The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Estes Valley Planning Commission 2009-04-21Prepared: April 10,2009 Revised: AGENDA ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:30 p.m. Study Session, Rooms 201 and 202, Town Hall 1:30 p.m. Meeting, Board Room, Town Hall 1. PUBLIC COMMENT The EVPC will accept public comments regarding items not on the agenda. Comments should not exceed three minutes. 2. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of minutes - March 17, 2009 Planning Commission Meeting 3. STAFF REPORT Accessory Dwelling Unit timeline for approval 4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN 09-02 - SUNFIELD ESTATES - Metes and Bounds located directly southwest of 1985 Moraine Avenue, Estes Park Owner/Applicant: Stonewood Properties, c/o Mark Hollenbeck Request: To construct a 3-unit development 5. AMENDED PLAT - ABUNDANT PROPERTIES OF THE ROCKIES, LLC- Lots 1 & 2, Block 4,2nd Amended Plat, Town of Estes Park, and Metes and Bounds Parcel located at 240 E. Elkhorn Avenue - 230,234, and 240 E. Elkhorn Avenue Owner/Applicant: Abundant Properties of the Rockies, LLC, c/o Kevin Schwery Request: To combine two existing lots into one lot and reduce the utility and access easement 6. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE, BLOCK 12 a. SHORT-TERM RENTALS - revisions to vacation home regulations, including revisions to the definition of accommodation use, guest room, guest quarter, household living, and nightly rental in the Estes Valley Development Code Chapter 13, and revisions to distinguish between Bed & Breakfasts and vacation home uses and the districts in which these uses are permitted. b. WILDLIFE HABITAT PROTECTION - proposed changes to Â§7.8 Wildlife Habitat Protection, to provide review standards for land identified as critical wildlife habitat, require preparation of a wildlife habitat conservation plan for land identified as critical wildlife habitat, and provide for Planning Commission review of said conservation plan. The Estes Valley Planning Commission reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. .ft 7. ADOPTION OF THE 2008 ESTES VALLEY HABITAT ASSESSMENT 8. REPORTS Burr Minor Special Review STAFF-LEVEL REVIEWS PRE-APPLICATION MEETINGS TOWN BOARD AND COUNTY COMMISSION DECISIONS ON APPLICATIONS REVIEWED BY PLANNING COMMISSION 9. ADJOURN The Estes Valley Planning Commission reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. 311 - RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission March 17, 2009,1:30 p.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Chair Doug Klink; Commissioners Wendell Amos, Alan Fraundorf, John Tucker, Betty Hull, Steve Lane, and Ron Norris Attending: Chair Doug Klink; Commissioners Alan Fraundorf, Betty Hull, Steve Lane, and Ron Norris Also Attending: Town Attorney White, Director Joseph, Planner Chilcott, Planner Shirk, Town Board Liaison Homeier, and Recording Secretary Thompson Absent: Commissioners Wendell Amos and John Tucker The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. Chair Klink called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. Chair Klink introduced and welcomed Commissioner Steve Lane as the newest member of the Estes Valley Planning Commission. Commissioner Lane was appointed by the Larimer Board of County Commissioners and will serve as replacement for Commissioner Kitchen. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT Town Resident Mark Elrod presented a document concerning the current Estes Valley Board of Adjustment application for a variance to install a wind turbine. It is his opinion that this type of variance request should be heard by the Estes Valley Planning Commission rather than the Board of Adjustment. Commissioners Hull and Norris would like to see this topic discussed at a future Planning Commission meeting. 2. CONSENT AGENDA Estes Valley Planning Commission minutes dated February 17, 2009. It was moved and seconded (Hull/Fraundorf) that the Consent Agenda be accepted, and the motion passed unanimously with two absent. 3. ABUNDANT PROPERTIES OF THE ROCKIES, LLC - Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, 2nd Amended Plat, Town of Estes Park, and Metes and Bounds Parcel located at 240 E. Elkhorn Avenue - 230,234, and 240 E. Elkhorn - Request to combine two existing lots into one lot, adjust the boundary line between two lots, and reduce the width of a utility and access easement Planner Chilcott stated the applicant has requested this item be continued to the next regularly scheduled meeting. It was moved and seconded (Norris/Hull) to CONTINUE this agenda item to the next regularly scheduled meeting, and the motion passed unanimously with two absent. 4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN 09-01 - YMCA OF THE ROCKIES PARADE GROUNDS - Metes and Bounds located directly north of Ruesch Auditorium, 2515 Tunnel Road, Estes Park - Request to convert Kallenberg Drive parking lot into parade grounds and an improved parking lot Staff Report: Dave Shirk reported this request is to redevelop and improve the existing parking lot, five- point intersection, and parade grounds immediately in front of the Ruesch Auditorium at the YMCA of the Rockies. This development plan is central to the overall concept of the YMCA's Master Plan to have a pedestrian-centered core area. The new parking lot will have higher landscaping and lighting standards than required by the Estes Valley Development Code and the YMCA Master Plan. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 2 March 17,2009 Mark Holdt, Vice President of Planning and Project Development at the YMCA gave a presentation which included a brief overview of the Master Plan. The current request will eliminate a five-point intersection, allow a safer and more aesthetic pedestrian promenade, and reduce vehicle traffic in this high pedestrian area. Roger Sherman of BHA Design presented a more detailed version of the plan. This area was strategically designed to preserve many of the existing traditional elements (fire ring, flag pole, etc). Parking lot will contain 118 stalls, seven being ADA compliant. Proposed lighting is below the maximum allowable light levels. In front of Ruesch Auditorium, it is proposed to have a guest drop-off point as well as an outdoor dining area. A small amphitheatre is proposed between Hyde Chapel and the Administration building, as well as a garden between the Administration and Walnut buildings. It is anticipated to have this first phase completed by May, 2010. Currently, construction of the western-most part of the loop road is taking place and is to be completed by Memorial Day, 2009. Mountainside Drive will be closed most of the summer in order to complete these improvements. Mr. Sherman noted that these construction projects are donor driven and will proceed as funding allows. Planner Shirk indicated the vesting period on this project is three years. Planner Shirk recommended conditional approval of the development plan. Public Comment: Brian Michener/County Resident - The proposed roads are an improvement that will promote the safety of guests. Mr. Michener expressed concerns about people driving faster once the road improvements are completed, and he also foresees a need for pedestrian crossings over the roadside ditches. He would like to see improved lighting on the trail system as well as the street signs. Having some unanswered questions, Mark Holdt from the YMCA invited Mr. Michener and any others to call him or stop by his office. Planner Shirk noted the new street signs will comply with the county sign codes, be reflective at night, and have consistent height throughout the property. It was moved and seconded (Hull/Norris) to approve Development Plan 09-01, YMCA of the Rockies Parade Grounds, for the Metes and Bounds Property located directly north of Ruesch Auditorium, 2515 Tunnel Road, Estes Park, with the findings and conditions recommended by Staff, and the motion passed unanimously with two absent. Conditions: 1. Compliance with the approved Development Plan; 2. Approval of the final construction plans by the Larimer County Engineering Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit and/or first building permit; 3. Landscaping legend should graphically delineate the proposed landscaping; 4. Legal description shall include the land area; 5. Planning Commission signature block should include the current Chair (Douglas Klink); 6. Compliance with memo from Larimer County Engineering to Town of Estes Park dated February 23,2009, which is a request for As-Built plans following completion of the project; 7. CS1 and LS sheets shall be submitted in mylar form. 5. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE, BLOCK 12 a. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADU) proposed changes to Â§5.2.B Accessory Uses/Structures Permitted in the Residential Zoning Districts, to allow accessory dwelling units (ADUs) within all single-family residential zoning districts except the R-1 district, and to adopt architectural standards for ADUs; also proposed changes to Â§13.3.3 Definition of Words, Terms and Phrases, to redefine the term Accessory Dwelling Unit. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 3 March 17, 2009 Staff Report: Planner Shirk gave a brief history of the code change impetus and what has transpired thus far. It was noted that the option for detached units has been removed from the revisions subsequent to the February 17,2009, Planning Commission meeting. Staff has revised the proposed code to allow ADUs in all single-family residential zoning districts, except the R-1 district, regardless of lot size, but with only one definition. The proposed definition of an accessory dwelling unit states: (a) an accessory dwelling unit is a second dwelling unit either in or added to an existing single-family detached dwelling on the same lot as the principal dwelling, for use as a complete, independent living facility with provisions within the accessory unit for a kitchen, eating, sanitation/bathing, and sleeping. Such a dwelling is an accessory use to the main dwelling; (b) an accessory dwelling unit may or may not have interior access to the principal dwelling unit. Exterior access to the accessory dwelling unit may be included, but is not required. At least 12 feet along one wall of the accessory dwelling unit must be contiguous to a wall of the principal dwelling unit. Planner Shirk intentionally did not specify the definition of kitchen because it already exists in the current development code. Due to requests from the public, the code was revised to require review and approval of ADUs by the Estes Valley Planning Commission. It was noted that due to the removal of the rental option, Staff believes the need for owner occupancy of homes containing ADUs is unnecessary. Staff believes using the "development plan" process and calendar would be most beneficial for the review process. Waivers of certain plans or reports could be granted. A fee structure will be set in the near future. Concerning (8) Limit on Tenancy, the code was revised to state vacation homes shall not be an allowed use on lots with ADUs, and no ADU shall be leased and/or rented separately from the principal dwelling unit. This language eliminates the option for short-term rental. Planner Shirk explained the code revision concerning size of the ADU, which states the ADU can be 49% of the size of the existing floor area of the principal dwelling (exluding attached garage), or 1000 square feet, whichever is less. Due to the removal of the option to construct detached ADUs, the requirement for underground utilities is no longer necessary. Staff has also removed the portion of the code requiring similar architectural design to the principal dwelling, as well as that portion concerning the granting of exceptions and modifications to the architectural standards. Staff recommends the lighting standards be met as well as the entrance to the ADU being concealed and not visible from the front of the dwelling. Concerning the non-conforming ADUs that already exist, Staff recommends to continue using the current code which states repairs and maintenance can occur but no expansion is allowed. Commissioner Hull thanked the Estes Valley Contractor's Association for their summarizing the types and locations of existing ADUS in the Estes Valley. Public Comment: Jay Heineman/County Resident - Does not agree with allowing ADUs on every lot in the valley. He thinks rentals will evenutally become an issue, and the unintended consequences will not be positive. He also does not think the demand justifies the need for a code revision. Dave Albee/Town Resident - Wanted clarification that ADUs will not be allowed in R-1, R-2 and RM zoning districts. He also wanted assurance that adjacent property owners will be notified when applications are submitted. Johanna Darden/Town Resident - Thinks the size limit should be less than 1000 square feet. Commissioner Lane clarified that the 1000 square feet counts towards the total accessory RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 4 March 17, 2009 uses for the lot (i.e. garage or detached woodshop), which would take away from the maximum size allowed for an ADU. Planner Shirk noted that, if approved today, the first reading of the code by the Town Board would be April 28,2009. It was moved and seconded (Norris/Hull) to APPROVE the proposed Block 12 Amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code regarding Accessory Dwelling Units as revised. The motion passed unanimously with two absent. Chair Klink called a 10-minute recess at 2:35p.m. The meeting reconvened at 2:45 p.m. b. WILDLIFE HABITAT PROTECTION - proposed changes to Â§7.8 Wildlife Habitat Protec#on, to provide review standards for land identified as critical wildlife habitat, require preparation of a wildlife habitat conservation plan for land identified as critical wildlife habitat, and provide for Planning Commission review of said conservation plan. Staff Report: Planner Chilcott focused on aquatic and riparian setbacks. Current setbacks are 30 feet from streams, drainages, and rivers next to developed property. Setbacks are 50 feet from rivers next to undeveloped property and wetland areas. Staff is recommending 50-foot setbacks from aquatic habitat, including rivers and streams, and from riparian habitat. There is currently no minimum setback from riparian habitat. Commissioner Hull commented on the usefullness of the riparian documents that Planner Chilcott distributed to the Commissioners per their request. Having the additional data provided more food for thought. Of the six documents reviewed, Planner Chilcott's opinion is that Protecting Stream and River Corridors and Desian Recommendations for Riparian Corridors and Veqetated Buffer Strips provided the best information. She stated when comparing other areas and research, a 50-foot setback is minimal. In general these studies found that 30-foot setbacks are not effective, 50 foot setbacks offer some benefits for water quality, and larger setbacks are required for wildlife habitat protection. Staff is recommending the setbacks be increased to 50 feet. The Estes Valley Habitat Assessment recommended 100-foot setbacks. Non-conforming structures within the setback could continue being used and repairs and maintenance would be permitted. Planner Chilcott stated according to the current setbacks, there are approximately 150-175 structures that are non-conforming. If the setback is changed to 50 feet, approximately 300 structures would become non-conforming. This is using only the high water mark, and not taking any riparian setback into consideration. Planner Chilcott indicated there is language in the current code prohibiting the removal of existing vegetation to put in a "lawn" along streams and rivers. She noted that native grasses/vegetation carry value to the buffer, and although there are no explicit restoration standards in the code, there would be site-specific studies that would most likely recommend restoration of any affected areas. Commissioner Klink would like more information about how the Commission would deal with the grey issues concerning trail setbacks versus setbacks for structures on private property. Director Joseph estimates the current build-out along the rivers today is 90%. Many of these areas are prime for redevelopment. He encouraged the Commissioners to think about the current code, which allows the razing of existing developments and rebuilding in the same footprint with 30-foot setbacks. Scott Zurn, Director of Public Works, stated that the FEMA floodplain maps are based on assumptions that need updating. When these assumptions are updated, floodplain boundaries are likely to change resulting in properties that are currently designated as outside the 100- year floodplain being redesignated as being within the 100-year floodplain. Mr. Zurn is also concerned about encroachment and development of areas close to rivers and streams and RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 5 March 17, 2009 how it relates to the Clean Water Act. He anticipates the State designating Estes Park as a Phase 11 community, and imposing tighter restrictions as the population increases. Mr. Zurn recommends the maximum amount of buffer due to the difficulty of meeting requirements of the Clean Water Act in the future if setbacks are not large enough. Natural filtration is important when dealing with stormwater, and the more natural areas a community has, the less costly it will be to meet any new requirements. Public Comment: Robert Ernst/Town Resident - After listening to Mr. Zurn, he thinks a 100-foot setback is acceptable in order to allow for filtration. Mike Menard/EVCA President - His association is concerned about property owner's rights and the affect of greater setbacks on those rights. Johanna Darden/Town Resident - She supports the 50-foot setback. She is concerned about the impacts of fencing on wildlife in her neighborhood, and Commissioner Klink suggested she