report for Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp 1.Location The approximately 0.35 miles of survey area for this Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineation (PJD) is located along Old Highway 82, Garfield County, Colorado (Figures 1 and 2). The cadastral locations of the survey area are within Sections 35 and 36, Township 6 South, Range 89 West (6th Principal Meridian). The center coordinates of the project are 39°28’46.26” latitude, -107°17’11.33” (NAD 83, degrees, minutes, seconds). 2.Purpose The project intends to construct a new boat ramp and parking area along the Roaring Fork River, with access starting at Sam Caudill State Wildlife Area (SWA). The Project includes realignment and resurfacing of an existing boat ramp to improve traffic flow and pedestrian/vehicle conflicts, installation of two boulder training structures and several boulder tie-off points to improve eddy access and boat rigging, and enhancement of riparian restoration in areas within and adjacent to the area of disturbance. The existing boat ramp is composed of rock, gravel, and soil. Natural erosion and heavy use over time has created ruts and ledges, making backing trailered rafts and boats down the ramp to the river difficult for recreational boaters and local fishing guides. There are also conflicts between vehicles with trailers and river users with hand carrier watercraft. Constricted access to the one lane ramp causes traffic hazards on adjacent County Road 154. Eddy access to the ramp at higher flows is marginal, resulting in boats taking out at the ramp missing the eddy occasionally and floating downstream. The project, which is focused on the river right bank of the project reach, will be constructed with large construction equipment, primarily excavator and front-end loaders. Temporary cofferdams may be used for work isolation during pouring of the concrete ramp and footer placement at the toe of the boat ramp and boat rigging area. These cofferdams will not be river spanning and will minimize flow restrictions such that a temporary change in flows does not create adverse effects to the aquatic system. BMPs will be implemented and maintained in effective operating condition throughout construction. All exposed soil and other fills, as well as any work below the OHWM, will be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. All disturbed areas, including the riparian and upland buffer zones, will be revegetated with native species to prevent erosion. The owner of the project is Pitkin County, in coordination with Colorado Parks and Wildlife. The total survey area is approximately 4.49 acres. This report documents the PJD conducted on April 3rd and 23rd, 2024, to evaluate the presence/absence of potential jurisdictional waters of the United States (including wetlands) within the limits of the survey area. Zero (0) potential wetlands were observed within the survey area during the survey and one (1) upper perennial stream (Roaring Fork River) was evaluated. 3. Location Description Development The survey area occurs along Old Highway 82, which is a two-lane paved road that parallels the Roaring Fork River (Figure 2). Recreation activities such as boat launch, boat take-out, and rafting occur within the survey area. Land use bordering the survey area is primarily residential properties. May 2024 5 Jurisdictional Delineation Report for Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp The survey area is approximately halfway between the City of Glenwood Springs and Town of Carbondale. Water Resources Water resources within the survey area include the Roaring Fork River (Feature 1). Surface water within this river is highly dependent on winter precipitation and the snowpack that develops in the Sawatch and Elk Ranges, east and southwest of the survey area, respectively. Typically, the highest surface flows occur during the summer in July (USGS 2021). The survey area is located in one watershed, Outlet Roaring Fork River (Hydrologic Unit Code [HUC] 1401000410), within the Roaring Fork subbasin (HUC 14010004) of the Colorado Headwaters basin (HUC 140100) in the Upper Colorado Region. The survey area is located in a Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rating Maps Zone B, a moderate- to low-risk area (Figure 3). Vegetation The vegetative land cover types that have been mapped in the survey area by the Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project (Lowry et al. 2005) include Developed, Medium-High Intensity, Rocky Mountain Gambel Oak-Mixed Montane Shrubland, Rocky Mountain Lower Montane Riparian Woodland/Shrubland, and Colorado Plateau Pinyon-Juniper Woodland. The Developed, Medium-High Intensity system includes a mixture of constructed materials and vegetation. The parking area and boat ramp within the survey area meet the criteria of this system. Rocky Mountain Gambel Oak-Mixed Montane Shrubland community is dominated by Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii) though other shrubs may co-dominate. This community dominated the uplands of the survey area. A diverse understory of herbaceous grasses and forbs was observed within this zone. Rocky Mountain Lower Montane Riparian Woodland and Shrubland is a mosaic of communities that are tree-dominated with a diverse shrub component. This system is dependent on annual to episodic flooding and typically found within river floodplains, islands, sand or cobble bars, and streambanks. Dominant trees include boxelder (Acer negundo), cottonwoods (Populus spp.), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), blue spruce (Picea pungens), peachleaf willow (Salix amygdaloides), and/or Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum). Dominant shrubs include Rocky Mountain maple (Acer glabrum), red birch (Betula occidentalis), grey alder (Alnus incana), red- osier dogwood (Cornus sericea), willows (Salix spp.), and snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.). This system was dominant within the floodplain/directly adjacent to the Roaring Fork River. Species seen within the survey area included cottonwoods, red-osier dogwood, grey alder, snowberry, and coyote willow (Salix exigua). Also common was Russian olive (Eleaganus angustifolia) and Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila). The Colorado Plateau Pinyon-Juniper Woodland system was not observed within the survey area. Terrain The survey area is located in relatively flat topography at an elevation of approximately 5,900 feet above mean sea level. May 2024 6 Jurisdictional Delineation Report for Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Figure 1. State Location Map May 2024 7 Jurisdictional Delineation Report for Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Figure 2. Project Vicinity May 2024 8 Jurisdictional Delineation Report for Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Figure 3. 100-Year Floodplain Map May 2024 9 Jurisdictional Delineation Report for Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Figure 4. Aerial Overview of Survey Area. May 2024 10 Jurisdictional Delineation Report for Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Soils The surface soils in the survey area are derived from colluvium deposits, which formed during the Holocene and Late Pleistocene and is a heterogeneous range of rock types and sediments (Colorado Geological Survey 2014). One main soil type occurs within the survey area: Torriorthents- Rock outcrop complex, steep. This soil is in hydrologic soil group D, which is characterized as having very slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, consists chiefly of clayey soils with high swelling capacity or potential, and a high permanent water table. This soil is not considered hydric. Refer to Appendix D for the full report of soils in the survey area. 4. Methods Delineation of “Other” Waters of the United States Prior to undertaking a ground survey of the site, an office review of available aerial photographs, floodplain maps, soil maps, topographic maps, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps (Appendix E) was carried out to assist with the field identification of possible waters of the United States, including wetlands, within the survey area. The preliminary jurisdictional limits of one (1) watercourse was evaluated during the site visit in April 23, 2024 by Sarah Smith (Logan Simpson) using the guidelines for determining the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of potential waters of the United States, which include assessing the presence or absence of the following characteristics: vegetation difference between creek bed and upland, change in soil characteristics, waterline mark on the bank, water stains, shelving or cut banks, exposed roots, sediment deposits, and presence of litter or debris. The delineation of waters of the United States was conducted in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 16-01. No wetlands were observed during the April 3, 2024 site visit. Ground photographs characterizing the condition of the observed feature are located in Appendix B. Wetland Determination OHWM and wetland delineation surveys were completed during the dormant season for vegetation; however, many seed heads and identifying characteristics were still present for most species. The wetland delineation was conducted per the US Army Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual (i.e., 1987 Manual; USACE 1987) and the 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (i.e., WM Supplement; USACE 2010). The WM Supplement was selected for this survey because it is located in the Rocky Mountain Forests and Rangeland Land Resource Region E, as indicated in Figure 1 of the WM supplement. Per the 1987 Manual, the method selected was a routine determination with onsite inspection for an area equal to or less than 5 acres in size (USACE 1987, Part IV, Section D, Subsection 2) since