talk to the neighbor involved and possibly Andrew Hart, the Code Enforcement Officer. Fred Mares/Town Resident - Reviewed the letter that he presented as public comment for this month's meeting. Mr. Mares stressed the need to have goals and clear objectives when revising codes. He recommends the required "approval" of a plan, and does not think the proposed language about significant adverse impact is strong enough. Judy Anderson/Anderson Realty & Management - Would like to remind the Planning Commission that the proposed setbacks will make some riverfront property unbuildable. Personal property rights should be considered with a possible allowance for those owners. Sandy Osterman/Town Resident - According to Rick Spowart of CDOW, development in the North End has affected the severe deer/elk winter range. Brian Michener/County Resident - Commented on the Spur 66 Management Plan. Some changes have been made since the plan was implemented, and many vegetation/habitat areas have been lost. The YMCA development and subsequent increased density as well as development along the highway is not conducive to healthy habitat for wildlife. Mr. Michener would like to see stronger language about what we want to preserve, as this concerns the entire future of the Estes Valley, including sustainability and economic health of the area. Chair Klink closed the meeting to public comment. In discussion with the Commission, Director Joseph noted Staff's view that the current setback standards should still apply to the Commercial Downtown (CD) zoning district, and possibly the Commercial Heavy (CH) and Industrial (I-1) districts. Single-family lots would be exempt from site-specific study but not from setbacks. He reminded the Commission that there are some lots that cannot be developed even with the current 30-foot setback. Board of Adjustment will continue to be the "relief valve" for the current and proposed regulations. Director Joseph noted very few variances have come to the Board concerning single-family residences located on streams or rivers. Commissioner Norris supports a 50-foot minimum setback. Agrees with exempting the CD, CH, and I-1 zoning districts from the proposed setback requirement. Agrees with exempting single-family lots from site-specific wildlife studies. Thinks wetland and riparian areas need more definition to eliminate some of the gray area. Commissioner Hull agrees with the CD, CH, and I-1 exemptions. She prefers 50-foot setbacks on new development and redevelopment, while keeping the 30-foot limit for existing development. She agrees with single-family lots being exempt from wildlife studies. She is in support of code language which would allow the Planning Commission to approve or disapprove a project based on inadequate wildlife protection. Commissioner Lane agrees with CD, CH, and I-1 exemption. Agrees with single-family lots being exempt from wildlife study. Strongly agrees with measuring the setback from the edge RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 6 March 17, 2009 of the river rather than the riparian edge. Would support 50-foot setbacks in areas of redevelopment, but not in single-family zoning districts. Commissioner Fraundorf agrees with CD, CH, and I-1 exemptions. Agrees with single-family lots being exempt from wildlife studies. He supports measuring the setback from the river's edge, and supports a 50-foot setback in areas of redevelopment and new development. He is undecided about 30-foot setbacks on single-family lots. He agrees with Planning Commission's ability to deny a development proposal based on inadequate wildlife protection. He thinks that Â§7.8.H concerning feasibilty needs to be reworded. Commissioner Klink agrees with CD, CH, and I-1 exemptions. Agrees with exempting single- family lots from wildlife studies. Supports a 50-foot setback from the river's edge. He cannot support 50-foot setbacks on single-family lots, but does support a 50-foot setback on redeveloped lots. He believes the wildlife habitat protection should be balanced with properrty rights and any vote to deny an application based on inadaquate wildilfe protection needs to be carefully considered. Director Joseph stated with this issue, the objective of the Planning Commission is to be the judge of what constitutes adequate mitigation where it is required. Staff will deliver code language that allows the objectives to be met. There will always be arguments on both sides, and it will be the Planning Commission's job to weigh the arguments and make a decision. Attorney White noted municipalities do not have the right to deny property owners the economic value of their property, which would be considered a "taking" of the property. The penalty of that "taking" is the town buying the property at fair market value. He stated there is the possibility of a development plan where impacts on wildlife cannot be mitigated, and the Planning Commission will not be able to deny the development of the property based entirely on that issue. There must be language that states "to the maximum amount feasible" or similar verbiage in order allow the Planning Commission to address any unique situations that will undoubtedly come before the Commission. Director Joseph recommended that in areas designated as severe winter range for deer or elk, developers have the option of not submiting a wildlife study if they propose single-family subdivisions that do not involve a density bonus or a rezoning. The value of the severe winter range is in its openness and clustering would maintain this habitat value. In the majority of cases, he believes a study would most likely recommend clustering the development. This concept would still give the land owner their use by right and also give them some certainty as to the outcome. It was moved and seconded (Hull/Fraundorf) to CONTINUE the proposed Block 12 Amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code regarding Wildlife Habitat Protection to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting, and the motion passed unanimously with two absent. a. SHORT-TERM RENTALS - revisions to vacation home regulations, including revisions to the definition of accommodation use, guest room, guest quarter, household living, and nightly rental in the Estes Valley Development Code Chapter 13, and revisions to distinguish between Bed & Breakfasts and vacation home uses and the districts in which these uses are permitted. It was moved and seconded (Hull/Fraundorf) to recommend CONTINUANCE of the proposed Block 12 Amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code regarding Short-Term Rentals to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting and the motion passed unanimously with two absent. 6. ADOPTION OF THE 2008 ESTES VALLEY HABITAT It was moved and seconded (Norris/Lane) to CONTINUE the proposed 2008 Estes Valley Habitat Assessment to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously with two absent. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 7 March 17, 2009 7. REPORTS a. Staff-Level Reviews Boyd Residence, Lot 15 of the Village Green Subdivision, 466 Skyline Drive Director Joseph stated this particular lot was platted with building envelopes. The residence was renovated and a deck was built with a minor error that encroaches less than one square foot outside the envelope. Because it is a platted envelope, it is not subject to a staff-level variance. The lot has an adjacent lot dedicated as open space, and the property owner would normally have to go through an amended plat process to make the correction. Staff would like to have permission to approve this adjustment. The Planning Commission agreed to allow staff to make the necessary correction to the building envelope. Director Joseph commented on current projects being reviewed by Staff: a pre-application for relocating a radio antennae which is under the 30-foot height restriction; a new Development Plan for Black Canyon Inn Condominiums; a minor proposal at Wildwood Inn, which will most likely be a staff-level review; and an Amended Development Plan at Mary's Meadow, which includes a modification to move the buildings uphill and create more open space in the meadow. There being no further business, Chair Klink adjourned the meeting at 4:45 p.m. Douglas Klink, Chair Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary 1 i 0 j - Sunfield Estates (Dp 09-02) ~ Estes Park Community Development Department Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue PO Box 1200 ~ Estes Park, CO 80517 ~ Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com DATE: April 21,2009 REOUEST: Approval to build three detached dwelling units on property zoned "A" Accommodations ~<lld =7:Ar---7 ( t: USES ~ LOCATION: TBD Highway 66, within .... 36 unincorporated Larimer County. The site is USE on the south/east side of the road just past A- Uâ€ž Dallman Drive. = LUS l.196 APPLICANT/OWNER: Stonewood :1 804.-y RMP Properties STAFF CONTACT: Dave Shirk (dshirk@estes.org, 577-3729) SITE DATA TABLE: Engineer: Landmark Engineering, Inc (Loveland) Parcel Number: 3534400024 Development Area: acres (+/-) Number of Lots: One Existing Land Use: Undeveloped Proposed Land Use: Detached multi-family Existing Zoning: "A" Accommodations Adjacent Zoning- East:: "A" Accommodations North: "A" Accommodations West: "A-1" Accommodations South: "A" Accommodations Adjacent Land Uses- East: Accommodations North: Multi-family residential West: Single-family residential South: Accommodations Services- Water: Town (via main extension) Sewer: UTSD Fire Protection: Estes Park Volunteer 0- PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: This is a request for development plan approval to build three detached residential dwelling units on property zoned "A" Accommodations; the proposed use is allowed in that zone district. The property has been approved for a development plan for seven units (Rippling River). Though that was approved for a different developer, the development rights travel with the property and that approval is still valid. This developer desires to build a different product type, and is therefore requesting approval for this new development plan. The proposed development plan includes a similar general layout and amount of overall disturbance, including fill in the floodplain (requires FEMA approval and a floodplain work permit issued through the Larimer County Engineering Department). Issues include changes to limits of disturbance and additional landscaping. REVIEW CRITERIA: This development plan is subject to applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC). Depending upon the complexity of the project, this section may be a brief summary of the standards of review or may involve a more detailed analysis of the standards based upon issues relevant to any particular project. Zoning Requirements. Densi<y. The proposed three units require 27,000 square feet of net land area. The gross land area is 110,988 square feet. After netting out 80% of the area in the existing floodplain and the proposed right-of-way dedication, the resultant net land area is 50,027 square feet. Therefore, this proposal meets density requirements. Impervious Coverage. The "A" district has a maximum impervious coverage of 50%, the proposed 17.5% complies with this requirement. Setbacks. This proposal complies with setback requirements, including the 50-foot river corridor setback. Grading and Site Disturbance. Section 7.2 "Grading and Site Disturbance Standards" applies to this proposal. No grading, excavation or tree/vegetation removal shall be permitted, whether to provide for a building site, for on-site utilities or services or for any roads or driveways, before issuance of a building permit. Limits of Disturbance. Section 7.2.D requires the Decision Making Body approve proposed Limits of Disturbance for all development plans. This section includes criteria for establishing Limits of Disturbance. The initially proposed LOD can be refined to help minimize site disturbance and preserve existing vegetation. Staff Page #2 - Sunfield Estates, Development Plan 09-02 1 has suggested these changes to the applicant, who is working with the design engineer to implement them. Changes include "pulling in" the proposed retaining wall between the units, minimizing utility cuts, and adding more protection to the slope between the units and the highway. It should be noted the proposed fill in the floodplain is not intended to increase the amount of allowed density on the property, as was the case in a previously denied development plan proposal for this site. Landscaping and Buffers. This proposal exceeds the minimum landscaping requirements sets forth in Section 7.5 in terms of volume. The landscaping plan also satisfies requirements such as species mix and usage, tree protection, irrigation, and locational requirements. However, this proposal also includes removal of a large stand of cottonwoods. Therefore, Staff recommends additional vegetation be added along the river frontage to offset this loss, as discussed below. Operational Performance Standards. Section 7.10 allows the planning commission to require additional landscaping to ensure compatibility with existing uses. Staff suggests the removal of the stand of cottonwoods warrants additional plantings along the river to minimize the overall loss of riparian habitat. Based on this, Staff recommends additional tree plantings between Building 3 and the river. These plantings should enhance the riparian habitat, and use trees such as aspens and/or river birch. Off-Street Parking and Loading. This proposal requires seven parking stalls; eighteen will be provided. The site design provides a functional parking and circulation plan. Adequate Public Facilities. No building permit shall be issued unless such public facilities and services are in place or the commitments described in Section 7.12.C have been made. This section requires that facilities are available to serve the proposed development when building permits are issued. Electric. All electric service is to be placed underground. A new 3-phase line will be required, and has been shown on the plan. Drainage/Water Quality Management. All required drainage facilities shall be installed and accepted in accordance with Section 7.12.F, which allows 25% of building permits to be issued prior installation of the drainage facilities. In this instance, the drainage facilities will need to be installed with the initial unit. Sdnitary Sewer. The new building will utilize the existing sanitary sewer line. Page #3 - Sunfield Estates, Development Plan 09-02 Water. An existing 8" water main will be extended to provide service for this development. Fire Protection. Per Section 7.12.G, fire protection requirements shall be installed prior to issuance of a building permit. REFFERAL COMMENTS AND OTHER ISSUES: This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. Larimer County Engineering, per phone conversation on morning of Wednesday April 8, 2009, a development construction permit will be required through the Larimer County Engineering Department prior to issuance of a building or grading permit. This process requires a meeting between Larimer County Engineering and the applicant, including the applicant's contractors, and includes discussion of engineering requirements such as state stormwater permit, FEMA requirements, access permits, etc. Town of Estes Park Public Works and Utilities had a vadety of comments regarding utility service requirements. These have been included as suggested conditions of approval. Uj,per Thompson Sanitation District had comments regarding plant investment fees and site design to ensure access. These comments have been included as suggested conditions of approval, and will require minor changes to the site plan to provide an access point for maintenance to the sanitary sewer main. Postal Cluster Box. The postal cluster box should be included in the final construction plans and cost estimate. Construction Plans. Final construction plans shall be approved by the Town of Estes Park Public Works Department and UTSD prior to issuance of the grading permit and/or first building permit. Other. The are a variety of"fix its" required. These range from modifying limits of disturbance and additional river plantings (as noted above) to changes to notes on the plan. These have been delineated in a letter from staff to the consulting engineer. Compliance with this letter has been included as a suggested condition of approval. STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the foregoing, Staff finds: Page #4 - Sunfield Estates, Development Plan 09-02 r 1. The applicant should carefully review the Staff report, which contains several references to Code requirements. Failure to satisfy these requirements could lead to a delay in issuance of building permits or certificates of occupancy. 2. If all recommended conditions of approval are required, the development plan will comply with all applicable standards set forth in this Code, including review standards set forth in Section 3.8.D. 3. The development plan is consistent with the policies, goals and objectives of the Estes Valley Plan. 4. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. 5. The Planning Commission is the Decision-Making body for the development plan. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed "Sunfield Estates" Development Plan 09-02 CONDITIONAL TO: 1. Compliance with approved development plan. 2. Prior to issuance of any grading/building permits, the applicant shall: a. Submit final construction plans (including drainage/erosion control) for review and approval of utility providers and Larimer County Engineering; b. Obtain a Development Construction Permit from the Larimer County Engineering Department; c. Updated CLOMR-F shall be provided to Larimer County Engineering for review and approval, and a copy submitted to Community Development; d. Fence Limits of Disturbance, as required by Section 7.2.D5 of the Estes Valley Development Code; e. Provide Restoration Landscaping Guarantee letter; f. Provide lighting cut sheet to ensure compliance with Section 7.9; g. Provide development agreement and letter of credit. 3. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: a. Dedicate proposed easements and right-of-way; b. Provide engineer certificate's verifying grading and drainage complies with approved plans; c. Provide as-built plans for review and approval of utility providers and Larimer County Engineering; d. LOMR-F shall be provided to Larimer County Engineering, and a copy submitted to Community Development. 4. Compliance with the following: a. Letter from Community Development to Stonewood Properties dated April 8,2009; Page #5 - Sunfield Estates, Development Plan 09-02 1 b. Memo from Estes Park Public Works and Utilities to Dave Shirk, Bob Goehring, and Scott Zurn dated March 25,2009 (except Note 9 regarding street lights); c. Letter from Upper Thompson Sanitation District to Dave Shirk dated March 19, 2009 (this will require minor changes to the development plan to ensure accessibility to the sewer main). SUGGESTED MOTION: I move APPROVAL of Development Plan 09-02 "Sunfield Estates" with the findings and conditions recommended by staff. Page #6 - Sunfield Estates, Development Plan 09-02 C 44' il Ce-FV.VT;1Yel 11 =t-1 rf~31 LEr" vt ''- .4./6 ESTES -Â®PAR K . . *%&*i;~?M COLORADO Room 100, Town Hall P.O. Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517 Memo To: Dave Shirk, Bob Goehring, and Scott Zum From: Tracy Feagans Date: March 25,2009 Re: Sunfield Estates Metes & Bounds located SW of 1985 Moraine Avenue Background: The Public Works and Utilities Departments have enclosed progress comments regarding the submittals received to date and remain general as the submittals are not complete and construction drawings for the public improvements have not been submitted. It is important to note that these Departments reserve the right to make additional comments and revise comments as more detail is provided in the subsequent submittals and development plans. Light & Power: The Light and Power Department has reviewed the Application for a Development Plan #09-02 for the above referenced property and has the following comments: 1) Developer to install all trenches & conduits, all materials, truck hours and mileage will be purchased from & installed by Town of Estes Park. 2) No building permits will be approved by Light & Power until the entire Electric infrastructure has been paid for and installed. 3) We will in the future need accurate As-Builts in electronic, Mylar, and paper versions. 4) The submitted plan needs to show all existing utilities, type, and location 5) Easements also need to accompany all existing primary electric lines and any secondary electric on others property 6) Each and every meter socket will need to be permanently marked with the specific address and or unit number prior to hook-up by the utility. 7) All primary electric must be buried 4' deep with warning tape at 2'. All secondary must be buried 2' deep with warning tape at l' in the appropriately sized conduit for the conductor. 8) We will need to meet with the developer to determine exact cost and location of proposed facilities. Contact our Line Superintendent Todd Steichen at 970-577-3601 9) Streetlights will need to be placed at all driveway entrances. 10) Submit plans from the project electrical engineer for Town review and approval. â€¢ Page 1 (1 C 11) We will need to know the size of each individual service, type of heat and whether or not air conditioning is being proposed. Water: After review of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat and Rezoning Request the Water Department has the following comments: 1) A Water Main Extension will be required for service, including Fire Protection. This infrastructure must be installed; testing preformed/passed and accepted by the Department prior to issuance of any building permits. Any project phasing of the infrastructure must be submitted with the construction drawings for approval prior to construction. Phased infrastructure must be completed and accepted prior to issuance of any building permits within the phase. 2) No installation of any project infrastructure is allowed until all Town Departments have approved and signed off on the project plans and construction drawings. 3) Construction drawings are required for the project. Drawings must be approved and signed by the Utilities Director or designated representative prior to any construction. All water line design and construction shall be done according to the Water Utility Policies and Standards. All water main lines and easements must be deeded to the Town of Estes Park. Construction drawings must include: â€¢ Plan and profile to show potential conflicts between water and other utilities including culverts, show Utility Easement locations when utility is not in Road Right of Way. â€¢ Metering/Tap location plan (drawing) indicating tap locations, meter sizing, meter locations, and addresses served by each. â€¢ The Plan and profile must show detailed drawings of all connections to existing water main. â€¢ An 8" gate valve plugged and restrained will be required at the end of new main. This project will be subject to all site inspections being provided by the Chief Building Official (which includes all water and power infrastructure as well as all drainage and civil facilities). Contact numbers of the firm or person acting as Utility Construction Inspector for the project to be provided to the department prior to approval of the construction drawings. 4) For verification all properties must show proof of inclusion in the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. 5) If Construction is to be within a Road, Road Right of Way or Flood Plain/Water Way the appropriate permits must be acquired prior to any work or construction. â€¢ Page 2 '' 6) Any water service line installation or replacement will require a Service Line Permit from the Building Department. 7) Cross Connection Requirements: â€¢ All service lines are required to have an approved backflow prevention device installed for containment purposes. The device type will be dependant upon the hazard associated with the service (high hazard or low hazard). The device will be tested by a Certified Cross-Connection Technician upon installation and annually there after. â€¢ All irrigation systems are required to have an approved backflow prevention device installed for isolation purposes. The device will be tested by a Certified Cross-Connection Technician upon installation and annually there after. Contact the Cross-Connection Control Specialist at 970-577-3625 with any questions regarding the backflow requirements for this property. 8) Contractors must call Utilities Notification Center of Colorado prior to any excavation 1-800- 922-1987. Engineering: No comments as the development is outside the Town of Estes Park's area of Public Works Department and located in the Larimer County. â€¢ Page 3 Development Plan - Spur 66 f Page 1 of 1 Dave Shirk From: Mark Hollenbeck [mark@stonewoodprop.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 9:30 AM To: Cliff Tedder Subject: Development Plan - Spur 66 Attachments: DevelopmentPIan-Sketch Final 1-28-09.pdf; Pre-Ap Outcome letter - signed copy.PDF Cliff, Thanks for your time this morning. Per our discussion, it is my understanding that the Estes Park Water Department will require the water main to be extended to the last lot served in our proposed subdivision, noted as "Proposed Residence 3" in the attached sketch plan, and not to the western most property line. Any written clarification you could provide would be greatly appreciate as it will address question #45 in the attached pre-application outcome letter. Please call me with any questions. Thank you, Mark Mark Hollenbeck Stonewood Properties, LLC 561-281-6245 (M) 970-577-6445 (O) mark@stonewoodprop.com 2/20/2009 ( Page 1 of 1 Dave Shirk From: Cliff Tedder Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 2:15 PM To: Dave Shirk CC: Jeff Boles; Mark Hollenbeck Subject: RE: Development Plan - Spur 66 Attachments: Development Plan - Spur 66 Dave: In reference to #45 on you letter to Stonewood properties. The water main will be required to be extended to the last lot. It however will only need to be extended to the property line between residences 2 and 3 not to the far West property line. Thanks and please call with questions. Cliff Tedder Assistant Water Superintendent Town of Estes Park (970) 577-3622 ctedder@estes.org 2/20/2009 Mar. 20. 2009 7:10AM r. L No. 8412 P. 2 F i Cl UPPER C "Ft./ uiSTRICTi) P.O. Box 568 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 (970)-586-4544 (970) 586-1049 Fax March 19,2009 Dave Shirk, Planner II Town ofEstes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Sun]field Estates Metes and Bounds, located directly southwest of 1985 Moraine Avenue, address TBD Dear Dave, The Upper Thompson Sanitation District submits the following comments for the above referenced property: 1. The District has an existing collection main on the south side of the proposed development and reserves all rights agreed upon in easement (B 1585, P 828). The District will not allow theplacement ofany landscaping (especially trees) and the impounding of water onthe easement without prior approval. Fencing or any other structures on the easement must be designed in a way to allow District vehicles and equipment to traverse the collection line. 2. The District will require an entry point from the development to the collection line for maintenance purposes. 3. District personnel will need to review the plans to determine the plant investment fees due. Plant investment and permit fees are to be collected at the time the building permit applications are routed through the Distlict's Administration office. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank You Todd Krula Lines Superintendent Upper Thompson Sanitation District ec: Landmark Engineering (Rod Hair) ( f Dave Shirk om: Karlin Goggin [KGoggin@larimer.org] Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 11:11 AM To: Mark Hollenbeck CC: Dave Shirk Subject: Re: Development Sketch Plan - Spur 66 Hello Mark, Thank you for the sketch plan. The road name of SUNFIELD LN has been reserved for your use in this project. The layout of the road and proposed home locations do not present any addressing concerns. At this time, preliminary addresses to the three homes are as follows: Building 1: 2088 SUNFIELD LN Building 2: 2096 SUNFIELD LN Building 3: 2104 SUNFIELD LN Baring any significant changes, these addresses should be valid for the final plat process. The addresses will not appear in any database until the development is approved and final by the town of Estes Park. Should there be any significant changes, please keep me informed. Thank you, Karlin Karlin Goggin arimer County Addressing Coordinator anning & Building Services Division 970) 498-7722 >>> Mark Hollenbeck <mark@stonewoodprop.com> 02/17/2009 2:28 PM >>> Hi Karlin, Thanks again for your time. Attached, please find our sketch plan. Weld like to use Sunfield Lane for the street name, so please disregard the Clearwater reference on the attached sketch plan. We intend to submit our development plan next Wednesday, February 25. Please let me know if have any questions or if I can provide further information. Thank you, Mark -- Mark Hollenbeck Stonewood Properties, LLC 561-281-6245 (M) 970-577-6445 (O) mark@stonewoodprop.com 1 C. r 4. j /0=town of estes park/ou=ENGINEERING/cn=Recipients/cn=dshirk From: Karlin Goggin [KGoggin@larimer.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 11:58 AM To: Dave Shirk Subject: Sunfield Estates Hi Dave, I have reserved the road name of Sunfield Ln for this development. Addresses will be from this new road name and will be determined at final plat. Please let me know when you approve this project so I can complete the addressing. thanks! k. Karlin Goggin Larimer County Addressing Coordinator Planning & Building Services Division (970) 498-7722 1 C i Dave Shirk om: Traci Shambo [tshambo@larimer.org] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 7:49 AM TO: Rod Harr CC: Dave Shirk Subject: Re: Rippling River Estates, Estes Park Rod - Yes - you can do that. do you have a copy of the origianl TIS? You could perform a write- up/addendum to it that discusses your findings. Your findings could include a request to waive the TIS due to certain factors such as the fact that this is less than half of the ADT and PHV of the original plan, which is what the TIS was based on. And if the original TIS did not require any improvements then the 3 lot development would also not trip aux. lane warrants. Mention the date of the last study and that the background trips have not changed significantly to affect the results since the last study. Mention if the access location is changing and either way, please verify sight distance and access spacing as it relates to other accesses along that stretch. Thanks for asking. traci >>> "Rod Harr" <harr@landmarkltd. com> 02/18/2009 1:35 PM >>> Traci, A quick question on the above referenced project. We had a pre-application meeting with 'he Town of Estes Park on this project. One of the items they noted was that the TIA eded to be prepared for the project. It is my understanding that there has already been completed for this project as a 7 unit development. This project, as I understand it, has been accepted and approved. The Developer wants to revised the site to 3 units instead of 7. Logic would tell me there would be less of an impact with 3 units as opposed to 7. The Town agreed but said this was your comment and that I would have to have you waive it. We did not want to have the delays to actually perform another TIA. We are trying to submit on February 25, 2009. The Town only just gave us the comments and responded to our questions about the need for a new TIA. Can we provide a letter that states the intentions of modifying the site from 7 units to 3 units and that the respective traffic will be 1/2 or less than what was previously approved? Just a thought. Please let me know your thoughts/requirements on this. Thanks, Rod I am using the Free version of SPAMfighter <http://www.spamfighter.com/len> . We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam. SPAMfi ghter has removed 5823 of my spam emails to date. The Professional version does not have this message. 1 r r C C /0=town of estes park/ou=ENGINEERING/cn=Recipients/cn=dshirk From: Candace Phippen [cphippen@larimer.org] Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 12:58 PM To: Dave Shirk Subject: Sunfield Estates and Otis Variance Request Hi Dave. No issues from my end. I believe Stan Griep will have e-mailed separately. Call if you have any questions. Thanks. 1 f J /0=town of estes park/ou=ENGINEERING/cn=Recipients/cn=dshirk )m: Stan Griep [sgriep@larimer.org] -ent: Monday, March 23, 2009 1:27 PM To: Dave Shirk Subject: Otis Variance and Sunfield Estates Hello and good afternoon Dave. I have no comments on the Otis Variance setback variance request other than to say that they will be required to obtain a building permit for the garage prior to any work on the structure or its foundation system. Concerning the Sunfield project I have the following comments; A building permit is required for each structure. Any retaining walls that are four feet or taller (measured from bottom of footing up) will require Engineered plans to be submitted with the application for permit, as well as 4 plot plans. The residence structures will need to have engineered foundation systems and a complete structural design analysis done on each by the project engineer due to this being a High Wind Design Area (138 MPH 3-second gust - Exposure C) . All engineers shall be Colorado Registered Engineers. The river access stairs will need to comply with the 2006 International Building Code (maximum rise = 7" minimum tread depth = 11", graspable handrails both sides and minimum width of 36"). We would require a code compliant guardrail system atop the proposed river wall if there is a walkway within 3 feet of a 30 inch or more drop off. I have copied this email to Rod at Landmark but did not send anything to Paul on the Otis project. anks for the opportunity to comment. Stan Stan V. Griep Lead/Commercial Plans Examiner Larimer County Building Department Ft. Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 voice: (970) 498-7714 email: sgriep@larimer.org 1 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT DENVER REGULATORY OFFICE, 9307 S. Wadsworth Boulevard LITTLETON, COLORADO 80128-6901 , March 17, 2009 Mr. Dave Shirk Town of Estes Park Community Development Department PO Box 1200 170 Macgregor Avenue Estes Park, CO 80517 RE: Sunfield Estates Corps File No. NWO-2007-3825-DEN Dear Mr. Shirk: Reference is made to the above-referenced project located in the SE 91 of Section 34, T5N, R73W, Larimer County, Colorado. If any work associated with this project requires the placement of dredged or fill material, and any excavation associated with a dredged or, fill project, either temporary or permanent, in the Big Thompson River or its riparian wetlands, this office should be notified by a proponent of the proiect for Department of the Army permits, changes in permit requirements or jurisdictional determinations pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Work in an aquatic site should be identified by the proponent of the project and be shown on a map identifying the Quarter Section, Township, Range and County or Latitude and Longitude, Decimal Degrees (datum NAD 83) and the dimensions of work in each aquatic site. Any loss of an aquatic site may require mitigation. Mitigation requirements will be determined during the Department of the Army permitting review. If there are any questions call Mr. Terry McKee of my office at (303) 979-4120 and reference Corps File No. NWO-2007-3825-DEN. Standi, ,/ /'0'~ /07. ,?VULL, /1.