the total area assessed for wetland characteristics was approximately 4.49 acres at the time of the site visit. The 1987 Manual, the WM Supplement, and the Munsell Color Charts were used as resources for the wetland delineation survey. May 2024 11 Jurisdictional Delineation Report for Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp The site visit to delineate wetlands along the Roaring Fork River (Feature 1) was conducted on April 3, 2024 by Sarah Smith and Sabrina Kleinman (Logan Simpson). Areas within the survey area were assessed for the presence or absence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology, per the parameters outlined in the 1987 Manual and the WM Supplement. No wetland indicators were observed during the site visit. 5. Results Delineation of Open and “Other” Waters of the United States Refer to Appendix A: Figures 5 and 6 for maps of the potential waters of the US and Appendix C for a table of the physical characteristics for each feature. As previously mentioned, two features within the JD survey area were evaluated, identifying one perennial and one intermittent feature with an OHWM and twenty-four potential wetlands as potential jurisdictional waters of the United States. A total of 2.43 acres of open waters (i.e., surface water) are proposed as jurisdictional within the JD survey area (Table 1). The quantities of these distinctions may vary depending on the time of year and surface flows of the watercourses within the survey area. Table 1. Summary of Open Water and Other Waters of the United States Feature Waters Type Waters of the United States Amount (Acre) Cowardin Class (NWI Designation) 1 (Roaring Fork River) Open Water Yes 2.43 R3UBH Total = 2.43 *Cowardin et al. 1979 and USFWS 2021 NWI = National Wetland Inventory R3UBH = Riverine, Upper Perennial, Unconsolidated Bottom, Permanently Flooded May 2024 12 Jurisdictional Delineation Report for Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp 6. Summary In total, one (1) feature within the JD survey area is proposed as jurisdictional waters of the United States. Table 7 summarizes the type and amount of proposed waters of the United States within the survey area. Table 2. Summary of Waters Type and Amount of Proposed Waters of the United States Waters Type Amount (Acres) Open Water 2.43 Total 2.43 7. References Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter V., F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report No. FWS/OBS/- 79/31.Washington, D.C. Lowry, J. H, Jr., R. D. Ramsey, K. Boykin, D. Bradford, P. Comer, S. Falzarano, W. Kepner, J. Kirby, L. Langs, J. Prior-Magee, G. Manis, L. O’Brien, T. Sajwaj, K. A. Thomas, W. Rieth, S. Schrader, D. Schrupp, K. Schulz, B. Thompson, C. Velasquez, C. Wallace, E. Waller and B. Wolk. 2005. Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project: Final Report on Land Cover Mapping Methods, RS/GIS Laboratory, Utah State University, Logan, Utah. Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Macbeth, New Windsor, New York. Kirkham, R.M., R.K. Streufert, Hemborg, Thomas, and P.L. Stelling. 2014. Geologic Map of the Cattle Creek quadrangle, Garfield County, Colorado, scale 1: 24,000. NGMDB Product Description Page (usgs.gov). Website accessed April 29, 2024. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Environmental Laboratory Technical Report Y-87-1. Corps Waterway Experiment Station. Vicksburg. January 1987. . 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountain, Valleys, and Coasts (Version 2.0). ERDC/EL TR-08-28. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. May 2010. . 2016. Regulatory Guidance Letter, No. 16-01. Subject: Jurisdictional Determinations. October 2016. . 2016. National Wetland Plant List (NWPL) for the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast. NWPL version 3.3 Mapper Tool. Website accessed March 18, 2024. May 2024 13 Jurisdictional Delineation Report for Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2016. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States: A Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 8.0. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021. National Wetlands Inventory – Wetlands Mapper. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Wetlands- Mapper.html. Website accessed March 18, 2024. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2021. National Water Information System: Web Interface: USGS Water Resources. USGS 09085000. Available at: https://waterdata.usgs.gov/monitoring- location/09085000/#parameterCode=00065&period=P365D&showMedian=false. Website accessed March 18, 2024. 