-- . - Timo#f~rey f J ChieÂ¢223#RegulktoryUffice tm Copies Furnished: Rod Harr Landmark Engineering 3521 W. Eisenhower Blvd. Loveland, CO 80537 31 724 1.,9.v 9-zw â‚¬Lu~Â»,en,Â£5 4:~84117ze'.0 4: *47.s Â¢*tiL, emu'*-4 Lf,tual. 6% 1/f I cÂ»ul./ AW-1- *'1~~ Â»de*7,Â»4 e~ fÂ»t/bu ) D~ 76 ~~.Â£14>4~ +Uvt *lu *wâ„¢U,/ jeA+04Â£006 Â»,wted, 4.,i id 2 -W.Alu wir k#*Aulv /062,8.6/ tcz,, ,~taw<Â«u >(60* a.u n,~w fa*,;1- Arcu, at A, OUU, frAxuu 1.444'W .9, Alflofg -kk> PtÂ»b . 'k Ul t.1 h .4 24 1- UUfu Ult Â» #w~u 14 w le'l l b.r 1/tw /Â·-ot a,04 0- dafu Clt 9#I47- mo-20 0,4, 9+-01.- - 4~744 ) *- r MAKAN 441; klua*A , ju,3 -6. FW: Sunfield Estates - Hwy â‚¬ ' stes Park Page 1 of 2 Dave Shirk From: Mark Hollenbeck [mark@stonewoodprop.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 6:28 AM To: Dave Shirk Subject: FW: Sunfield Estates - Hwy 66, Estes Park Hey Dave, Just wanted to let you know I've been in touch with Mr. & Mrs. McTavish. Thanks for the possible lead! Mark ------ Forwarded Message From: <BDMacl@comcast.net> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 03:37:10 +0000 (UTC) To: Mark Hollenbeck <mark@stonewoodprop.com> Subject: Re: Sunfield Estates - Hwy 66, Estes Park Mark, Thanks so much for the info. We do have an interest and would appreciate any updates. Ben & Donna Mac ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Hollenbeck" <mark@stonewoodprop.com> To: BDMacl@comcast.net Ce: "Don Chasen" <don@stonewoodprop.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 17,2009 1:19:20 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central Subject: Sunfield Estates - Hwy 66, Estes Park Hi Ben & Donna, After speaking with Dave Shirk this morning, I thought I'd send you a note. I live in unit #3 and work for a gentlemen that bought the 2.6 acre lot, adjacent to your unit, last Fall. As you are aware, the prior developer had obtained approval for a 7 unit townhome project. From the time he acquired this property, my employer was interested in developing a project with lower density and recently submitted a plan for 3 home sites. The project has been designed so that each lot will have unobstructed river and Continental Divide view corridors. If approved, the Sunfield project will be an architecturally controlled community featuring smaller, high quality estate homes, brick paver streets, natural stone walls, and extensive natural landscaping. Its architectural elements will include timbers, native stone masonry, hand-carved wood elements, and wrought iron fixtures. Siding will be 2" planks with chinking. The intention is to create an historically accurate reproduction of early 20th century mountain architecture, except for certain contemporary improvements such as garages, etc. It is anticipated that the houses will have approximately 3,500 square feet ofheated space. I've attached a copy of the proposed Sunfield site plan for your review. This is the plan the Estes Valley Planning Commission will be considering on 4/21. If the Sunfield plan is not approved, my employer will be moving forward with constructing the previously approved 7 unit townhome plan. Our website, which has additional information about the Sunfield project, is currently down for maintenance, but should be up again later this evening. Its address is: http://www. stonewoodprop.com/.<http://www. stonewoodprop.com/> Please let me know if you have any questions and/or possible interest in any ofthese home sites. 3/18/2009 4.' 4-.3 ~ 6003 9 1 8 3 3 li_1 oi STONEWOOD PROPERTIES, LLC _~bADEÂ©~~- FebruNry 25,2009 Mr. David Shirk, Planner II Community Development Department Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Parcel Number: 35344-00-024 (Sunfield Estates) - Statement of Intent Dear Dave: Pursuant to our pre-application meeting on February 5,2009, we are hereby requesting the Town' s consideration of this new development plan, herein after referred to as "Sunfield," for the referenced property. We do not wish to abandon the approved Rippling River Estates Development Plan, herein after referred to as "Rippling River," unless and until Sunfield receives its approvals and its first building permit is issued. The intent of the Sunfield plan is to reduce the previously approved density, from 7 units to 3 units, and to introduce estate homes to the Big Thompson riverfront. In that regard, we hope that this project will be a precedent for future single family housing on the river in lieu of the multi-family product developed to date. Sunfield will utilize the curb cut previously approved for Rippling River. A primary difference in the site plans is that the Sunfield plan uses a spaced design for the building locations rather than a clustered one. Further, Sunfield will include unique features such as paver streets, stone retaining walls, unique exterior lighting, and unique architectural elements, further described in the attached design them statement, which will greatly distinguish it from Rippling River. I *ery much appreciate your consideration of the Sunfield proposal. If I may provide additional information or answer any questions, please don't hesitate to call me. Sincerely, 14< Ittld Mark Holfenbeck 1986 Dallman Drive #3, Estes Park, CO 80517 mark@stonewoodprop.com 0 561-281-6245 (M) 0 OEÂ© FE u \3 n n / El [%1 SUNFIELD dj ~-~ FEB 2 5 2009 Design Theme The architectural theme of the project is turn-of-the-century quality. The century in question is the 206 Some of the elements that come to mind are timbers, native stone, hand- carved wood elements, and wrought iron fixtures. Siding will be 2" planks with chinking. There will be a liberal use of masonry elements: foundations, chimneys, and exterior highlights. The intention is to create an historically accurate reproduction, except for certain contemporary improvements. For example, concrete tile roofing will replace slate and wood; three-car garages will replace the carriage shed. Certain materials will not be permitted, such as stucco, asphalt shingles and synthetic wood. The color scheme will be strictly natural wood tones and stone. Regarding the sizes of the structures, we believe that smaller homes of the highest quality trump larger homes of mediocre materials. It is anticipated that the houses will have approximately 3,500 square feet of heated space. h BMECEDVE n 1 u ESTES VALLEY ... f J) 16.fÂ»%01 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION~ i~ FEB 2 5 2009 ~ J 1 k '--*; Submittal Date: 2-25-09 \ Type ofkliplidation ' Â· . 4. 46 .il i, Â¥$ 4. . '. F... - - - g. 1 2 1 -4 7 - ./ g Development Plan 1- Boundary Line Adjustment Condominium Map 1- Special Review r ROW or Easement Vacation r Preliminary Map r Rezoning Petition r Street Name Change 1- Final Map 1- Preliminary Subdivision Plat r Time Extension r Supplemental Map 1- Final Subdivision Plat 1- Other: Please specify r Minor Subdivision Plat F Amended Plat General Information Project Name SuNFIELD ESTATEs bEvELof,vIEWT Â»LEA) Project Description 3 - U.v,Â·r Deve-LoPME.Â·r Project Address /14-6- LISTEB By LaR,MER dow,Â·rv Asse-55012.- Legal Description 52-6 ArrAL net:> Parcel ID # 55%99 - 00 - 024 Section 39 Township 5/1/ Range 73*~U Site Information Total Development Area (e.g., lot size) in acres Z.55 Existing Land Use VACAA/T Proposed Land Use 5:A/GLE /Muer, Farnia Existing Water Service r Town F- Well g None F- Other (specify) Proposed Water Service R Town r- Well F- None F Other (specify) Existing Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD R UTSD r Septic F None Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service F EPSD R UTSD r Septic Is a sewer lift station required? F Yes R No Existing Gas Service r Xcel F Other R None Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning A A Site Access (if not on public street) Are there wetlands on the site? 37 Yes F No Site staking must be completed at the time application is submitted. Complete? 0( Yes F No Primary Contact Information Name of Primary Contact Person MARK NoLLUBELK for â‚¬Towwooo -PRopan 65 Complete Mailing Address 2200 60 vERA/o,Rs 14/VE, ESTES TARK ,CO â‚¬09,7 Attachments 0 Application fee K Statement of intent JR- 3 copies (folded) of plat or plan ;Â¢ 11 " X 17" reduced copy of plat or plan 0 Names & mailing addresses of neighboring property owners (see attached handout) Please review the Estes Valley Development Code Appendix B for additional submittal requirements, which may include ISO calculations, drainage report, traffic impact analysis, geologic hazard mitigation report, wildfire hazard mitigation report, wetlands report, and/or other additional information. Town of Estes Park 4 P.O. Box 1200 -6 170 MacGregor Avenue 4 Estes Park, CO 80517 Community Development Department Phone: (970) 577-3721 + Fax: (970) 586-0249 4 www.estesnet.com/ComDev . 1 0,7~ 42.1 0 - 0 Primary Contact Person is R owner F Applicant F Consultant/Engineer ~ Record Owner(s) 4-FoREU.)06>D 7RoPEATI E-5 ~21#4RK HoiLE,ta Et-kb Mailing Address 2200 GovÂ·ER,*â‚¬-AS U/2/6-,0 61TE-5 7>421< 1 CO 90577 Phone 970 - 677- (0115 Cell Phone 970 - 676 - 4310 Fax Email Mar k 9 91-anfu>a>ol prep, Co,1/l Applicant 64#16 115 DumER Mailing Address Phone Cell Phone Fax Email ConsultanUEngineer L ANDiM ARK EkiweER(-6, 1,vo. (Rob UY, AR 3 Mailing Address -15-21 (daT Â£152*~HowER Â£>LVD. LavELANDJ 0 905-37 Phone 9 70 -le (01 - Le"Z 811 Cell Phone Fax 97(3 - 667 - GZ91 Email harr 9 land,â€¢lark 1+0(. Coph ~ APPLICATION FEES For development within the Estes Valley Planning Area, both inside and outside Town limits See the fee schedule included in your application packet or view the fee schedule online at www.estesnet.com/ComDev/Schedules&Fees/PlanningApplicationFeeSchedule.pdf. All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal. MINERAL RIGHT CERTIFICATION On July 1, 2001, House Bill 01-1088 became effective. This legislation requires applicants for Development Plans, Special Reviews, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plats, Minor Subdivision Plats if creating a new lot, and Preliminary and Final Condominium Map& to give notice of their application to all mineral estate owners where the surface estate and the mineral estate have been severed. This notice must be given 30 days prior to the first hearing on an application for development. I hereby certify that the provisions of House Bill 01-1088 Section 24-65.5-103 CRS have been met. Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRINT: Applicant PLEASE PRINT: Signatures: Record Owner Date ~ Applicant Date , c @ lE Â© lE 0 v lEi 1 f-. . I ... .4*Pt. 667*~i'tiftÂ¥ U -1 Primary Contact Person is 17 Owner E Applicant 13 Consultantl ginem - Record Owner(s) Mailing Address Phone Cell Phone Fax Email Applicant Mailing Address Phone Cell Phone Fax Email ConsultanUEnglneer Mailing Address Phone Cell Phone Fax Email APPLICATION FEES For development within the Estes Valley Planning Area, both inside and outside Town limits See the fee schedule included in your application packet or view the fee schedule online at www.estesnet.com/ComDev/Schedules&Fees/PlanningApplicationFeeSchedule.pdf. All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal. MINERAL RIGHT CERTIFICATION On July 1, 2001, House Bill 01-1088 became effective. This legislation requires applicants for Development Plans, Special Reviews, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plats, Minor Subdivision Plats if creating a new lot, and Preliminary and Final Condominium Maps to give notice of their application to all mineral estate owners where the surface estate and the mineral estate have been severed. This notice must be given 30 days prior to the first hearing on an application for development.Â· I hereby certify that the provisions of House Bill 01-1088 Section 24-65.5-103 CRS have been met. Names: 1 A 149 100&11 Record Owner PLEASE PR/NT. /Dialt# ZÂ· Â£5 05â‚¬,1 - 04.,6#q/Â»fâ‚¬.6..1; riD~ft'#4 LL Ut Applicant PLEASE PRJNT.Â· ,Aa,K Noilâ‚¬lue.LK Signatures: Record Owner ~ C'WA B.â€¢4 Date Applicant Date 0 42 APPLICANT CERTIFICATION < 4 I hereby certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that in filing the application l am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owners of the property. â€¢ In submitting the application materials and signing this application agreement, 1 acknowledge and agree that the application is subject to the applicable processing and public hearing requirements set forth in the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC). * I acknowledge that I have obtained or have access to the EVDC, and that, prior to filing this application, I have had the opportunity to consult the relevant provisions governing the processing of and decision on the application. (The Estes Valley Development Code is available online at wv~.estesnet.com/Con,Dev/DevCode.) * I understand that acceptance of this application by the Town of Estes Pari< for filing and receipt of the application fee by the Town does not necessarily mean that the application is complete under the applicable requirements of the EVDC. * I understand that this proposal may be delayed in processing by a month or more if the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or submitted after the deadline date. h I understand that a resubmittal fee will be charged if my application is incomplete. â€¢ The Community Development Department will notify the applicant in writing of the date on which the application is determined to be complete. â€¢ I grant permission for Town of Estes Park Employees and Planning Commissioners with proper identification access to my property during the review of this application. â€¢ I acknowledge that l have received the Estes Valley Development Review Applicatidn Schedule and that failure to meet the deadlines shown on said schedule shall result in my application or the approval of my application bedoming NULL ~ and VOID. I understand that full fees will be charged for the resubmittal of an application that has become null and void. Names: Record Owner PLEASE PRINT: ~DMoc~ L. (54 ~5â‚¬vl -01...r/Me-6.41 .~5to.0toooj Applicant PLEASE PRINTÂ· /4 et / K No / . ~vt ~09 4-K f4O1rtic<p Lt, Signatures: Record Owner /CK)Â·0Â« ~~G'~~~uv-+A Date A.Fa* R"A'll- \4/L--4 -C Date ~ MAR - 6 2009 1 ~ Revised 06/26/07 1 , 4,1 r'.4 - 4 '- '04.4 ' . C % .-3 4&,2;hmi~*1 ... e r 3 Â· L â€¢trjt<>c ir n g ineers Plant-.ers. 53Â·.,voycrs 2,/ 5.,~-ce.~,&,22~gr/4Â£' ~--L,4 i,CyÂ£~ Ij~ht,2%-0~Â·rELARL22, 4.8./. w..~iL5?44 '3;67**+6321 1/ It r Orn 1 1 1-13 j FEB 2 0 t-uug ~ 'i 1\1 i 3 1.3L---2~ .--U Loveland 970-667-6286 Toll Free 866-379-6252 ~ Fax 970-667-6298 } www.landmarkltd coin i February 24,2009 352t West Eisenhower Blvd. Loveland. Colorado 80537 Project No. STONEP-9A8A-02-600-Al Mrs. Traci Shambo, P.E. Larimer County Engineering c/o Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 RE: Sunfield Estates Traffic Impact Study Variance Request Dear Traci: This letter is to formally request a Variance to the need for a new Traffic Impact Study (TIS) as required in the Pre-Application Meeting Requirements, item #30. The reasons for a "Variance Request" are outlined herein. This project site was originally approved as the Rippling River Estates Development and consisted of 7 units. e TIS that was used for this approval was signed April 23,2008 by Lonnie A. Sheldon, P.E. The TIS ressed the existing traffic on Spur 66 (Moraine Avenue), the anticipated additional trip generation, and site distance requirements. The approved plan noted the location of the proposed access in a location that would provide a minimum site distance of 490 feet, which exceeds the minimum site distance requirements of 440 feet for the posted speed. In addition, the traffic count at the time of the TIS was estimated to be 3,800 trips with the road capacity being 7,000. The additional trip generation was estimated to be 10 trips per unit for a total of 70 additional trips. These additional trips equated to approximately 2% of the existing traffic and less than 1 % of the allow traffic. This additional traffic did not warrant additional improvements to Spur 66. The revised plan reduces the number of units to 3 with the site access remaining in the same location. Using the same assumptions of 10 additional trips per unit, this would add an additional 30 additional trips. This is |eSS than M of the original estimate and would translate to less than 1 % of the existing daily trips and less than !4% or the allowed trips. Since the original TIS and project traffic did not warrant additional improvements it would be logical to assume the current proposal would not require additional improvements. The total additional traffic count will now be reduced from the approved level of traffic. Therefore, based on the above reasons, we respectfully request a Variance from the required need for a new TIS. It is our opinion, the existing TIS, which was used for the original approval would still be valid. If you have any questions, please contact our office. OUU'1111///4 /ADO R //// Sincerely, - -09 OFâ€¢~56 A i / Ef ir:* NDMARK ENGIN~E~ING LTD. \ i Â£4Â¥1 2957 in B& t?,44 %Â»PIA-Â·0:.d'#P v s. - Â¢D J..'L- IR 'V' & 4,. 12 3/ONAL EF * Rodney *Flarr, P.E. 0///t/, ' ' H 'â€ž'. \\\,\11"111/0/1// I. P I - . I I ] .- - ... 7 & ' 4 0 0 1--In [EngineerÂ·s Planners Surveyors Al/-'tects ae:itic,â‚¬0,1,(i,.gh C 1 --*.