8.Signature Prepared by: Date: Sarah J. Smith Associate Ecologist Logan Simpson 05/07/2024 APPENDIX A VEGETATION COMMUNITY MAP (FIGURE 5) AND PROPOSED PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION (FIGURES 6) FIGURE 6. VEGETATION COMMUNITY MAP. FIGURE 7. PROPOSED PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION ") WXYZf Old S t a t e H w y 8 2 C o u n t y R o a d 1 0 9 R i v e r R i d g e R d Roa r i n g F o r k R i v e r 39.480149 -107.287266 39.478761 -107.284987 Glenwood Springs Project AreaWXYZf Is Key Project Area (4.50 acres) Waters of the US Permanent Impact to Waters of the United States (0.037 acre) Temporary Impact to Waters of the United States (0.136 acre) ")Feature Number Flow Direction 0 100 Feet [ Aerial Date: 09/27/2023 Source: Maxar Technologies; Impacts to Waters of the United States Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp May 2024 Figure 6 Prepared by: Sarah Smith of Logan Simpson, May 2024 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Cattle Creek, CO T6S R89W Sec. 35 and 36 T7S R89W Sec. 1 and 2 UTM 1983 Zone 13 303366.66mE, 4372451.76mN Wetland Delineation Ground Photos April 2024 Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project APPENDIX B PHOTOGRAPHS (04-23-2024) Wetland Delineation Ground Photographs Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination including Wetlands Sam Caudill Boat Ramp April 2024 B-1 Photo No. 1 (Feature 1) Photo No. 2 (Feature 1) OHWM, facing northwest. Photo No. 3 (Feature 1) OHWM, facing northwest. OHWM, facing southeast. Photo No. 4 (Feature 1) OHWM, facing southeast. Photo No. 5 (Feature 1) Photo No. 6 (Feature 1) Wetland Delineation Ground Photographs Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination including Wetlands Sam Caudill Boat Ramp May 2024 B-2 Photo No. 7 OHWM, facing northwest. OHWM, facing southeast. Photo No. 8 Soil Pit 1. Soil Pit 2. Jurisdictional Delineation Report Including Wetlands for May 2024 Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project APPENDIX C JD PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND OTHER INFORMATION TABLE 1 OF 1 J.D. Physical Characteristics & Other Information Section 404 Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp YES / NO YES/NO Feature Number (Name) Vegetation Difference Between Creek & Upland Change in Soil Characteristics Waterline Mark on Bank Water Stains Shelving or Cut Banks Exposed Roots Sediments Deposits Presence of Litter or Debris River Width (feet) River Depth (inches) Photo Location Number Existing Drainage Structure Type WOTUS Comments 1 (Roaring Fork River) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 126.8 12+ 1 - 6 N/A Y Perennial river, OHWM, R3UBH (upper perennial; unconsolidated bottom; permanently flooded) N/A=Not applicable; OHWM=Ordinary High Water Mark; WOUS=Waters of the United States Jurisdictional Delineation Report Including Wetlands for May 2024 Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project APPENDIX D NRCS Custom Soils Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties; and Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties Sam Caudill SWA Natural Resources Conservation Service April 29, 2024 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map..................................................................................................................8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................12 Map Unit Descriptions........................................................................................12 Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties...................................................................................................14 92—Redrob loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes.....................................................14 120—Water.................................................................................................15 Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties............................16 8—Atencio-Azeltine complex, 1 to 3 percent slopes...................................16 67—Torriorthents-Rock outcrop complex, steep.........................................17 73—Water...................................................................................................19 References............................................................................................................20 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report 6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 43 7 2 3 1 0 43 7 2 3 4 0 43 7 2 3 7 0 43 7 2 4 0 0 43 7 2 4 3 0 43 7 2 4 6 0 43 7 2 4 9 0 43 7 2 5 2 0 43 7 2 5 5 0 43 7 2 5 8 0 43 7 2 6 1 0 43 7 2 3 1 0 43 7 2 3 4 0 43 7 2 3 7 0 43 7 2 4 0 0 43 7 2 4 3 0 43 7 2 4 6 0 43 7 2 4 9 0 43 7 2 5 2 0 43 7 2 5 5 0 43 7 2 5 8 0 43 7 2 6 1 0 303270 303300 303330 303360 303390 303420 303450 303480 303270 303300 303330 303360 303390 303420 303450 303480 39° 28' 50'' N 10 7 ° 1 7 ' 1 4 ' ' W 39° 28' 50'' N 10 7 ° 1 7 ' 5 ' ' W 39° 28' 40'' N 10 7 ° 1 7 ' 1 4 ' ' W 39° 28' 40'' N 10 7 ° 1 7 ' 5 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 20 40 80 120 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,520 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties Survey Area Data: Version 14, Aug 23, 2023 Soil Survey Area: Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties Survey Area Data: Version 16, Aug 22, 2023 Your area of interest (AOI) includes more than one soil survey area. These survey areas may have been mapped at different scales, with a different land use in mind, at different times, or at different levels of detail. This may result in map unit symbols, soil Custom Soil Resource Report 10 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION properties, and interpretations that do not completely agree across soil survey area boundaries. Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 25, 2021—Sep 5, 2021 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 11 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 92 Redrob loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes 0.2 4.8% 120 Water 0.2 4.9% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 0.4 9.7% Totals for Area of Interest 4.5 100.0% Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 8 Atencio-Azeltine complex, 1 to 3 percent slopes 0.1 2.8% 67 Torriorthents-Rock outcrop complex, steep 1.7 38.9% 73 Water 2.2 48.5% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 4.1 90.3% Totals for Area of Interest 4.5 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a Custom Soil Resource Report 12 given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Custom Soil Resource Report 13 Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties 92—Redrob loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jq7r Elevation: 5,800 to 7,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 40 to 44 degrees F Frost-free period: 85 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Redrob and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Redrob Setting Landform:Flood plains, terraces, valley floors Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Mixed alluvium derived from sandstone and shale Typical profile H1 - 0 to 14 inches: loam H2 - 14 to 20 inches: stratified loamy sand to stony loam H3 - 20 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope:1 to 6 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 18 to 48 inches Frequency of flooding:Rare Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:10 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R048AY010UT - Wet Fresh Streambank (Willow) Other vegetative classification: riverbottom (null_19) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 14 Minor Components Fluvaquents Percent of map unit:10 percent Landform:Flood plains Hydric soil rating: Yes Other soils Percent of map unit:5 percent Hydric soil rating: No 120—Water Map Unit Composition Water:95 percent Minor components:5 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Minor Components Aquolls Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Marshes Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes Custom Soil Resource Report 15 Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties 8—Atencio-Azeltine complex, 1 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jnzd Elevation: 5,000 to 7,000 feet Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Atencio and similar soils:50 percent Azeltine and similar soils:45 percent Minor components:5 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Atencio Setting Landform:Alluvial fans, terraces Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape:Convex Across-slope shape:Convex Parent material:Mixed alluvium derived from sandstone and shale Typical profile H1 - 0 to 11 inches: sandy loam H2 - 11 to 23 inches: gravelly sandy clay loam H3 - 23 to 28 inches: gravelly sandy loam H4 - 28 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly sand Properties and qualities Slope:1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:10 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R048AY306UT - Upland Loam (Wyoming Big Sagebrush) Hydric soil rating: No Description of Azeltine Setting Landform:Terraces, alluvial fans Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Custom Soil Resource Report 16 Down-slope shape:Convex, linear Across-slope shape:Convex, linear Parent material:Mixed alluvium derived from sandstone and shale Typical profile H1 - 0 to 18 inches: gravelly sandy loam H2 - 18 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly sand Properties and qualities Slope:1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.60 to 6.00 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:10 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: R048AY306UT - Upland Loam (Wyoming Big Sagebrush) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Gravel pits Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Alluvial fans, terraces Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Hydric soil rating: No 67—Torriorthents-Rock outcrop complex, steep Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jnz5 Elevation: 5,800 to 8,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 46 degrees F Frost-free