*.Ir#Â· 3 4.41 ke< .:4 + - <27 3 4 4 I -r- 1 *Bland:hajoifkj - p *.2, Te. 1 Engineerling 'ALLLE_=10 Loveland 970-667-6286 Toll Free 866-379-6252 Fax 970-667-6298 www.land markltd.com 3521 West Eisenhower Blvd. Loveland, Colorado 80537 Mr. David Shirk, AICP Town of Estes Park Community Development Department 170 MacGregor Avenue Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Sunfield Estates Development Stormwater Management Report Mr. Shirk, This letter is written to discuss the stormwater management for the proposed Sunfield Estates development on Spur 66. This site was previously considered for development by a different property and a general development plan was submitted to Estes Valley Development Committee for review in April 2008. A stonnwater management report was included in the previously proposed "Rippling River Estates" development plan. Due to the similarities o f the two developments, a review o f the Stormwater Management Plan for the Rippling River Estates development was conducted and the components of this report are believed to be valid for the Sunfield Estates development plan and will be used in the final design of the Sunfield Estates development. The final grading plan of the Sunfield Estates will include 3 small PLD's as discussed in the previous stonnwater management plan. These PLD's will be placed in the same general locations as previously designed for Rippling River Estates, however the final locations will be adjusted to reflect the final footprints ofthe proposed buildings in the Sunfield Estates development. For additional information regarding the stormwater management plan please reference the "Rippling River Development Stormwater Management Report" that was included in the April 2008 submittal package. Also, feel free to call with any questions or concerns regarding this letter, 970-667-6286. Sincerely, Landmark Engineering, Inc. #*AE 98Â£&.'tal i/L- & 2. .mm 1*Â·.2-25-_01 :~4911 Bryce A. Brady, P.E. WEVAIN VILy C C ~C --11# 111 EÂ© [2 0 ViE p 1- 2 3 L D Cul)9 W f.(11 '1 h-v' .1 j j'Â· un:1 1 )1 j \,1 u__----<.*---*----*-- ' 1 11 .1 1,11!11. C (ill u 1:(1:1 ::(F 4'm(Or-{)!l. .-A Ullobc] 2.4.2006 J\41. Zach Hanson, Project J\4 anager Van Horn Engineering and Sul-Veyinf ]043 Fish Creck Road Estes Park. Colo]-ado 805]7 RE: Wetland Evaluation for t.lie Toft Property Project, Estes Park, Colorado Dear Air. Hanson: This serves to present the results of a field reconnaissance madelo the Toft Property project area on October 2.0 and 23,2006. The task for this field work was to evaluate tile presence or absence of wetlands and Waters of the United States (Waters) within the project area and determine: if they were found to be present, whether they would be impacted by the proposed development. The proposed project entails the construction of 10 detached dwelling units Within the project boundaries between Highway 66 and the Big Thompson River. The project area is located east of the YMCA of the Rockies facility on Highway 66 and west of the split of Highway 66 near Beaver Point near Estes Park. The project area is located in the northwest 4 of the southeast M of Section 34, Township 5 North: Range 73 West in Larimer County. The longitude is 105 degrees, 33 minutes, 41 seconds and the latitude is 40 degrees, 21 minutes, 19 seconds. The elevation of the project area is approximately 7.700 feet above sea level. The project location is found within the Estes Park: Colorado Quadrangle 7.5 minute Sel-ies topogrÂ·aphic map. The results of the field reconnaissance wei-e that no wellands exist within the property boundaries. Although several species of hydrophytic vegetation exist within the riparian con-ido]- of the Big Thompson River al the southern boundary of the property, no dominant hydrophytic vegetation was observed within the project area, A]der (Al.nus 1.ellui.folio), river birch 03 etula Tom ina.lis) and a vai-jely of willow (Sali.1- sp.) occur within the riparian zone directly adjacent to the ]-]ver on top of die 1-iver bank. The ren'lainder of the site is covered with groves of aspen (topu.lix.s irem.tiloides) and inle]-spe]-Bed ponderosa pine (Pinus poilderosa L The herbaceous vegetation St]-813 is domiizated by Umothy (P/1/eum pia.lense): sniooth brome (31-0177.us inermis). and redtop bent (Agroslis sloloni.Tera). Tile ploject area lays ups]ope and upland from the river with "high and dry- vegetation cover and hydrologic diaracteristics. 1,1 1 1 1 1 1 < . 4 i t.,1 1 1 i.. i.. .... , 11 1 .1 1 . / .- P 11 R ..1 t n - - - 1 1 ; 1 .4 11 * . 11 .. ' ; 1 1' -- Â·Â· . , 7/Car,le clill ~ a...1 1 / 1 -' ' i .,i +. . 1 \.1 .. ..C 9 %1'22%( Ao(u f~ i a i j> L-~ 11 ... . 1 It . '\ 11' . 11 11 i. I / 1 -,4 . ./I' 1 / 1 .~ t , C." I /' I mul 1 , \ h.. J 4 ./ 1 1': , 1 1 -' 7- 1 , .. I , u i ' ---- ,&1' ..$ 6,0-,elÂ·l c L .&: ..-1 , 1 '9. AdÂ·-Â· j N O ln. 1.) K 0 '1'1 " 'Â· " -- \ n 11.-1 , 1:1(44 .:.11'..l . 1-5 ..:/r..c Â·6008 -Â· ' !769'0 .1 Â·Â· Â·Â· 60-'' ' -- 1 , 3 :'I A le . f .1 3, '. , e , / I ..2 r. 1 1 11 ,} . .1 . 11 . , '1 .1, D, C G .... ' 1 I r Â£41 - jt f h t . ....2 t" 4 ~1 'I '~'~9, 9.a-in) j '1 .j 3 % r. -1-b JUDEEZL=.--lIZJJ-=T vy-c-d 0 24Â· 1 -1 ..Ca L .1 -1/ 1, h 0 6#ing kie, 6 1-2 :=1.7957-- 1 ..1 \ \ .... P - Â· Â· I I ' , ..C --- j 4 . 1 JÂ·- ...1, 2.1 -1 1.. 0 6, . I /' 1,1. 4 1 . III. 1 /4 , . I .- \. 11.. .i / , C (1:#M. ,-f........ ~n N I.- - .. f.\Â· " I. ...... . 1 ' Confeunte Camp i '.Â·Â·. rk: - i , 1 .11 . 4 -.1. r 21/ ..' Â·!' -. ~- . .rÂ·i ' : . B AJOA ),4Â·*\:'' #/P . 7 ~ 8612 - -- k-' f. 'j 7&621.11 i . a .. 'I L 4. P 277 9 Hot n A +\Â· 7 f C ).$(Te&16 c.- Â· ~ h~t- i-'-- ' , 1 / 1 ft ' T Q;,0 r Â°ful , a 6/4 2 1 C 96Â£: ' ) : SC~ Jiffil . ,- ~7 u ~8* 7 0 .r, < ~ ; 3 ' ./ ji(,t)21 ~Fle Â·f l t..924 / 44 ii i r - 4 1. Mlnt 'i Ill j ~~~ '' ~ ~~, f -, /1 ' /1 4 1, t'.1; >. 10< 4, 4.--,1 f / / , I. i , 1Â·Â·14 1 - \67- C F 1 11Â· till. r.1,12 / 11.' &2.,11.141'.1 - b ? 1 Figure 1 Toft Propertv Project Project Area Map : C i 1,1/(.1 111 \17!Hl d,L.h V.'ill').lilli' 1 1111141. 16'd/,, , :1,2, /, //il j ' 11'rnt :114111 ] <jilill, 14 ( ;! p' dill (i , ;: 111,Â· 50, :i t.Â·' 11 ( 11 JI Ill(' (,~,11114 {illit< Ii:'ilifilt' Jil I,ill;1111111/111'1:'/'ill lu 111.1~1:11,1,11 lilli 61'11 1,)11; 1!11'11,'liic'i' Iii' , 4 Ndl , .7. 11, (1.,iii'' t;;11 atid cpi Ii,)1 jj'dd \, , Ii,!ji,j 1, 311!p,','. i )1 lj,:(11!i :1 1JJ ,I j, 1 Â·'t.'1!21}11 Ilval(H'H'Y 1 Ji (' y (3{ CIt} ;] I ]JJJ'. Lp(}1 (jj] 113(' Li 1(- (111(* 11, I 1]jji)Il jj< 11 11 1!1(Â· :1,4,!).;11 J} 1.PJJ V.'' 1.-r' 1.yill ' ,]1 )( ) \'( ' i j ic.' ~.\V:11(. Sul t:Il l' \4Â·',11(Â·J } 1 j '. 1 3('l'jj ( h,-11]Jj<'](Â·(j l r) 1 I jJ . ,]1 (.I] 11 # j]H {jj(Â· J E );1(! I j.i, 1 1](' 1 A,1(- ('l ljol li of Wc)(,d.y dcl)]-1.$ 211 NIC (dd :1(.'ll'LS root(' U) Illl' 1)1()1-)('}1.y Thic,(.Â· \,aj](,\1Â·'f, (1(.ilj] \),/1111 11(3]J(]c}(j',â€ži ]9]]]C. 2 ddl] jileÂ· U] J ]H] A] spol.' jot 21 ] jO ot j jer up];um] xcniÂ· *cokÂ·s. Wetland hydrology was not available on the ma joi-il.y of the projecl area. with the exception oi Lhe ]]ver CJ-lani-ie] ille]1. as Uie elevation of the projecl area wat some 4-]O ket al)ove the 1-iver channel. The upland shelf is covered with aspen and meadow grasses and jorbs as described above. The top of the bank suppons severa] hydrophytic species; bul hydrology supporting these species is obtabied by their roots reaching groundwater recharge ref>en/es within the bank itself. Waters are definitely present in association with the Big Thompson River which lies along the southern border of t.he project area, A formal wetland delineation has not been conducted to-date pending a revision to the existing 100-year floodplain by Van Horn Engineering, If FEMA approves the revised floodplain mapping: parts of the project area can be filled at the top of the bank of the river inward to the rest of the pro.ject area, This activity may impact riparian vegetation and may fall under jurisdiction by the U.S. Anle Corps of Engineers. At this tirile. a 50-foot setback from the river's edge would protect all potential Waters of the United States from impact by the proposed projectk construction parameters, The Waters issue will be revisited after FE!\4A makes a final determination as to the adoption of a new 100-year floodplain boundary at this location on the Big Thompson River. Soils on the site consist of sandy loam with cobbles, Larger moss rocks are observed across the site and are typical of soils adjacent to the Big Thompson River. The soil was found to range from 10 YR 3/2 at the river's edge to 10 YR 4/3 within the upland meadow area of the Site, Soils are not hydric on the site with the exception of those associated with the riparian zone directly adjacent to the river. In summary, no wetlands occur within the project area. A thin riparian corridor occurs adjacent to the Big Thompson River. Waters of the United States occur within the banks of and in association with the Big Thompson River itself. lf you have any questions: or require additional information, please feel free to call me at 970-635-9183. Sincere}y: l 4 j M i /0 . //- \1 /if/il /1 - 1-, i UU 'Li/. -iÂ·' V ~ i V Â·U,-71 \ 1,0 7 U . 0- Darcy A. Tiglas. Biologist Tigias Ecological Services C h A h h N g NhhhAN h h r- hh Â·r- r .-r "r-"ri-" 9- 1 1- O (D 10 10 If) 10 9|Â» LO LO LO LO LO LO LO - c\1 10 00 Al F~ F) '~ xI-ONtO 0 0 (r) 0000009 8 8 005000 r- 00 0 00 00 00 00 00 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r Â¥ Q 0 0 % % 0 a 20@0000 72 *00000000 OrooOOCD ~ u 0 0 0000 -00 00 0000 00 00= O 00 28 - U.1 -21.1.1 j. ~2 -2 .22 -EZ (V ': -2 -00 Bdo - 0<t -m 6 2 0 Of -E Im ..2 % ,%44 0 16 - m - m m m 28 69> CO co ic -.c co E -2 - co 0- m 0- 0- 0- 0- 00 . 0- 0- 0- 0- -- 1.12 E - U) U 1-6:.-igg}mgo_Em 0 020 2 Eâ‚¬ Egg ag & Em ~ 0 020 - h ~S 2 28 E U * 4 0 00 0 0 Dowu); O 0 LU O Ill LU LU 111 n O LLI LU LLI LU 111111 LU _1 LL LU O _1111 LU m _1 U. LU < 0 ~wlfezep * "S g;*88 ~~ ~I~~62 88 g .E -~ C\' A D ill *v B TE H U, 0 E Z E~ 00000ouo r M Lo 0 4- cv 0 1 .6 LU m w 9!800 ~ ~ ~~ 00 o u C) 0 cV co r C\1 ON 8 00 00 CD If) C\1 Acragoggs#lo C\1 1-0- O- .- ~ C\| C\100 CNI O. m ,- Al(0 91- N * 1.0 0- r m ,-9-1-h 02 0- 2.21 -g Nd - J Â£ a M - co B J â‚¬> 6 (0 92.22 ~ -~ W 4%@w- 0-1= g 0 22 CO -1, a) 22 23,1 1 ==-,2 1 ZE'* 2 0 Ig).5 &%8 CD (0 -92 C 0- 0- r - L Q- d 0 CD (D 00 0) R Â® 0 CD CJ) cr u 0 W 0 =1 (D C C 2 - 0 2 0 0 1- -C co 0 0 >0.*zt Â§~*-icafgh w w O -- H.E DmnmoILL 1 0517 80908 1(] Meecls- 8 !IlleueIN eluen~e'Al Z L908 OO aAV euieJOIN 298 60 L92 Xl 82808 V 3N eoue40 XpOOAAUna +0 1srul eouepisel Sled pe!1!lei stes ark, stes ark, stes Park, he~ste tes Par n & Michaela Blazek Owner 11 ~943 Broadmoor Rd 8 N 141 st Ave & Lynn Lykins Hararf PI 2086 Uplands Cir James Ranglos Developers, LLC ark Hollenbeck ount Cottages ladooo w !11 OdÂ¥ selels3 ple!luns Owner S UNFIEL_D E STATES OF 40 MPH = DESIGN SPEED = 45 MPH = 360 FEET 7 SPACES REQUIRED SIGHT DISTANCE: PARKING SIGHT DISTANCE REQUIRED: POSTED SPEED REQUIRED: 2.25 PER DWELLING UNIT - (CDOT DESIGN GUIDE 2005, CHAPTER 3, ELEMENTS PROVIDED: 18 OF DESIGN, TABLE 3-1) EACH UNIT HAS A 3 CAR ATTACHED 44 SOUTH: 1220 FEET ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY PARKING = 9 SPACES 4}Â· 0-E-NERAL -D-EVELOPMENT - SITE PLA_N NORTH: 490 FEET GARAGE = 9 SPACES 4 BUILDING INFORMATION: SPACES. ALL PARKING SPACES PROVIDED SHALL BE STANDARD PROPOSED: A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SE 4 OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, (3 SINGLE FAMILY) ZONING: 3 DWELUNG UNITS SIZE: 3,802 s.f. (Average Footprint Per Unit) A- ACCOMMODATIONS Â·rt> ~~ ~'~~ ~ RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6th P.M., COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. EVDC AND SHALL BE MEASURED FROM THE ORIGINAL POST ROAD DEDICATION: FRONT 25', SIDE 15', USE: RESIDENTIAL EXISTING SETBACKS: FRONT 25', SIDE 15', MAXWUM BUILDING HEIGHT IS 30' DESIGNATED BY THE REAR 10', 50' RIVER am GRADE PRIOR TO THE IMPORTATION OF FILL ONTO THE REAR 10', RIVER 50' SITE. ALL PROPOSED BUILDINGS WILL MEET THIS 11- HEIGHT RESTRICTION. DENSITY: GROSS AREA = 110,988 s.f. (2.55 acres) DESIGNER/ENGINEER: PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT/CONTACT: ROAD DEDICATION: 7,030 s.f. 6-4 LANDMARK ENGINEERING STONEWOOD PROPERTIES MARK HOLLENBECK NOTES: 3521 W. EISENHOWER BLVD. 2200 GOVERNORS LANE STONEWOOD PROPERTIES 1. EXTERIOR LIGHTING WILL BE LOCATED AT THE ENTRY POINTS OF FLOOD PLAIN =67,414 s.f. (80% FLOOD PLAIN -EAGI. Cup, RD. PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATE LOVELAND, CO 80537 ESTES PARK, CO 80517 2200 GOVERNORS LANE LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SHIELDED AND DEFLECTED DOWNWARD. COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION placed on site.) THE NEW BUILDINGS, ATTACHED TO THE BUILDINGS AND WILL BE REDUCTION=53,931 s.f.)(Existing flood plain prior to fill (970) 667-6286 (970)577-6115 ESTES PARK, CO 80517 PRE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION: 7.9 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE IS REQUIRED. NET AREA = GROSS AREA - ROAD DEDICATION - 80% SITE ON THIS ____ DAY OF , 20__. (970)676-9310 cell A ZONING REQUIREMENTS: APPROVED AND ACCEPTED BY THE ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION (970)577-6115 office (FROM LANDAMERICA TITLE COMMITMENT No. TNEP0001360) 2. ALL REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED OR FLOOD PLAIN = 50,027 s.f. r BEGINNING AT THE CENTER 4 CORNER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, GUARANTEED IN ACCORDANCE WITH EVDC SECTIONS 7.12 AND RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., THENCE SOUTH 36 DEGREES 44 MINUTES 10.5K. 30 SECONDS EAST 712.11 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, A SINGLE FAMILY LEGEND MONUMENT ON THE RIGHT OF WAY OF STATE HIGHWAY SPUR 66, THE BRASS 3 0 9,000 per unit = 27,000 s.f. 3. PER SECTION 7.2.86, RETAINING WALLS OVER FOUR FEET TALL CAP THEREIN IS INSCRIBED STATION 45+00; MUST BE ENGINEERED. THENCE ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY OF STATE HIGHWAY SPUR 66 SOUTH 35 4. PER SECTION 7.13, "CONDUIT, METERS, VENTS AND OTHER TOTAL LAND AREA REQUIRED = 27,000 s.f. - OK PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR -- -7009 Â·Â·Â· EXISTING CONTOUR ~ ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER DEGREES 10 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST 77.0 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25 EQUIPMENT ATTACHED TO THE BUILDING OR PROTRUDING FROM THE TOTAL LAND AREA AVAILABLE = 50,027 s.f. DEGREES 37 MINUTES WEST 258.6 FEET TO THE TANGENT POINT OF CURVE ROOF SHALL BE SCREENED, COVERED OR PAINTED TO MINIMIZE -7712- PROPOSED CONTOUR FROM WHICH THE POINT OF CURVATURE BEARS SOUTH 29 DEGREES 00 VISUAL IMPACTS." ~ ELECTRIC PEDESTAL MINUTES WEST 172.63 FEET; THENCE ALONG A CURVE WITH AN INTERSECTION 5. EXISTING DRIVE SHALL BE REVEGETATED WITH NATIVE GRASS. IMPERVIOUS: OWNER'S CERTIFICATION .- - - - LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE ANGLE OF 6 DEGREES 46 MINUTES AND A RADIUS OF 1,462.5 FEET A 6. HAND RAILS MAT BE REQUIRED ALONG WALL, REFER TO ESTES MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS: 50% ~f DISTANCE OF 172.7 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE MENTION ABOVE; VALLE( STANDARDS FOR REQUIREMENTS. G THE UNDERSIGNED, BEING THE OWNERS, DO HEREBY AGREE THAT THE REAL -uis - SEWER MAIN tie PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT THENCE SOUTH 32 DEGREES 23 MINUTES WEST 188.6 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 7. RETAINING WALL ELEVATION CALLOUTS INDICATE STEPS IN WALL.. EXISTING IMPERVIOUS: N/A 4* PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW FILED AND WATER VALVE 26 DEGREES 40 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST 13.2 FEET MORE OR LESS TO 8. THE PROPOSED RIVER ACCESS STAIRS MAY BE RELOCATED DUE PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS: 19,371 S.F. A LINE 99.0 FEET NORTH OF AND PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TO FINAL CONFIGURATION OF DWELLING UNITS. HEREWITH, AND AS SHOWN ON THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE SUBJECT TO -Â·-"-- 0 ---Â·-Â· SEWER SERVICE LIN E PERCENT IMPERVIOUS: 19,371/110,988=17.5% THE PROVISIONS OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE TOWN OF ~ MANHOLE THE SE i OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE SOUTH 88 DEGREES 46 MINUTES 9. THE DWELLING UNIT FOOTPRINTS MAY NOT DEPICT FINAL ESTES PARK, COLORADO AND ANY OTHER ORDINANCES OF LARIMER COUNTY, EP-3 PRIMARY ELECTRIC LINE EAST 143.69 FEET ALONG THE ABOVE MENTIONED LINE PARALLEL TO THE DWELLING UNIT FOOTPRINTS AND ARE MEANT FOR A VISUAL VESTED RIGHTS STATEMENT: ~Â£ VICINITY MAP COLORADO PERTAINING THERETO. SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID SE 4 TO THE CENTER OF THE BIG THOMPSON REPRESENTATION OF POSSIBLE DWELLING UNIT LOCATION. APPROVAL OF THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN CREATES A VESTED cs - SECONDARY ELECTRIC LINE 0 SEWER CLEAN OUT RIVER; THENCE ALONG THE CENTER OF THE BIG THOMPSON RIVER NORTH 50 10. ALL TRASH ENCLOSURES SHALL BE BEAR PROOF. DEGREES 23 MINUTES EAST 113.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 41 DEGREES 42 11. ALL REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED OR PROPERTY RIGHT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 68 OF TITLE 24 W PROPOSED WATER -SF - SILT FENCE MINUTES EAST 308.08 FEET; THENCE NORTH 10 DEGREES 07 MINUTES WEST GUARANTEED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF C.R.S. AS AMENDED. SCALE: 1"=1000' 142.19 FEET; THENCE NORTH 17 DEGREES 42 MINUTES EAST 68.82 FEET; OCCUPANCY. BY: STONEWOOD PROPERTIES MAIN LINE 4:' '12 4 â€ž THENCE LEAVING THE CENTER OF THE BIG THOMPSON RIVER NORTH 36 12. THE OWNER SHALL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE HANDICAP PHASING: 44-07 4 :t/ EXISTING TREES DEGREES 44 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST 142.00 FEET MORE OR LESS TO ACCESIBILITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE A. D.A. AND U.B.C. CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE COMPLETED IN WJ WATER SERVICE LINE THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. TWO PHASES. PHASE ONE SHALL CONSIST ----- PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED TREES COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT. PHASE TWO 17 64 & BUSHES CONSTRUCTION. EACH DWELLING UNIT MAY SHALL CONSIST OF DWELLING UNIT BE BUILT INDEPENDENTLY. E Ng (ACCOMMODATIONS (A-U < ZONING ~ / ZONING j â‚¬ 24 /'- ZONING ~ 3 28 2 ME (ACCOMMODATIONS (A-U (ACCOMMODATIONS (A- U - luo ZONING 0 00 ~~ - ~ EXISTING < 2 /â€¢r AL r ~COMMODATIONS (A-1) 37 1 2 0 te 0 /GRAVEL DRIVE I -ilill 1 -~ill- --* ,# CNc - Ull co EXISTING _ t' 35?0 to 'CD - 4 ;80 ci m 0 1 NE - 0 60 / --Ill-* torm GRAVEL DRIVE 4%130 ~~~~~ ~ EXISTING ... gltÂ» m I - ~ EDGOÂ·Â·OF ASPHALT - 27' 60 0 L ~ SPUR 66 (COUNTY ROAD) ~ RIGHT-OF-WAY 6 W L :~i - *z (60' RIGHT-OF-WAY) EDGE OF ASPHALT 70' PROPOSED 6 j . L g SE@ EXISTING GRAVEL ACCESS - I 0 2 112= - 27' PROPOSED- - -Â· / RELOCATED. Â· 1 _ _ PAVED ACCESS j (ADDITIONAL 10' OF R.O.W TO BE DEDICATED) /' TO BE REMOVED AND ---------------------- RIGHT-OF-WAY 2 E fvE Â· PROPOSED WATER MAIN 7- i. _s::I~ :fl'.3 r LIMITS OF - 1 '47 --------~----DISTURBANCE Â·-Â·-Â· 4~ --- -- + 4L., /"R=20'Â·Â·.1~ M. ---- / ==S......h 92320 4 - - . - - 3.6 E Wg -- / 1 . 0:23% - ./.23 R=220'-<31 Â· .- -1715-- 22,2 2-' NEW c .Â· ~~\'\Af- NEW STOPL---- ----~~~PROPOSED-9-"-7"F--p 1-0 =-a-"- _ DEDICATION , . Ja 1.134_ ENTRY , as=----7= 18 4 - ' 10' DEDICATE 77 20 - SIGN L-~--~ 10' R.O.W. Â·Â·. -I . TO CONTY PROPOSED - \ \A \ U._314. . FIRE HYDRANT iÂ»ErrrNIN--20 ~ -EPLD POND. -Â·, C731 .4 10' UTILITY AND_es E 44 <// /. - 25.0' BUILDING ' DATE: MAR. 4, 2009 . '.<. es - DRAINAGE EASEMENT , / SETBACK -7710-- l 10' UTILITY AND el es DRAINAGE EASEMENT ... =-6 es~Â·-EXISTING 24"-1 , 4 ~. _~_es --~l~d, ___~ , 41,4 --- ' L PROPOSED i -i I--------- 7-liz-- 9 -7- 7 - ------ ' 1\.A-0-97M~.BOX' ;-... '.-/ A,-.71\Ff-- >, ~'.,. 332Krl.Â·.... Â»~5 ~ ~ _...3>_UT_1- -f_--/E ~ ~ SETBACK-7 -- 25.0' BUILDING "" 1 Â· =-_ SCALE: 1" = 20' -----z=--1Â«7~~--an-_-uLTREE TO REMAIN --~IL , t 11 ,==:=ZEEB==*=I--------F~ 11 Ptl:.fl\ . r. 0 M Â·/1Â·9 -" SETBACK ~ " DRAWN: BB 0 LIMITS ~ ~\ . L ...4 , R=25'~ 1 . (4 /7--Aff \ DESIGNED: BB DA . 1 4 ' :f R=1.0,44*1 ,SS> ~ 0 i \\\ -7Tiouvt--7--V 1 - ,/ 1/ I. ENCLOSURE>---2-1~ --Il- -L----ULÂ«\ \\444% #, LIMITS OF $ u , ; 64â‚¬ PROPOSED RESIDENCE APPROVED: RAH ,-2 3 - --F=RU-7-/ 0 . SUNFIELD LANE 1\ ~~~~ ~ TREE TO REMAINI> .r~L h I I . e BUILDING 1 -O r.- 1 . D-C, ,Â·11 -,/ , f[' AN- 43 15' ~ ~ BUILDING 3 6 W ' 31_CAF~\~ -(4*_~â€ž_W-W.*firriafT- \ R=20' 1 y / ./1/ "' ZONING 3% 9 W I / .-04: (2088 SUNFIELD LANE) ,i. PROPOSED RESIDENCE r~ ~ 1 PARKING <1 EXISTING 30'Ll OISTURBANCE 0 l AREA F .0, // ko 1 ./F . 15'~~4Â·'1 - 0 1 5 R=7.5' , SIDEWALK (2104 SUNFIELD LANE) 1 R=10'-Â·Qc-0271\-1-4/29-LR=10' R=5*' 0 -~~ff:Â« //4 - ~%1111- I:JT- R= 10'/Â»' SIDEWALK - e Ad-- R=5' 4< 0,5$9 / .. .. '44- ....... . .. - 716/43 h / - PROPOSED A -R=5' R=5' ~ \ \ \ . k?\ --- 20' ----~ ' .Â· 04.Al / 0 'Â« 42/02 1 - \ ~Â»r-Â·-j- PLD POND 100-YR -- --Â·Â·-- ' ,: ,~ ',SA - - , ..r L.~ PlÂ«'PROPOSED 3-CAR ,/: 9 \ , /7 10, GRAVEL TRA~ / 1 , FLOOD PARKING AREA Â· A *oti 1 h Â·, ~-'R=10' 1.Â·~ C 1-51/ l 1 PROPOSED RESIDENCE . 5 ~Four SETBACK ~- (2096 SUNFIELD LANE) 3-CAR . ' J ZONE / j , 1 4-11 49 . h BUILDING 2 3 1.7-~ - - L . l A ---~C V~- A GARAGE P -TRASH ' f I 1 .I , - &--- -- 3.-4-/ /:I - C. f . . / 3 4 <6 - PROPOSED LIMITS ENCLOSURE 1 11 991 - -7*79 DISTURBANyE RIVER --3 . 2/ I v 0 10' TRIL EASEMENT - f / 10' GRAVEL TRAIL nuus ov -__-~ Â· Ii' 24 , PROPOSED -- -0 4 ff I Â«L\j ---- -2 --2- ; STAIRS PROPOSED #*-- 12f: , PLD POND F : 4 Â·~ ACCESS ~~WDROPOSED '' -- 1 j,/6~~ 7~ 94 WALL ./ I . 32 0, I Un.... -.-=1.->f-PROPOSED, .9 --- E 68.82 EXISTING 24" TREE ~Â« 9/ WLi, / 4 -- 9 U) # 9:52: 1 u o it /%. ---~~ 017.42' n~____ NOTE: -$1- TO BE REMOVED. FLOOD ZONE LIMITS > , , 4. 45 / 23'iE . d, 100-YR - SETBACK - (NS DISTTANUcts, TnfE D~WE~EAip FLOW~R~~GESCANNTER[-INE , 1/ â€¢7 111509 Nk ' ZONING 65 .2 N OF THE BIG THOMPSON RIVER. ACREAGE SHOWN IS TO ' -50.0,~R SETBACK f342 ?*.9. ../ . /35< 1.--- ~---Z--ryrs_.- DEEDED BEARINGS AND DISTANCES. , I I Â»3Â«' "- 124 - 574'14'457 22.0' ACCOMMODATIONS(A) & WS r--- i / -40*9 / /~ Â«440 1 2, CK < LL.1 ---Joi.-L - .10Â·Ii -Lt 09% Zzl --4% . 0 -â€ž- PROPOSED 0- 1-> 34<K O Z . - - ,t -7 w 9=!aco. 1 O m _1 < 5: B -1 < J 4Â© Z L_ LU 0V41'42 2 308.089 -DIG -- 2. 1 ~ 2 gg E E 0' -~ E(DEBV @17 0 09 PU7 CD 0 THOMPSON A GRAPHIC SCALE Â· ~4 ~ ZONING 1\ . 4 JOB NO.: STONEP - \ RIVER - 9A8A-02-300 ( IN FEET ) ( ACCOMMODATIONS (A) f *0 ~-~ APR 1 5 2009 ~~ 40 1 inch = 20 ft SHEET 1 oF 4 0#Da XE) uoild!JOS@Cl SNOISIA3M SS@IULID4 plal] eq ju@jxe }Sellry 341 01 'llows )po w UD-1 -13-1 P 41 6upeeul MJDUÂ·IPUD-1 JO 80!AJeS ID JO JU@lur'IJJSU! UD s! Well,InOOp S!41 op s!40 JO @Sne. J 0 'ebuDLP 'uo!4% lpOUJ ~~Z!.Ol~noun JO in|O !JO Kip@Belp Jo 6UIS!10 I~s~~~4!PqDII '86Dulop XUD Jo paso@pl puo 10300*Id 99 Mnd F: \Projects\Stonewood66\Civil\Drawings\DevelopmentPlan.dwg, SITE PLAN, 03/04/09 2: 32.12PM, bbrady SU-NFIELD ESTATES 6-EN-ERAL DEVELO_P-M-ENT - GRA-DI_NG PLA_N A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SE h OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6th P.M., COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. RETAINING WALL DETAIL NO SCALE LEGEND DRAINAGE NOTES: 1. THE POROUS LANDSCAPE DETENTION (PLD) -I --I --I-'-V Q-/ -* .=8 L~ TYPICAL DRIVE CROSS SECTION . 7089 - - EXISTING CONTOUR PONDS ARE SHOWN FOR APPROXIMATE LOCATION ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER AND SHAPE. FINAL SHAPE AND LOCATION WILL BE ' NO SCALE DETERMINED ONCE THE FINAL BUILDING - k REBAR HOOK -7712- PROPOSED CONTOUR FOOTPRINTS ARE DETERMINED. R VERTICAL 0 24" O.C. ~ ELECTRIC PEDESTAL 2. ALL NON-PAVED AREAS SHALL BE â€¢ - - - LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE CONSTRUCTED WITH A MINIMUM 2% SLOPE TO ~ | VARIES Me PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE. *24'-36' - UTS - SEWER MAIN 3. THE OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE TO MAINTAIN AND 1 0 1 jrd" REBAR AND WATER VALVE oÂ·f f HORIZONTAL OPERATE ALL ON SITE DRAINAGE FACILITES. VARIES % (2% MINI.) - VARIES % (2% MINI,) SEWER SERVICE LINE ~i "..,14-:"i.. ~ MANHOLE -I // \ 1 1 -EP-3 - PRIMARY ELECTRIC LINE WALL NOTES: 12 Il Â¢ 1. THE TOP OF WALL ELEVATIONS ARE CONTROLLED 1 .i .,r ; , p, Â·1, \, 1 /UN. .1 it .at,,l.'/ /7 i, /,0 d :/ BY THE 100-YR FLOOD ZONE AND ARE SHOWN ON \ \ ~-3Â» COMPACTED TYPE C ASPHALT co - SECONDARY ELECTRIC LINE 2 SEWER CLEAN OUT ~ ~-4" COMPACTED AGGREGATE ROAD BASE W PROPOSED WATER -SF- SILT FENCE THE PLAN. i \ COMPACTION WILL BE TO 95% OR BETTER MAIN LINE k--16,-4 2. WALLS OVER 4 FEET HIGH SHALL BE ENGINEERED. , 3. FINAL WALL MAY BE CONSTRUCTED OF CMU'S U._ COMPACTED SUB BASE MATERIAL, FREE OF AND COVERED IN A ROCK VENEER TO MATCH STONE ORGANIC MATERIAL WO WATER SERVICE LINE USED ON HOMES. 4. FINAL WALL MAY BE JOINED WITH FINAL HOME - - - - - PROPOSED RET-AINING WALL FOUNDATION WALL. 5. ONCE WALL IS COMPLETED AND FILL IS PLACED BEHIND THE WALL A CLOMAR-F SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO FEMA TO REFLECT THE 100-YR FLOOD ZONE CHANGE. 3 hoo g Cg C 09 5 00% 2 2Â© 6 22 5 Oe 33 2 0@ - ~ --- ~ EXISTING X --il t --- 2 2 lE ,/ GRAVEL DRIVE 1 _ ..... - n *100 J EXISTING \ --Â·----- C @ 010 -922-<-~ _ EDGEÂ·Â·OF 27' 6 500 -,6 SPUR 66 (COUNTY ROAD) 1- L M t 0 JAE - - M i ip E .. - - p .0 L EXISTING GRAVEL ACCESS EDGE OF ASPHALT ~ 27' 13_ .... L 0 0 Â®c / _.RELOCATED. (60' RIGHT-OF-WAY) PROPOSED --.) 70' PROPOSED A t*N ACCESS0 Â£ 3~1 ~Â· ACC ... =YES'. 111.9-fi--Â·----~ 11 (0 9 -Vc .-I (ADDITIONAL 10' OF R.O.W TO BE DEDICATED) C*-<TO BE REMOVED AND "Â·---Â· zz.=..eÂ£sE~L_---~~~~ fâ„¢ :LIMITS "dE - - - _UZE----~ ~~~~~ - - 1 - - M \ /' f \N / 0 1 0 - - Â£-23-Â£--43---~-9-23 '"-'~- '""--- -,m Ld 19[12 RIGHT-OF-WAY / L W -7715-< *&-/ 7713 --*. 1-Â£~ZIEZZ~Â£-333.- 2-d3 - p Â·...~ . ~ . - ' , 0 - ' PRCPOSED-7-710------------- -- --7-*--w-~------7- - H I C LD --7720 -- - - ' al LLI S -7720- -------- --.92 7 , 1 Â· $ 1- es --Â·=~1*26 i - 4 : I #-$-W-/ - f f W . Â·6044 E 1, f..t. 0: : . 'A 25.0' BUILDING Â· , es. g. ' / SETBACK -@- ~--~j-------vtÂ»~ - DATE: MAR. 4, 2009 es -7. 7710 ~Â·Â·T~ ~~ F k43*es es/, / , '7..... 6 .' SCALE: 1" = 20' =-_ es co -TrÂ·~ es - es --7~ / -Il-- DRAWN: BB SETBACK -- 25.0' BUILDING r - - I , Â·Â·: SETBACK -- -7711 â€¢ LIMITS ~ , -- SETBACIC' 0 e - ~ ~-~.-~Â·... -Â· ~ I '1 3< ' MAILBOX '>~ ~> , .--"-~* ~ 1.--Â·Â· , ... , LIMITS %\ ., 9 / 2 % ---- --- I. -. 4Â·7708 ... DESIGNED: BB / -CLUSTER ~ -.=/.-0- PROPOSED RESIDENCE Â¥ 47 133,- / 0 . APPROVED: RAH . 0, /, ,/I 1%%h.. BUILDING 1 .: . 1 - 'C,Â· 0-5 , $ , / 1,0 ' -1 TOF=7711.25 \\ \ r\. 1.- ~ . f- 'Ri SUNFIELD LANE *Â·Â·Â·Â· 35' 1 / / " 4 eld I Wa:t-w-w ~~ *~ % , .., 11rl/ '~ -- 11_.R_ / 77< 1 4Â« 3 A.. 6% 1 PROPOSED RESIDENCE it F 11 's, LIMITS OF 12_%- 1 05 * / 15' DISTURBANCE 1-i~~~-elâ‚¬Â£1 ~ ~l-----{-- i/~-- *2/44-- 1 - --- 1. J.2- 1 p---- i- 21 41\. . 0> EXISTING 100-YR BUILDING 3 6 L< 44, /=32-- </ ; ,1 1-Â¤ - -- -- TÂ£zlifros~=~ ~54 '2 -1 --* :' * 4~48. O~EJE~~'~~~ --I _ ~- FLOOD ZONE ..0/5//, E _TOF=7714.57 - ~ 1 -0 1 1 a. Â·45 , .- -O 1 -0 /- PROPOSED U \ . V /Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·' \ f. EXISTING 100-YR *.- \ /4 5 0 / 1 ..i......4 :14% . / \./ ' ' GRAVEL TRAIL 1,9.> \ 1Â·00 YR-FLOOD -- ~~ZONE (AFTER SITE 0- -4 % %.... . .- - \ c.'ALÂ·Â·-- \ FLOOD ZONE --- \~\ / - PLD POND 0~% / 1 , 4. ,049 045)13) / ->- I F 4 919 I \ f /9 FOUt 1. 4 1 Â« / (N 1 -FiLL IS PLACED) 'r- ~-TW:7712.5 PROPOSED RESIDENCE 3 9% 111 ,~ 1 TW:7709.0 100 YR-FLOOD A 1 ---3-X --- - 1 WALL . TW:7711.0 1 BUILDING 2 PROPOSED 10Â©0 LIMITS OF -$5. TOF=7712.96 PROPOSED ~ E PLD POND " PROPOSED / 4 ZONE (AFTER SITE--- Â·--Â·. / 6 1-- 9 i TW:7712.5 UPROPOSED 3-CAR GARAGE ~ --/11 \ --FILL IS PLACED) - TOF=7711.5 1 ~ -< * . 10 ~-7,.Â· PROPOSED Â·Â·WALL -0 - DISTURBANCE 1 - Ng Â» -Â·Â· RIVER -J , , 2 / g /- I// 727.m>ZZ,JaL / 1 ; , * TW:7709.0 ~~ - 10' TRAIL EASEMENT - --- --03 . *32*b ' 'Â·Â·4 . / U - & STAIRS TW:7711.0 745--- 7 4 2 - TW:7710.0 ~ '~~Â·- SETBA~CK . / fs# ' --- ; Â©: i .- Lil LIMITS / _ - 1- 44% --,7> 100 YR-FLOOD //// (N17'42'E 68.82') - -~-- /4 ZONE (AFTER SITE ---- 0 100* NOTE: 7-- ---I- -I-*+---9, *- ?,, ALTHOUGH THE DEED CALLS OUT BEARINGS AND - ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ...: AS,~~- f kv (N50*23'r- THOMPSON DISTANCES, THE OWNERSHIP FOLLOWS THE CENTERUNE . 0 - 113.509 OF THE BIG THOMPSON RIVER. ACREAGE SHOWN IS TO . ~ - ---9.-Z--37-9 ~~ ~ . . ./. - , r //. . 7., 0 4 / LTW:7710.0 - ~ ~ , 1. , iÂ· ~ FILL IS PLACED) --DN.7711.0--~ - f 4 * Z 1 W TW:7710.5 / 1 DEEDED BEARINGS AND DISTANCES. //f'. ~8 % %-% , S74'14'45"W 22.0' '/ 49%% -% - .-ht..320.0. RIVER SETBAER----c, ' -UIL-1-1 / 1 - FAMil / BIG -~ Zz< ~~Â»=U74.- LJOO_ 4 ~ /// - .. - 0 6 % WOCE : LLLJO (N41'42 2 308.089 ~St bu) CD CD 4 ED LUCK 5 -j 0 GRAPHIC SCALE . . JOB NO.: STONEP RIVER - 9 2~~~~~~~~m ~ ( IN FEET ) . 9A8A-02-300 1 inch = 20 ft ~~~~ SHEET 2 of 4 ejoa Xe uoild!.losec] S3Ilhl3dOEId CIOOM3NO1S SNOISIA33:1 62_~Sezg-Â«99 (76) SSe~UJJD 4 pl@4 aq xe }salin.1 341 ;OJ JO ;Uel.Un.qSU! UD s! JUet.UnOOp S!41 U e UU n D O I JO @Sne.J JO 'tUDL~/ZiuN:AU' .'719.1;n~ur JLJreou![~t~s!~~DA~paB@ip Jo 6u!$!.Jo lS O '~1!I!1Â¤!I '05)Dulop XUD Jo peSDal@J pUD F: \Projects\Stonewood66\Civil\Drawings\Developmentplan.dwg, GRADING PLAN, 03/04/09 2: 33.35 103POEd 99 UndS S U_N--FI_-EL-D ESTAT E F - GEN-E _HAL -DEVE_LOPH_ENT - UTILIT-Y PLA-N A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SE 4 OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6th P.M., COUNTY OF- LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. ENTRY SIGN DETAIL NO SCALE LEGEND SEEER: UTILITY NOTES: ALL UNITS WILL HAVE A 4" PVC SERVICE LINE THAT WILL CONNECT DIRECTLY TO ' 60' '' ~ ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER INSTALLED EVERY 100' OR AT CONNECTION POINTS AND COMPLY WITH UPPER 7009- EXISTING CONTOUR THE EXISTING SEWER MAIN THAT RUNS ALONG THE RIVER. CLEAN OUTS TO BE -7712- PROPOSED CONTOUR THOMPSON SANITATION DISTRICT STANDARDS. . /-STONE SHALL MATCH ~ ELECTRIC PEDESTAL IATER: / SITE RETAINING WALL. LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE 8" WATER MAIN WILL BE EXTENDED FROM THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH AND COMPLY WITH THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK WATER DEPARTMENT STANDARDS. A FIRE -urs - SEWER MAIN ~~ PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT HYDR*IT WILL BE INSTALLED SOUTH OF THE ENTRANCE AND A SECOND INSTALLED IN Â· AND WATER VALVE THE CENTER OF THE DEVELOPMENT. ALL UNITS WILL HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL 3/4" SERVICE LINE RUN DIRECTLY FROM THE MAIN WITH A METER INSTALLED AT THE SUNFIELD --3 ~ MANHOLE RESIDENCE. THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH DETAILED A 12" PVC SLEEVE UNDER THEIR SEWER SERVICE LINE 36' 12' EP-3 - PRIMARY ELECTRIC LINE NEW DRIVEWAY FOR THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF WATER. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF ESTATES*I __1 co - SECONDARY ELECTRIC LINE - SEWER CLEAN OUT EXTENSION IF NOT FOUND THE ROAD WILL BE OPEN CUT TO INSTALL THE EXTENSION. 121, THIS IN THE FIELD. IF PVC SLEEVE IS FOUND IT IS TO BE USED FOR WATERLINE ELEÂ¤BID W PROPOSED WATER - SE - SILT FENCE ALL ELECTRIC WILL COME FROM THE TRANSFORMER LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY STANDARDS. A TRANSFORMER WILL BE PLACED ON SITE AND SERVICES RUN FROM THE MAIN LINE TO THE NORTH AND COMPLY WITH THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK LIGHT AND POWER L CAST BRONZE PLAQUE NEW TRANSFORMER. wo WATER SERVICE LINE ON STONE SIGN. IELEEHQME. ----- PROPOSED RETAINING WALL WILL COME FROM THE EXISTING BOX ON THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH ' 36' CABLE: , ,~ WILL COME FROM THE EXISTING BOX ON THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH 3 Cg C 09 -C DON i (D @c) or 9 06 f I ~ GRAVEL DRIVE ~ O u. C) â‚¬ . r EXBTNG----- M ~930 EXISTING ~ _ _ ~~_ 4 , w 0 612 1 --- 0 0 JAr GRAVEL DRIVE - - RIGHT-oF-WAY â€ž -b 2 43â‚¬ ~ SPUR 66 (COUNTY ROAD) (60' RIGHT-OF-WAY) f 6 go 5 -425 CIO *(DC - 3 EE PAVED - Â·PROPOSED 8"- (ADDITIONAL 10' OF R.O.W TO BE DEDICATED) WATER MAIN , C 2 W U-NEW ELECTRIC -- Â·Â·---Â·Â·-Â·Â·Â·- Â·-1 --EXTENSION ~ ACCESS j - X-4 -â€žâ€žâ€ž-râ€žâ€¢ -" L.- ".- ''--W 7717 0 g @23 . h 7715 ._.. ..... ..U..2... 2.. ... 2- 1-Â·Â·.-~.-. - t .TRANSFORMER a m- . a 1 . -= 1715 -- 1 O RE PROPOSED 8" -1111 c If) E , 1 0 PROPOSED.===2.--1'~-t'l~_.---es-"-1 f -7 --- --Uf. z.~i...\.,-râ€ž--..... ... ~...~...7710--- ------- ~-~-~7-- - U.1 11.1 6 5 WATER MAIN CAP-- -7722 FOR FUTURE Â· Â·~ .-W-W-'-42---W-'-W-'- .... TO COUNTY ' W-W : ELECTRIC-- --~ \- -4.-.... ELECTRIC .. 4 ~ 10' R.O.W. I 1Les -clzd=-LIZZ=27=-~ - ---- .- L ~- -__-_.i ~~ Â· ; Â·Â·.Â·Â· Â·Â· 4/Â· 10' DEDICATE, < 7715 -0-- ' EXTENSION -7721 - DEDICA-rIONI ___- a~~r=.iLi- ~ * / fERVICE â€žftia L _._ ~~~ ~~ 3/4'~ WATER~ ~~ 25.VBT'gING ~ 7 , /1 ~,~, f ~/ 3, T Â· "-'/C<-SERVICE 10. . --ELECTRIC_--2Â»-02-2\ /- uZEBMICE -jllr %327-/ 1- Â«24;-~-'.1 - SCALE: 1" = 20' - - \ UlLITY AND-es >0 \ 821% i.. fy ...,#t Â· DATEÂ·. MAR. 4, 2009 - - - - I """,m -/ r \ :63 L NEW FIRE 7710 DRA}NAGE EASEMENT -Â»Â·Â·Â·Â· -es es -" es> . 49:2 Â»3, = e es< ' es -DRAINAG[ EASEMENT 40/ / 10' UTILITY AND. -cr= es Lh . i 4 SETBACK . .A 1 .-:2--- I I .. 00 -~Â·rv, a T731.9 25.0' BUILDING '"" ''' ' /4" DRIP IRRIGATION \q; - 2 // ./. - UMErS . I ' <4Â· . =- NEW FIRE, ' . SERVICE AND METER ' ; HYDRANT ---- PEDESTAL L_.-- -1 - LL -4--- DRAWN: BB --- --'-'Â·'"'- SETBACK o , + DESIGNED: BB '4 rk , -6 . 7 0 1 --- , : I ./ I. *: ,> HYDRANT -' Â·Â·i ~ _ SETBACK 74\ 1 /1 - 3 0 MAILBOX - -.-2 -Â·3*--4= -.~-- -_ ... A I '0,1 -mb. <.7 ) APPROVED: RAH \ - LIMITS ~ ..CLUSTER j,L--- / % . \ /-N f I SERVICE - . 11 1 y ./7 ........ 1. :/ PROPOSED RESIDENCE SUNFIELD LANE * ~\--ELECTRIC --+ 1 j Â£-W'-----W-W 1 ' i #I BUILDING 1 PUL ; W ty i . I : / F 4 J 01 1 4 \ --- .-- I. . / 00 4 - 7 ,\ \ 1 D- --1 11 2 u 3/4" WATER ~ 3 *4Â·40 L ~"~ ~Â·PROPOSED RESIDENCE 4 3 2-1 3- - SERVICE 3/4" WATER 1. . I a 4,9/e SERVICE,: .Â«642 f BUILDING 3 -- -e \ 1-14 1 / 2252â‚¬ -. / / 4/ r / - PROPOSED ~ .i' ' 4" SEWER ~ / 10' GRAVEL TRAIL I"ff / \ . '%,0, .... 2 L<4 ./ SERVICE I y 14 -- ~/-----~ 0 CKS,9 /// 2 45' - PROPOSED - p- ( 10' GRAVEL TRAIL /4 --- O,09 4" SEWER- f PROPOSED RESIDENCE Â·Â·Â·~Â·, FOLIT '5/ 9% 4 2 \ \14 1 , 2 / -- --47 0 PROPOSED ~ 1 , D - 64 J./ 1-4 SERVICE 20 \ i / f -.2 ... 1 . ./ - 10 SETBACK -~-- -~ BUILDING 2 / *. -I 1 7 -mss - ,r / LIMLTS 10' TRAIL EASEMENT .â€ž-,- 19 /// ~~~ ~~7~~ - t1 PROPOSED -n \ t. 4 1 D ./ r .:.,7 i . , j V ./. 51 WALL L-PROPOSED \41; â‚¬ CE - - 0% SERVICE i U f 4.:b Â» -- I -. Â·/.12.-. Wit 140Â¢4 - 4 CAR GARAGE LU 0 CD / r / 2 54- f mÂ»=3148 50.0' RIVER SETBACK e :': I SETBACK -hZZ:7 413 LIMITS ---..-w.-Â· UTS -\41 . / -W-1 _*-Â£..Ii..Â·Â· UTS . . i y Â»Â»Â»:*4- (/).- z l ,\1 <LU I -I, 16 5%>10 .... n -- -U71_ Â»Im- Â» 0 1-u %3 ~ 1/73 ---e/ .+ O 9 - E -U BIG ED H D GRAPHIC SCALE .. . . JOB NO.: STONEP THOMPSON RIVER - ( IN FEET ) -% 9A8A-02-300 1 inch = 20 ft. ~~~ SHEET 3 of 4 0100 41 uondposea SNOISIA3&1 SS@IUUD4 plew eq 'MDI luued jue xe }salini @41 oj "D'4s >poulpuD-1 (7*37) 'PJ-1 U3 M D eJoid Jo JUel.Unilsu! UD s! JUal,UnOOp S!41 F: \Projects\Stonewood66\Civil\Drawings\DevelopmentPlan.dwg, UTILITY PLAN, 03/04/09 2: 34.17PM, bbrady 7712~ Â·sial:to ~ ~~elunoop s!4} Jo esne. 10 '86u?40 'uo!7004!polu pez!1041noun Jo Jno Buis!.ID Xlp@69ip JO 6UIS!.JD JSOO JO 'Al!1!q[!I 'eBOLUDp XUD Jo paSDal@J pUD N31Ald0 Vh13N39 2 -U-NFIELD ESTATE S GEN-ERAL -D-EV_ELOPM_ENT - LAN-DECAPE PLA-N REQUIRED: STREET FRONTAGE LANDSCAPING TREES-1 PER 25 LF, REQUIRED-28 SHRUBS-1 PER 10 LF, REQUIRED-70 A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SE k OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, TREES-1 PER 40 LE, REQUIRED-13, RETAINING WALL OR SHRUBS-3 PER 40 LF, REQUIRED-38 RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6th P.M., COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. PROVIDED: STREET FRONTAGE TREES-41 SHRUBS-84 RETAINING WALL TREES-37 LANDSCAPE NOTES: SHRUBS-0 EROSION CONTROL NOTES: 1. ALL SEEDED AREAS TO BE RE-SEEDED BY HAND AND RAKED IN PLACE. ALL SEEDED SLOPES GREATER THAN EXISTING (TO REMAIN) 1, SILT FENCING AND STRAW BALES TO BE PLACED PRIOR TO ANY DEMOLITION, GRADING, OR CONSTRUCTION. LEGEND 2:1 TO BE MULCHED AND NETTED FOR EROSION CONTROL (USE STRAW BALES WHERE NEEDED TO AVOID EROSION TREES-3 2. NO FUELS OF CHEMICALS WILL BE STORED ON SITE. AND ENHANCE GROWTH POTENTIAL). 3. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CLEARING MUD TRACKED ONTO COUNP ROADS ON A DAILY BASIS. 4. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES WILL BE INSPECTED WEEKLY DURING CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTAINED IN WORKING ORDER. 