period: 80 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Torriorthents, steep, and similar soils:60 percent Rock outcrop, steep:25 percent Custom Soil Resource Report 17 Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Torriorthents, Steep Setting Landform:Mountainsides Landform position (two-dimensional):Footslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Mountainflank, base slope Down-slope shape:Convex, concave Across-slope shape:Convex, concave Parent material:Stony, basaltic alluvium derived from sandstone and shale Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: variable H2 - 4 to 30 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 30 to 34 inches: unweathered bedrock Properties and qualities Slope:15 to 70 percent Depth to restrictive feature:4 to 30 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Hydric soil rating: No Description of Rock Outcrop, Steep Setting Landform:Mountainsides Landform position (three-dimensional):Free face Down-slope shape:Convex Across-slope shape:Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 60 inches: unweathered bedrock Properties and qualities Slope:15 to 70 percent Depth to restrictive feature:0 inches to paralithic bedrock Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Very low to moderately high (0.00 to 0.20 in/hr) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Custom Soil Resource Report 18 Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s Hydric soil rating: No 73—Water Map Unit Composition Water:100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Custom Soil Resource Report 19 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 20 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report 21 Jurisdictional Delineation Report Including Wetlands for May 2024 Sam Caudill SWA Boat Ramp Project APPENDIX E U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Institute Wetland Map Attachment C – 60% Plan Set © 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS SAM CAUDILL SWA BOAT RAMP IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT MAY 2024 CONTACTS Lisa MacDonald. Healthy Rivers Program Director Pitkin County Healthy River 530 E. Main St, Suite 301 Aspen, CO 81611 Quinn Donnelly, P.E. Project Engineer RiverRestoration.org, LLC. 970.947.9568 Francois Escorihuela Project Designer RiverRestoration.org, LLC. 970.947.9568 G01 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLE COVER SHEET R01 LOCATION MAP VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEX R02 G02 BASEMAP & HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN CW00 CW01 CARE OF WATER PHASE 1 AND 2 D01 D02 RIVER & BANK IMPROVEMENTS, PLAN VIEW BOAT RAMP AND PUT IN, PLAN, PROFILE AND SECTIONS BOULDER STRUCTURE DETAILS TIE OFF ANCHOR DETAILS CARE OF WATER DETAILS CARE OF WATER DETAILSCW04 EROSION CONTROL DETAILS 60% DESIGN CW05 CARE OF WATER OVERVIEW AND NOTES CW02 CW03 D03 EROSION CONTROL MATTING DETAILS CARE OF WATER - STAGING AREA R03 BOULDER WINGS, PLAN, AND SECTIONS NTS G01 N CO V E R S H E E T 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ G 0 1 _ C o v e r S h e e t . d w g Da t e : 5/ 5 / 2 0 2 4 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ G 0 2 - B a s e m a p . d w g Da t e : 5/ 5 / 2 0 2 4 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 N 1" = 40' (FULL SIZE) G02 BA S E M A P & H O R I Z O N T A L CO N T R O L P L A N SCALE: 1" = 40' 80'40'0 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ C W 0 0 _ C o W _ O v e r v i e w . d w g Da t e : 5/ 5 / 2 0 2 4 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 40' (FULL SIZE) CW00 CA R E O F W A T E R OV E R V I E W A N D N O T E S N SCALE: 1" = 40' 80'40'0 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ C W 0 1 - 0 2 _ C o W _ P h a s e s . d w g Da t e : 5/ 5 / 2 0 2 4 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 20' (FULL SIZE) CW01 CA R E O F W A T E R PH A S E 1 & 2 N 20' SCALE: 1" = 20' 0 40' 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ C W 0 1 - 0 2 _ C o W _ P h a s e s . d w g Da t e : 5/ 5 / 2 0 2 4 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 10' (FULL SIZE) CW02 CA R E O F W A T E R ST A G I N G A R E A N 10' SCALE: 1" = 10' 0 20' 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ C W 0 3 - 0 5 _ C o W _ D e t a i l s a n d E C . d w g Da t e : 5/ 5 / 2 0 2 4 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 CW03 CA R E O F W A T E R D E T A I L S NTS 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ C W 0 3 - 0 5 _ C o W _ D e t a i l s a n d E C . d w g Da t e : 5/ 5 / 2 0 2 4 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 CW04 CA R E O F W A T E R D E T A I L S NTS 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ C W 0 3 - 0 5 _ C o W _ D e t a i l s a n d E C . d w g Da t e : 5/ 5 / 2 0 2 4 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 CW05 ER O S I O N C O N T R O L DE T A I L S NTS 1 R02 2 R03 1 R03 2 R02 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 