4/4 RE-VEGETATION BEGINS. STOCKPILING SHALL NOT OCCUR OUTSIDE OF DELINEATED LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE. -7009 Â·Â· EXISTING CONTOUR 2. TOPSOIL SHALL BE STRIPPED IN AREAS OF DISTURBANCE AND STOCKPILED TO BE REDISTRIBUTED WHEN 5. ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE TOPSOILED AND SEEDED. SEED WILL BE DRILLED OR HAND RAKED TO INSURE A" TO 1" PROPOSED GEYER WILLOW 3. REQUIRED LANDSCAPING SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A HEALTHY, GROWING CONDITION AT ALL TIMES. THE NOTE: COVER. Â«Neâ‚¬ -7712- PROPOSED CONTOUR PROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REGULAR IRRIGATING, PRUNING, WEEDING, MOWING, FERTILIZING, SIGNS TO BE INSTALLED PER TOWN fr V D- -VIL 6. SEED MIXTURE TO BE COMPARABLE TO BEAUTY BEYOND BELIEF REPLACEMENT OF PLANTS IN POOR CONDITION AND OTHER MAINTENANCE OF ALL PLANTINGS AS NEEDED. NOT TO SCALE OF ESTES PARK STANDARDS. WILDFLOWER SEED .â€ž.~ ,-,Â·.- LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE ,~ PROPOSED WESTERN RIVER BIRCH 4. CONIFER TREES SHALL BE SIZED AS 50% EIGHT FEET TALL AND 50% SIX FEET TALL AT PLANTING. GRASSES % Wn DFL OWERS % - SE - SILT FENCE 6. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL MEET THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN SPECIFICATIONS FOR NUMBER 1 / 1 . t 5. DECIDUOUS TREES SHALL BE SIZED AS 50% FOUR INCH CALIPER AND 50% TWO INCH CALIPER AT PLANTING. PRAIRIE JUNE GRASS 5 RKY.MNT. DESTEMON 5 ~~ PROPOSED RED-OSIER DOGWOOD BLUE GRAMA 5 BLUE FAX 20 GRADE AND SHALL COMPLY WITH THE QUALITY STANDARDS OF THE COLORADO NURSERY ACT, TITLE 35, ARTICLE SHEEP FESCUE 20 BLACK-EYED SUSAN 5 ----- PROPOSED RETAINING WALL 00. PROPOSED JUNIPER 26, C.R.S., AS AMENDED. SUNFIELD LANE -<4 M.U.T.C.H. D3-1 SIGNS ,# 7' MIN. 8%:*' SQUIRREL TAIL BOTTLEBRUSH 5 BLUE COLUMBINE 2 F (OLD GOLD JUNIPER) (5 GAL.) 7. ALL TREES SHALL BE STAKED OR GUYED AND FENCED TO PROTECT FROM WILDLIFE DAMAGE. NO CHAIN LINK @Topj "X30" REFLECTIVE W/ 6" BLUE BUNCH WHEAT GRASS 15 SHOOTING STAR 1 FENCING SHALL BE ALLOWED. LARKSPUR 2 PROPOSED PONDEROSA PINE TREE . i.f~t PROPOSED JUNIPER MTN. LUPINE 5 ,~jt (COMPACT PFITZER) (5 GAL.) LETTERING .080 THICK :-1 8. NO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY SHALL BE ISSUED UNLESS THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA ARE FULLY SATISFIED INDIAN PAINTBRUSH 1 WITH REGARD TO THE APPROVED LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING PLAN: SUCH PLAN HAS BEEN FULLY IMPLEMENTED ALUMINUM) 1 1.-1 1 . 4 ON THE SITE AND INSPECTED BY STAFF OR, SUCH PLAN, BECAUSE OF SEASONAL CONDITIONS, CANNOT BE ALPINE ASTER 2 >'fist PROPOSED PROPOSED BLUE SPRUCE ,/3Â·;~ FIRE WHEEL 3 M, 21 EXISTING PONDEROSA PINE TREE IMPLEMENTED IMMEDIATELY, BUT HAS BEEN GUARANTEED BY AN IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT MEETING THE M.U.T.C.H. R1-1 SIGN WALL FLOWER 4 (30" REFLECTIVE 2' MIN.'~ 1 7. AFTER SEEDING ENTIRE DISTURBED SITE WILL BE MULCHED USING CLEAN HAY AT A RATE OF 1.5 TONS/ACRE. SLOPES < REQUIREMENTS OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE. GROUND- 3' PROPOSED MOUNTAIN ALDER 9. AN AUTOMATIC DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED TO MAINTAIN THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE .080 ALUMINUM) L STEEPER THAN 2:1 SHALL BE BLANKETED WITH BIODEGRADABLE EROSION CONTROL FABRIC WITH A MINIMUM WEIGHT OF 92 1 EXISTING WILLOW CLUSTER IMPROVEMENTS. 4/sq.yd. INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURES SPECIFICATIONS. 10. SLOPES 25-40% SHALL BE RE-VEGETATED WITH DEEP ROOTING PLANTS AND SHALL INCLUDE EROSION ~- CONTROL BLANKETS UNTIL PLANTS TAKE ROOT. SLOPES GREATER THAN 40% SHALL BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED WITH ROCK RIP RAP OR HYDRO-MULCHING. 11. NO TREES SHALL BE PLANTED WITHIN 5 FEET OF WATER AND SEWER MAINS. 12. NO PLANTS THAT GROW TALLER THAN 6 INCHES SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN 3 FEET OF FIRE HYDRANTS. 1 NOO 5 00% 0 0 0 E ER 0 20 1 6 07 8 05 C 2 46 ~ EXISTING - ~ 3 W O =p------t / GRAVEL DIRIVE X - C O (3 0 U <>W 1 EXISTING j 1 -- - . VUO IL 061 Â·Â· ,< L. 0 J A f GRAVEL DRIVE \ All L -- - 27' FOLLOWS THE BOUNDARY OF THIS ~ SPUR 66 (COUNTY ROAD) -i - REMNANT OF AN OLD WIRE FENCE EDGE OF ASPHALT ~ EQ L Beg I.il.i= .--.- PROPERTY. THE FENCE IS NOT (60' RIGHT-OF-WAY) 70' PAVED - RIGHT-OF WAY E â‚¬ 0 9 SHOWN HEREON AND SHALL BE ACCESS 1 J T ANY PERMITS. (1) c 0 1-1 REMOVED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF . 4. ~ "' ~~ ~ 177191--~ V A. E E6~ ' ca-Waj r.2 :PROPOSED--- --7717-- - 7.0 3. PLD POND Â· 1 f *7720 - f ~ z ~; .-1 8 2% g9 0" ~~~2 \ -emai- .--. 1 4 E L 0 0Q( (ADDITIONAL 10' OF R.O.W TO BE DEDICATED) - : i~ 2 -N -- ---17722 - / / 7- pa)--Â£743- - - --1 /\â‚¬.t~INSTALL STOP SIGN ...7715.---- - , ... --- ~ \I l l / (INSTALL PER M.U.T.C.H. STANDARDS) , / - LU M 5 -2 ETTE---TET,-7~7~~~T~~~~~~ -" ...% 0.... T . ' Nal _LI---1-4--0-t-709 :-/__.*li'FO'..-T Â·'. 10' DEDICATE Â·Â·Â·Â· ~ . ~ . -ENTRY=2114444Â¢ \ ' _LL _'t _m--_ , -- -3* TO COUNTY â€¢-SIGN-' v / ..1 1 <.--. ...... /1 1 a - 90-44+7-+,1--t- 3 10' UTILITY AND - es 6OLL-C~- / 25.0' BUILDING Â· 4 -2-1/ 2 es , es -DRAINAGE EASEMENT 4 7710 ./7 i ./ / a--- es _di â€¢-:alu -22~_ ---I--- - - f - ' ~ / SETBACK -< 00 ' _ a.'an - -0- . - Â«Â«/,-9 7 - DATE: MAR. 4, 2009 - - _ 25.0' BUILDING - 7.. , es -es les 1 --- 1-le- 1 es - SCALE: 1" = 20' % 0 / -221.9311-1 -- n .-w=*v- -- . UMITS 1 -- SETBACK- RAH -0 ,, EXISTING 30" / DRAWN: BB SETBACK % ' ' .MAILBOX N \ *2' , 0 - ...6 A fl / - 4 9 g - 0 In\\ CLUSTER '%,A ./ I .-. . , , , 0 DESIGN ED: BB \ TREE TO REMAIN , 007 4 / / _-,4/ EXISTING 30"' -- <~- TREE TO REMAIIâ‚¬ ./'- ~ / APPROVED: :03.4/ h : / / 40'3 e -0 i GRPHEL ~RA~-~ ~ / < ~ 0+ 5 7 0- , >1 X 1 .11 N ;46 , f Â£1.0 PROPOSED RESIDENCE % )4Â·Â·Â·Â·~. PROPOSED RESIDENCE St - 0 --0 r- 16 --,=. - 1' cÂ·'BUILDING 3 EXISTING 24" -- 7- / 1 r- 7 / TREE TO REMAIN Di 11111 - .2-2< - 1 / 4. PREE WEU. " -o. Ad/:,6 '02 \ I /1 - - 13 - / 2, -9 44,Â· / / 4 . .f / - / 1//f~~---2 ru Â£'44 ~ 10' GRAVEL TRA~ 4~-- :z Â¤_ Â·Â·~ AJRZONE . 1 4*-100-YR ~~./. l i 2/ / y -- PROPOSED j' -, ~ 1 / 1 - ic ...4, "-/. 1, 5 1 , 7 -- \ /- ...., 1 r- ,/ 9 afl:9 -- -- -/1/le ---*- PROPOSED . , f / -- S PLD POND PROPOSED RESIDENCE , I All 7-7> - BUILDING 2 ~-Foub - f / . \4\\ ins--14 / ' i --PROPOSED O , 10' GRAVEL TRAIL 7. a L PROPOSED A \~PLD POND 1/-3 SETBACK -- ~~ 1 PROPOSED - FLOOD ZONE,j ; 21 -- -.- 7 -~-~ 45 ; -EXISTING L.IMITS WALL Â· PROPOSED ~ TREES . .9 ...1 0 2:.*51%,13:.-- 0. I~ 10' TRAIL EASEMENT - -0 = 7 -n>- 7--2 1 100-YR ./ r . / 1 -/ 7#0 - f j -' Â·. / .. FLOOD ZONE 4,0111, f -Â«.11.EXISTING 24" TREE i ./04-~ 4 1 TO BE REMOVED. Â· PROPOSED t $ WALL ~, i / >â‚¬44- : - --Li-r-.:.1.....I - . S f f. Â· 3 , b -44-- f Â», 4 i ./ 4 3 1 // - Â·t -tr,~~ U?* 0 ,/ j ,--=~~ ~ - . - PROPOSED :. 79 , ...: ~~'~~--~~--22--~ ~=3797(I!3~ '...\ 10' GIR#6/EL__~R~~~~ *<. '~~;Â· Â·':. :.Â·~. i (f) FI ./ * I = + /%/1 SETBACK , 1 ' V. ,,4. 1 - LIM ITS : 1 -= . 1 1 4Â» .4--, -,0 - ---fa . CO ,: 0 . - --99 - , LU Z , . - j-Uk, . 0- Ik ,. PROPOSED -0 - '' < LU -- --- -07,90-0 RIVER SETBACK - Â· 1-1-1--% . I-/ -mUTe .- MI ~ LLI ~ *1 -0/ . O 0-J< ,/ . 1 1 9 7-4 4 0 1 LU w CE U) L . . Z LL LU O â‚¬2 DIG 90 .,z zz D ED W < 5= GRAPHIC SCALE THOMPSON RIVER - -- JOB NO. STONEP 0 (IN FEET) . . gA8A-02-300 1 inch = 20 ft. SHEET 0 3> LL 4 of 4 uond!-losec] SNOISIA3bl SS@IUU '4 plaq eq U.Lle Juelxe }Salnj 941 0 'llolls MJD -Prl uu!.leeU! u3 M.Dl.Up U 1 JO 30!AjeS iDUOISSe; 4 -I}SU! UD SI well.noop s!41 od66\Civil\Drawings\DevelopmentPlan.dwg, LANDSCAPE PLAN, 03/04/09 2: 35.09PM, noop s! 44 10 8Snel JO 'af;UDLIO 'uo!}DU [5~,u p?f.7t noun Jo }no ~uis!-ID Xlpa~allo Jo buis!.ID) JSOO .I~ LUDp XUD JO peSD@p. pUD 10300@Id 99 Und S3 Ilhl3dOhl N31Ald0 -7 Schwery Amended Plat ~ Estes Park Community Development Department Town Hall, 170 MacGi-egor Avenue PO Box 1200 - .... Estes Park, CO 80517 ~ Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com I. PROJECT OVERVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: April 21, 2009 PLAT TITLE: "Schwery Amended Plat, the Amended Plat of Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, of the Second Amended Plat of the Town of Estes Park, and a Portion of the N.W. 44 of the N.E. 44 of Section 25, Township 5 North, Range 73 West of the 6th P.M., Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado" LOCATION: This plat involves three lots, which are located downtown on East Elkhorn Avenue across from Town Hall. The addresses are 230,234, 238, and 240 East Ell<horn Avenue. APPLICANT: Kevin Schwery PROPERTY OWNER(S): Abundant Properties of the Rockies, LLC Lot 1, Block 4 of the Second Amended Plat of the Town of Estes Park and the metes-and-bounds parcel. Kirk's Flyshop, LLCs Lot 2, Block 4 of the Second Amended Plat of the Town of Estes Park CONSULTANT/ENGINEER: Rick England, England Surveying STAFF CONTACTCS): Alison Chilcott and Bob Joseph APPLICABLE LAND USE CODE: Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: This is an amended plat application to: 1. Adjust the property line between Lots 1 and 2 of Block 4 of the Second Amended Plat of the Town of Estes Park. 2. Vacate the property line between Lot 1 and the metes-and-bounds parcel. 3. Reduce the width of a public utility and access easement on the metes- and-bounds parcel from nineteen feet to ten feet wide. This easement was originally dedicated to the Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority (EPURA). EPURA later transferred the easement to the Town; therefore, Town Board is the final decision-making body regarding any changes to the easement width. EA A 414 U C.Â·Vt#, , .. .X E.ee,0,? PN . -#i ' f val f--71 0 :4Â£1Ct 21 - K go 41 . 1 \\4 ~ U, 2,4 E * fir rIKHORN ffi ..0.4 Lok 1 - \ - v w *719. 41 woe* d) Â® Ul % 0- 13 r 19,2 n g #,aa ,-, m, \ 11' -U -p 46 '263 1 230 Â£ 0*010*W V 0.4 1759, 3%1 1 1 /81:.40 0457 t. 4 Uc,%8Et PLA.r \ 2 3, i AN,0 5, 2 4 - '41 w 290(-2 4. 4505,90446 10 S Augge nAT E, RECPT #88050589: â€¢ O L r 19:Kt' U' Â£545 Â·Â·4 :er - McicÂ»og 4 9&1 '%.3 3 - 2 _ -4 0 0 g 32774(Â·81NY LOT 2. '*Â·' ~ 908, 405 .(P ----1 163â„¢0 90 '. --11.4 .*$.* .' Fr. ...3 16 911 f A k =25 . 0 -4 '3 .=- tt\,1 \ \ 0 - \./ ./% I 6 Z. -11--------1 4 1-/9.,4 0. t, j. f De.S/e . 0**R,UCY- 04. AM 't 584*4.Â£ :U 107 1, t. ' 5/1#00/. W# : ;ca<NhoL 6-924 R.19Â¢&%' ~Â· : 3 GUE <lat M.:0, â€¢SÂ·' -.* 70/20/4995 RECP, 9.- ..4 1 Page #2 - Schwery Amended Plat UQU Â¤ U 0 U U B 9 - C-D -~ fÂ·la_ .i; i ~ f WI#.- W # 13 0 -5 E = 2 -2 4 %4/20 2% 31 06 2 g E irn N =f M CS â‚¬ O M 0 - 4 m UD 0 r - - /2 W S E f 0 40 d= Legal vescrwtion AUUrebb Â£,Agt1116 1~allU U/C Zoning Zoning Downtown Owntown mmercial ommercial mended Plat of the Town Shop/Kirk's *0Â£21 P.HE[ 1 own/Contained Partially ot 1 and partially on poled spunoq puu Solotu 3Iieff solsH :11013>I ER'O 0Â£Â£'919'9 .JAV 0104111 -H OVE [0011?d spunof[ 1 solow 03Â£.0 09Â£'Â£36'Â£I Square Feet Acres Lot 2, Block 4,2nd 230 E. Elkhorn Ave. 3,652.500 0.084 234 E. Elkhorn Ave. 3,652.500 0.084 Reta 992*0 OEBOLE'OI luld PopUOUIv aZIS p).Ied 005'E99' luld PoptIOUnt nd Amended Pl t of the Town 238 E. Elkhorn Ave. SERVICES Water Town of Estes Park Sewer Estes Park Sanitation District Fire Protection Town of Estes Park Volunteer Fire Department Gas Xcel Energy Company Electric Town of Estes Park Telephone Qwest MAPPED HAZARDS/PHYSICAL FEATURES Mapped Hazard/Physical Feature Applicable to this Site? Wildfire Hazard No Geologic Hazard No Wetlands No Streams/Rivers Adjacent to the Big Thompson River Ridgeline Protection No Wildlife Habitat No LOCATION MAP AND ADJACENT LAND USES , -0~wLHRI' f 1 ::.0* -t k ... w ./ : ./9./. 4.li~hry/ 5 $ k. .... k UÂ«M ond Park l E. 1/7/Ir#li ./1/.7 . 4 j)/t/* ID~ 1///tz.3/-7/1/I 33 ' .0 I t ...a 1 -14(096 9- ~.\ .6 : 41 , I ./6 -Â·f - ED-I / I , . -44â‚¬â€ž .,1 r . .1 , 0 > 4 : r.mm~7!,1,) I. - t. 4- 4 1.W - . A 3 . I. 1 . .. ' % I. : 9 .t-- T: t. . L. _,9 >31 7 1 . 4.Â®' .4 .# . . I. ... 24' '1 2 j \\ III. REVIEW CRITERIA The Estes Valley Planning Commission is the recommending body and the Estes Park Town Board is the decision-making body for this amended plat application. Since the property is not being subdivided, the Town does not review for compliance with adequate public facilities standards and many other subdivision standards. We do review the plat to ensure that the form is correct. The applicant has requested that the Town approve vacation of a portion of a public access and utility easement. If approved, the plat would serve as the vehicle to reduce the easement width. IV. REFERRAL COMMENTS These requests have been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff and adjacent property owners for consideration and comment. The following staff and/or adjacent property owners provided written comments. Estes Park Public Works and Utilities Departments. See Tracy Feagans' memo to Alison Chilcott, Bob Goehring, and Scott Zurn dated February 18, 2009. Page #5 - Schwery Amended Plat Estes Park Light and Power Department. See Mike Mangelsen' s memo to Bob Goehring dated February 17, 2009. Estes Park Volunteer Fire Department. See Derek Rosenquist's memo to Alison Chilcott dated February 17, 2009. Estes Park Sanitation District. See James Duell's letter to Alison Chilcott dated February 11, 2009. Larimer County Assessor's Office. See Megan Harrity's letter to Rick England dated February 19, 2009. Colorado Department of Transportation. See Gloria Hice-Idler' s email to Alison Chilcott dated February 10, 2009. V. STAFF FINDINGS - AMENDED PLAT Staff finds: 1. Project Description/Background The Project Description/Background found in Section I of this staff report is incorporated as a staff finding. 2. Reviewing Agency Comments This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. 3. Neighbor Comments This request has been submitted to neighbors for consideration and comment. No written comments were received. 4. Lot Configuration Lot Line between Lot 1 and Metes-and-Bounds Parcel The proposed property line vacation eliminates a lot line, which runs through a building, and is not centered on a common wall. One larger lot, rather than two smaller ones, may also provide more options for future redevelopment on the property. Lot Line between Lots 1 and 2 This is a lot line adjustment to center the lot line on the common wall between Kirk's Flyshop and the Shirt Shack. The lot line is moving 0.33 feet (four inches). Page #6 - Schwery Amended Plat 5. Proposed Reduction in the Width of a Public Easement Staff does not recommend vacating nine feet of the nineteen-foot wide public access and utility easement on the metes-and-bounds parcel. Below are photos of the easement which provides access to the river walk. .W i~. 441* I L---1 CIa f i 1 W .0 r.-7 A Â· * , t .6.2- I -9 s,re-4...1 --- ...1.' A=:2= *- L.1 ~ . 1~. The Public Works Department, Utilities Department (including Light and Power, and the Fire Department have all submitted letters/memos stressing the need to retain the easement in its current configuration. Their written comments describe reasons for denying the request to vacate a portion of the easement width. Page #7 - Schwery Amended Plat 6. Dumpster The dumpster on the Abundant Properties, LLC property should be animal proof and screened as described in the Estes Valley Development Code. The proposed dumpster location and screening design should be reviewed and approved by staff. 7. Unpermitted Sign A sign for the Sierra Small Bird Jewelry store was installed without a permit. As of March 25,2009 this permit has not been resolved. Abundant Properties, LLC should resolve this. 8. Formatting a. The existing size for Lot 2 should be provided on the plat. b. The vicinity map should be to scale with the scale noted. c. Font sizes for the existing lot sizes shall be increased so as to be legible. d. The dedication statement should be revised to dedicate any new easement propos6d with this plat, and only those easements. e. Kirk' s Flyshop, LLC shall be added to the dedication statement. f. The reception number or book and page shall be provided for the ~ nineteen-foot wide public access and Utility easement. g. The month should be added to the Board of Trustee' s Certificate. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - AMENDED PLAT Based on the foregoing, Staff recommends APPROVAL of the amended plat CONDITIONAL TO: 1. Denial of the requested reduction in the width of a nineteen-foot wide public access and utility easement and removal of the language vacating nine feet of this easement from the plat. 2. All signs on the property shall be properly permitted prior to plat recordation. 3. Prior to plat ;ecordation, the dumpster on the Abundant Properties,.LLC property should be animal proof and screened as described in the Estes Valley Development Code. The proposed dumpster location and ~ screening design should be reviewed and approved by staff. Page #8 - Schwery Amended Plat C 4. The existing size for Lot 2 shall be provided on the plat. 5. The vicinity map shall be to scale with the scale noted. 6. Font sizes for the existing lot sizes shall be increased so as to be legible. 7. The dedication statement shall be revised to dedicate any new easement proposed with this plat, and only those easements. 8. Kirk's Flyshop, LLC shall be added to the dedication statement and signature blocks for Kirk' s Flyshop shall be added. 9. The reception number or book and page shall be provided for the nineteen-foot wide public access and utility easement. 10. The month shall be added to the Board of Trustee' s Certificate. VII. SUGGESTED MOTIONS APPROVAL I move to recommend APPROVAL of the applications to the Town Board of Trustees with staffs' findings and conditions. CONTINUANCE I move to CONTINUE the applications to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting because... (state reason for continuance - findings). Staff recommends that the applicant agree to this for the record at the Planning Commission meeting. DENIAL I move to recommend DENIAL of the applications to the Town Board of Trustees because. . . (state reason for denial -findings). Page #9 - Schwery Amended Plat #-h 4. 