20' (FULL SIZE) R01 RI V E R & B A N K I M P R O V E M E N T S PL A N V I E W N 20' SCALE: 1" = 20' 0 40' 1 R02 2 R02 5880 5890 5900 5910 5920 5880 5890 5900 5910 5920 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 1+57 5880 5890 5900 5910 5920 5880 5890 5900 5910 5920 0+00 0+50 0+61 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 10' (FULL SIZE) R02 BO A T R A M P A N D P U T I N P L A N , PR O F I L E A N D S E C T I O N N 10' SCALE: 1" = 10' 0 20' 2 R03 2 R02 5870 5880 5890 5900 5910 5870 5880 5890 5900 5910 0+00 0+25 1 R03 5880 5890 5900 5910 5880 5890 5900 5910 0+00 0+50 0+63 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 1" = 10' (FULL SIZE) R03 BO U L D E R W I N G S P L A N & S E C T I O N S N 10' SCALE: 1" = 10' 0 20' BO U L D E R S T R U C T U R E D E T A I L S NTS D01 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ D 0 1 - 0 2 _ D e t a i l s . d w g Da t e : 5/ 5 / 2 0 2 4 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 TI E - O F F A N C H O R D E T A I L S NTS D02 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ D 0 1 - 0 2 _ D e t a i l s . d w g Da t e : 5/ 5 / 2 0 2 4 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 ER O S I O N C O N T R O L M A T T I N G DE T A I L S NTS D03 60 % D E S I G N - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N Im p r o v e m e n t s \ 2 0 0 - D R A W I N G S \ S h e e t s \ D 0 1 - 0 2 _ D e t a i l s . d w g Da t e : 5/ 5 / 2 0 2 4 38067 MAY 2024 WE S T B A N K B O A T R A M P IM P R O V E M E N T S Westbank Boat Ramp Improvements RiverRestoration P.O. Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 www.RiverRestoration.org Roaring Fork River Colorado PR E L I M I N A R Y Pitkin County Healthy Rivers 530 E. Main St. - 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Attachment D - prior USACE correspondence 1 Quinn Donnelly From:Frank, Robert CIV USARMY CESPA (USA) <Robert.W.Frank@usace.army.mil> Sent:Monday, April 22, 2024 11:19 AM To:Quinn Donnelly Cc:Sabrina Kleinman; Sarah Smith Subject:RE: SPA-2024-00149 - Sam Caudhill concept plan w/ quantities Good morning Quinn, I have discussed this with my supervisor, and we will be able to grant a waiver since the proposed project isn’t too over the threshold of the NWP 36. As for the cultural resources, I would not think it would be necessary to conduct a report or survey due to the previous impacts of natural river funcƟons and other disturbances. I did noƟce one officially eligible site that is very close to the area of potenƟal effect so we will likely need to consult with SHPO on this maƩer. It will be very helpful to have a map illustraƟng all impacts of the project in waters of the United States, as well as stagging and access areas. Finally, for the boulder wings impacts and other associated structures, please illustrate how the structures will be Ɵed into the boat ramp so we can issue these impacts under NWP 36. Please reach out if you have any other quesƟons. Best, Robert Frank Regulatory Project Manager, NW Colorado Branch Albuquerque District, US Army Corps of Engineers 400 Rood Avenue, Room 224 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 (970) 243-1199 X 1017 (office) (970) 837-6870 (cell) From: Quinn Donnelly <quinn.donnelly@riverrestoration.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 11:23 AM To: Frank, Robert CIV USARMY CESPA (USA) <Robert.W.Frank@usace.army.mil> Cc: Sabrina Kleinman <skleinman@logansimpson.com>; Sarah Smith <ssmith@logansimpson.com> Subject: [Non-DoD Source] SPA-2024-00149 - Sam Caudhill concept plan w/ quantities Good morning Robert, Thanks for the pre-application meeting and information yesterday. As we discussed, I’ve attached an updated concept plan with all of the materials identified and quantified. Based on the quantity calculations for the boulder wings and tie oƯ points, we are going to be over the 25 cy cutoƯ for NWP-18. These are a little oversized to be conservative on the impact quantities, but I don’t think we’ll be able to get under that threshold. Please let me know what you think on that and if there are other avenues we can take for that component of the project. A couple of things you were going to chat with your boss about or research before our formal PCN submittal. 1) Client is hoping to have a 22’ wide boat ramp to allow for two full lanes. NWP-36 max is 20’, but a waiver can be given. Wanted to see if that was a possibility on this project. 2 2) Cultural resources – wanted to see if a cultural resource inventory and report will be required. The site has been heavily disturbed by river processes and construction and maintenance of the existing boat ramp and adjacent bridges. I’ve attached a google earth pin on the location. Thanks again for all of your help and guidance. Please let Sarah, Sabrina, and myself know if you have any questions or concerns. V/R, Quinn -- Quinn Donnelly, PE www.RiverRestoration.org PO Box 248 Carbondale, CO 81623 970-947-9568 (o)