41.4-1 E-;[Iil~nijGIil[gaMY>Lrf,<74*12~ 572* 1 IM,1 **twfl Flit;Â¥V;t;!Ttrif':,1 t-irrENhirl 17%:tÂ·)23â‚¬..45#Regi.yw.,1;:416' ESTE S Wt' Â®PARK -, . -I., .....1 COLORADO Room 100, Town Hall P.O. Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517 Memo To: Alison Chilcott, Bob Goehring, and Scott Zurn From: Tracy Feagans Date: February 18, 2009 Re: Abundant Properties of the Rockies, LLC, Amended Plat parcel located at 230,234, & 240 E. Elkhorn Ave Background: The Public Works and Utilities Departments have enclosed progress comments regarding the submittals received to date and remain general as the submittals are not complete and construction drawings for the public improvements have not been submitted. It is important to note that these Departments reserve the right to make additional comments and revise comments as more detail is provided in the subsequent submittals and development plans. Engineering: After reviewing this Amended Plat the Public Works Engineering Department has the following comments: The Public Works Department recommends denial of vacating the 19' Public Access & Utility Easement. (Supporting information below) 1. The easement was dedicated for Access & Utilities. There are several primary underground utilities along the Riverwalk that require access for service, maintenance, and operations by large heavy equipment. (see L&P memo) No other access is available, and this was the original intent and design of this easement. The width is required by many types of heavy machinery. 2. Access to the riverbank is compulsory for the Public Works Department. Any changes to the rock bank or high water issues will generate emergency response by PW as well as other public safety personnel. 3. The origin of this easement also included the future possible placement of an Elkhorn Avenue catch basin and stormdrain culvert to the river. This remains a viable need. 4. PW needs access for the maintenance of the concrete riverwalk, the river, river bank, landscaping, irrigation system, and floodway. Water: No Comments f / Â·. ( t 1O To: Bob Goehring From: Mike Mangelsen Date: 2-17-09 Re: Abundant Properties of the Rockies, LLC, 230,234, and 240 E. Elkhom Ave. The Light and Power Department has reviewed the Application for an Amended Plat (Lot Consolidation) and Easement Reduction for the above referenced property and has the following comments: 1. We're opposed to the easement reduction, due to the need to access the river walk with large line trucks and heavy equipment. 2. We have no comments or concerns over the lot consolidation with the understanding that all existing utility easements remain intact. 1 C fEÂ«*Palli*Valmitiiatâ‚¬ 1FitOlDÂ®h*t~blittil 24* emo TO: Alison Chilcott, Planner From: Derek Rosenquist, Estes Park Volunteer Fire Department CC: Rick England, England Surveying Date: 2/17/2009 Re: Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, 2nd Amended Plat, Town of Estes Park, 230,234, & 240 E. Elkhom Ave After reviewing this amended plat, the Estes Park Volunteer Fire Department does not recommend allowing the Public Access & Utility Easement to be reduced. A ten foot wide easement does not allow enough room for safe passage and operations of fire suppression vehicles and equipment in the event they are needed at that location. 1 i k i Estes Park Sanitation District PO Box 722, Estes Park, CO 80517 February 11 th,2009 Alison Chilcott, Planner Town of Estes Park PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517-1200 RE: Abundant Properties of the Rockies, LLC Dear Alison Chilcott, Upon review of the Amend Plant and Easement Reduction for the above mentioned property the District has the following comments: 1. We have no problem with either request. Thank you and if you have questions please call me at 586-2866. Sincerely, # :, t>, */:/ V 11 1 /1 -24-3=*tt James Duell District Manager C. Rick England, England Surveying Office: 1201 Graves Avenue 970.586.2866 / Plant: 610 Big Thompson Ave 970.586.3516 Fax: 970.586.4712 C C # \4.2 LARIMER fACOUNTY Steve Miller, Assessor 200 West Oak Street, Suite 2000 PO Box 1190 Fort Collins, CO 80522-1190 February 19, 2009 England Surveying Rick England PO Box 908 Lyons, CO 80540 Alison Chilcott, Planner II Town of Estes Park Re: Preliminary Plat Review Schwery Amended Plat After reviewing the preliminary plat of Schwery Amd Plat, I noticed there was no signature block for Kirks Flyshop LLC. Please include a signature block for Kirks Flyshop, LLC before recording final plat. Thank you. Sincerely, 4***mi Megan Harrity For the Assessor 970-498-7065 mharrity@larimer.org Phone: 970-498-7050 Fax: 970-498-7070 www.larimer.org/assessor Alison Chilcott om: Hice-Idler, Gloria [Gloria.Hice-Idler@DOT.STATE.CO.US] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:03 PM To: Alison Chilcott Subject: Projects Alison, My comment for both the Willuweit Residence and Abundant Properties is the same - "NO COMMENT". That was easy! Gloria Hice-Idler Permit Supervisor CDOT Region 4 1420 2nd Street Greeley CO 80631 (970) 350-2148 1 . LETTER OF INTENT To: Town of Estes Park From: Abundant Properties of the Rockies, LLC Date: August 26,2008 Re: Amended Plat Application for: Acklress Parcel Number Legal Description 230 E. Elkhorn Ave. 35251-19-002 Lat 2. Block 4,2"" Amd Plat Town of Estes Park -n,1 234 E. Elklinrn Ave. 35251-19-(101 Lot l. Block 4.1 Amd Plat '1'own 01' Estes Park 240 E. Elkhorn Ave. 35251-00-009 Metes mid Bounds Parcel 1. We intend, if applicable, to vacate lot line between Shirt Shack (234 East Elkhorn) and Sierra Smallbird - (238 E. Elkhorn - formerly 240 East Elkhorn) 2. We request the reduction ofthe existing nineteen (19) foot wide utility and access easement to bereduced to a ten (10) foot easement coming from the furthermost Eastern side of 240 E. Elkhom Avenue. Submitted by: ABUNDANT PROPERTIES OF THE ROCKIES, LLC / \An/ V &evin J. Sc~Qery, Manager Â£5/ fj) EÂ©ED VWF%1 ~j~ OCT 2 2 2008 ~ 1 0 ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Submittal Date: Ff -5.4 4 - TE T 1.14 --27%*:-Â·F rt L. ......7.-- 4:LiLtÂ¢3~Â·St J-r'3.', -1*43 4% 'A.~--Â»..z.~~ ..,2,05. 1 L .5.,ew*'25 1 -- . fy*'21?ji.-~pplicatipnot=41.41-14-* 4.4-e-- -;=Â·t Â·w &,>2/..:.~.ty. Â·-Â· 08*4$ E- ..=:-- 4 414 zipi.-:1~,LSE ilf#A..r. 3/3 1- Development Plan r Boundary Line Adjustment Condominium Map r Special Review 1- ROW or Easement Vacation r Preliminary Map F Rezoning Petition r Street Name Change r Final Map 1- Preliminary Subdivision Plat r Time Extension 1- Supplemental Map r Final Subdivision Plat F Other: Please specify r Minor Subdivision Plat .P - Â¥ Amended Plat jIGeneral Information -Addn,2- ~ Project Name flchv# ; Armended PlecE <Abv4#+PropekÂ£Â© 1-49-4 4 Ac- , : ~ Project Description Adive} 1.-c* L; ne bek,Â·ceÂ£.44,0 (clb tÂ· Co~rrb; re +ua:~lots intâ€¢~ one 19 Project Address 230,2-54) 4-240 Eo.Â·* Elkhorrl Ave AJâ‚¬ ~ Legal Description ~~g~~'1 07.,Ihig d<.427*An,&'Plgtof %-Fob..,.,:F B.AnsPDA: + fhebt-Ftâ€¢uÂ·,41 Mit51-14.04 Â·325*2:51 -00 -90 9 J Parcel ID 4361151 -019-001. Section -15 Township S NorW, Range-13\Je s'E - Site Information Total Development Area (e.g., lot size) in acres C-).32', o.c ee *3 Existing Land Use 14+(411 Proposed Land Use b (une- Existing Water Service 52 Town F well F None F Other (specify) Proposed Water Service g Town F Well F None F Other (specify) Existing Sanitary Sewer Service R EPSD r UTSD r septic F None Proposed Sanitary Sewer Service I EPSD r UTSD r septic Is a sewer lift station required? E Yes K No Existing Gas Service 37- Xcel F Other F- None Existing Zoning 4'C- t> ' Proposed Zoning S g,Ae Site Access (if not on public street) Are there wetlands on the site? E Yes lz- No Site staking must be completed at the time application is submitted. Complete? E Yes F No Primary Contact Information Name of Primary Contact Person ~<ibn Ex.hvktj Complete Mailing Address Po E ex \7461 , Efks ?Ark CO 805 1-1 Attachments 0 Application fee 17 Statement of intent CornfkÂ·W,4 ~ SAFF (400-, infer,nt,J<OrÂ·. %.AÂ»,4*be-2 53 --13. c.. F F:l; c ant- 11 3 copies (folded) of plat or plan [7 11 " X 17" reduced copy of plat or plan A.c. 17 Names & mailing addresses of neighboring property owners (see attached handout) \--1-Â©1 Please review the Estes Valley Development Code Appendix B for additional submittal requirements, which may include ISO calculations, drainage report, traffic impact analysis, geologic hazard mitigation report, wildfire hazard mitigation report, wetlands report, and/or other additional information. Town of Estes Park 4 P.O. Box 1200 -6 170 MacGregor Avenue -6 Estes Park. CO 80517 Community Development Department Phone: (970) 577-3721 4 Fax: (970) 586-0249 4, www.estesnet.com/ComDev [1 13 4rail a. <21 I. 1 APPLICANT CERTIFUCATION * I hereby certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge l and that in filing the application I am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owners of the property. $ In submitting the application materials and signing this application agreement, I acknowledge and agree that the application is subject to the applicable processing and public hearing requirements set forth in the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC). * I acknowledge that I have obtained or have access to the EVDC, and that, prior to filing this application, I have had the opportunity to consult the relevant provisions governing the processing of and decision on the application. (The Estes Valley Development Code is available online at www.estesnet.com/ComDev/DevCode.) I I understand that acceptance of this application by the Town of Estes Park for filing and receipt of the application fee by the Town does not necessarily mean that the application is complete under the applicable requirements of the EVDC. â€¢ I understand that this proposal may be delayed in processing by a month or more if the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or submitted after the deadline date. â€¢ I understand that a resubmittal fee will be charged if my application is incomplete. I The Community Development Department will notify the applicant in writing of the date on which the application is determined to be complete. â€¢ I grant permission for Town of Estes Park Employees and Planning Commissioners with proper identification access to my property during the review of this application. I clul\I,UVVICUyC U lal 1 1 laVC ICUCIVCU U IC Chleb Valley 1.â€¢CVCIUp,Ilt:Ill nt;VICVV Mppl,Uctl,Ul I OUI ICUUIC d, IU illell ICUIUI C LU Illt:t:l * the deadlines shown on said schedule shall result in my application or the approval of my application becoming NULL and VOID. I understand 11 fees will be charged for the resubmittal of an application that has become null and void. 0 -1 02.Lepre ug,-kâ€ž A~ frofÂ«kks +_42 *ub s k 1- C. - A @T /224Â·+- 1~1EE,ih Sl-)01 40.-er*,fk1*-565" Names: r'YE- ~leCord OWner PLEASE PRINT: Kir Â¥6 P ly 1 lop : Lic AppliCant PLEASE PRINT: uar/late,l , PI 000,4, er Signatures: 6~co~Ap'.c ,#- Ae,A-r (2,-c>'pu-+Ce, 041- 'fk oeuckrbs, C ACL------likcAL_tfizE-/De (20- |0~f--Record Owner Ktil<, F1}74?r; ul-r. Date 4 0/30/08 44 4*taÂ«-F CUM , 11 0*%-; M,~, Date /0/34/08 Revised 06/26/07 -W f i \ 1 4 tl'1111[1 [:et?*CIP*)tatl911Â¥0Ng*ReÂ¥43~ 1~ ' 1 Primary Contact Person is 4 owner r Applicant F Consultant/Engineer Record Owner(s) *61 5 F- 144oq j L 1-0 + Alod .l~At- Prow 45< Alk Â¢-ockfk_ Mailing Address'pt>Exrm (Uz.,73â€¢*m, ~Prk,(r, 64). K Of firk /. F.A. PUS lib ., : Phone 9-10-571 -4)196 ( kirk.C) hace. bilow Ar Cor,?*ree . 1 Cel Phone info. Fax 910-5-77 -06â‚¬' CkÂ»re,2) Email ~b; e.--dntÂ»me â‚¬ c.o< . (-Cyv-1 . - Applicant Â£ftfu,Th <1- ,4 u.-*Â« Mailing Address Â§2 /9 . 606--rEAl' Phone 9 70 0 3-776. 9 200 Lw 3 GonsultanVEngineer~rvâ‚¬yvt ' g,21 â‚¬I~~</cpwi~j E-n~li..7 & Su ,_204 1 Re CeH Phone 970.5 21.%163 Fax Eme:\\ Se AL-< ry Â£9602 4 Â»sh . C cÂ« Mailing Address pOE ex 4 06 1 M cri s, CO 8%5-WO Phone 9,03-02 3 - SW 61 Cell Phone Fax Ernall EYL~Ia.nA Surve,irr *> CA.OlÂ· conn APPLICATION FEES For development within the Estes Valley Planning Area, both inside and outside Town limits See the fee schedule included in your application packet or view the fee schedule online at www.estesnet.com/ComDev/Schedules&Fees/PlanningApplicationFeeSchedule.pdf. All requests for refunds must be made in writing. All fees are due at the time of submittal. MINERAL RIGHT CERTIFICATION On July 1, 2001, House Bill 01-1088 became effective. This legislation requires applicants for Development Plans, Special Reviews, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plats, Minor Subdivision Plats if creating a new lot, and Preliminary and Final Condominium Maps to give notice of their application to all mineral estate owners where the surface estate and the mineral estate have been severed. This notice must be given 30 days prior to the first hearing on an application for development. 11]egeby pertify th*Â®e provisions of House Bill 01-1088 Section 24-65 5-104 CRS have been met. /#i'vic#CeÂ¢- 1 (Y'4/CorJ (jL.(4_ /<1<vib-__5cL -trf / A-kkbd/L r Fct,7 urpes of- fh...1&2Â£1Â£i 16-I. )14Gt/Asee Names: 44Â· (Re<.0,3 6-*e r . A-\~,AcÂ¢L~z--252Â£Klku_ZE__Th Â®0(/3 rs ...U=R- *SAJnt %244Si.-*&1 ~cf~Â¢~,6-Record Owner PLEASE PRINTL 6/,IC, f~ 54,Gp- LLC- - 01 Applicant PLEASE PRINT: Gary !51'en atures: Recorl --4<r &'Ade-*-_*p~,fkrsofkfTÂ£_Ee. ki-Â£5,--Un Â©0--~ C to/go/op 4 eff < CA.* Â»0-22:%1 6,1- D A-T E. lÂ©/76 /00 k-~rtÂ» ecord Owner 6, fl<f Plvit,0%4 :LLC Date 10/30/08 ~~----21 Applicant ,Â·/5 01 Date \0 /30/08 V 1 . C r 1 ( .GO NO 21 â‚¬ â‚¬ S 0 C\191-OCDODO (Dom,-0002 Il 00 XXXXX X 00000 00 00 Do Do Do 00 00000 0 O-0-0-0-0- O- 2, -6 0 IL Z 30 0/ IC .b= C 2 < U.1 00 shop, LLC Estes Pa 80517 Estes Pa CO 80517 stes Village Properties, Ltd Estes Park, CO 80517-4130 arlow, Inc Estes Park CO 80517-1116 Estes Park, LLC Kent, WA 98035 Lei of the Land, LLC Â· PO Box 12 Estes Park, CO 80517 Estes Park, CO 80517 Owner Owner 11 Address leld pl,Uv se!)loobl elll Jo seluedold luepunqv Town of Estes SCHWERY AMENDED PLAT THE AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 4, OF THE SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, AND A PORTION OF THE N.W. 1/4 OF THE N.E. 1/4 OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., TOWN OF ESTES PARK, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO. NORTH 1 VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE 60' ROW , HIGHWAY 34 BUSINESS RT AV<N U Et / ~ BOND U.S. 1 1 -9 ARA: \ \ \ EAST ELKHORN 4 WALK \ ' CONCRETE ~ E. ELKHORN AVE ) 7.4 _ i , 1 95.J \ 1 * 1472Â°30'00"EL . 4\ REOPT #87052151 - \ 1 m 0.33 4 3 \ ' CONCRETE WA K me 00 --- e251 \ \ \ S \0\ -- -\ BIG THOMPSON RIVER -4 C ?Pi -1 2 E\ A q 0 \ ORN\ \444% 4 \ LO lA \, 5 BOOK 219, PAGE 12 \ 24==? Â«1 \El PROPOSED: 2380, PAGE 389, \ 0 10.270.830 FT. \ 11/15/1965 0 C 0 230 E ELI<HORN - / OK 1759, 422300 m . \--al.-R 402= 1 151 / O \ 1 "A (A 0.. RECPT. #200790 PAGE 0457 31 \ ~ / rli - . a /- LOT JA AMENDED PLAT , LA CD 32 OF LOTS 3, 4, AND 5, 2.1 00 - RECPT. #89002948 BLOCK 4. ACCORDING TO 19'Â©bl(JI TE .1,~<9--- - ' cr 0 & RECPT f88060589 \\ - ~ THE 2ND AMENDED PLAT E, 1 1 - <L- 15 0 # LÂ» , OF THE TOWN OF ESTES ~ -- v A \-n / , PARK. COLORADO. LA\ CD>- 1 / 8 / \9 ~ LA GSA RESTAURANT 01 LOT 2A ~7 BLOCK 4 â€¢ 1 \ \1- 13 0.084 ADEES \m Z 3.652.500 50. \ CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP AND DEDICATION STATEMENT 53% R\ 6 I2 ..I 26 / KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT ABUNDANT PROPERNES, LLC, (KEVIN SCHWERY, JOHN C. SPACES MVIAN E. BECKER, AND STANDARD INSURANCE BEING THE UEN HOLDERS OF THAT PART OF THE N.W. LYLES, nM CARNEY) AND GARY BIEN & KIRK BEN BEING THE OWNERS , AND HERBERT BECKER, ~ 5 , 15-9720' PARKING 1 1/4 OF THE N.E 1/4 OF SECION 25, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6TH KM., \ \ 4 f~ :,I GAS Â¢18 \ TOWN OF ESTES PARK, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS -4% 10 / FOLLOWS, TO W/7-: 0 \ I 8% n / u.\ 9 \ NEW ELEC.-3/-034 -3 LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 4, OF RE SECOND AMENDED PLAT, FILED 4/8/1908, AND A PORTION OF THE N.W. 1/4 OF THE N.E. 1/4 OF SECTiON 25, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 73 WEST OF THE 6111 P.M., m TOWN OF ESTES PARK, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO; CONTAINING 0.320 ACRES OR 13,923.330 SQ. \ Sts\ 35 -/E /Â« \ Fr., MORE OR LESS; HAVE BY THESE PRESENTS CAUSE THE SAME TO BE SURVEYED AND SUBDMDED 2 7' WIDE ACCESS TO, 4Â«;U' 7765 PLAT AND DO ALSO RESERVE PERFETUAL EASEMBVE FOR 7HE INSTALLAVON AND AWN7EAANCE 91* ,~ ' 1 % L . 111 E 95 1/UPED INTO LOTS TO BE KNOWN AS THE SCHWERY AMENDED PLAL AND DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND CONVEY MAJNTENANCE OF, AND TO AND FOR PUBUC USE FOREVER HEREAFTER THIS STREETS ARE LAID OUT AND DESIGNATED ON DRAINAGE FROM LOT 3A, 5/1/2007, RECPT. 1 I / ~3 10' CON~X. 100' YE# AF R/1/ER CORRIDOR, 2,\ THIS PLAT, WITNESS OUR HANDS AND SEALS THIS DAY OF , 20_. #20070032216 0 OF UTILINES AND FOR IRRIGAnON AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES AS ARE LAID OUT AND DESIGNATED ON 1 - Qu/r CLAIM DEED, ~ _ - 33:50'- - - \ 494- ..>61 - 10/20/1995, RECPT. - 1 OF FLEPED L T #95061385 APPEX. IRTH -Â·- 1 \ CONCRETE p EDGE OF BIG iWOMPSON RI\,8~ r OCD 3. ABUNDANT PROPERTIES OF THE ROOKIES, LLC ABUNDANT PROPERTIES OF THE ROOKIES, LLC KEVIN SCHWERY (OWNER) JOHN C. LYLES (OWNER) / A \/ '*4P~1901 Vf Co500'm ABUNDANT PROPERTIES OF THE ROOKIES, LLC W E A TIM CARNEY (OWNER) STATE OF COLORADO) -SS COUNTY OF LARIMER) THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS - DAY OF , 20_, BY S WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL ' 0 20' 40' NOTARY PUBUC SCALE: 1"=20' DATE PREPARED: 1/13/2009 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES LEGEND: HERBERT BECKER, LIEN HOLDER VIVIAN E. BECKER, UEN HOLDER ~ FND. #4 REBAR W/ YEUOW CAP, LS#9485 STATE OF COLORADO) SS * SET #5 REBAR W/ ALUM. CAP, LS#29415 COUNTY OF LARIMER) ( ) PLATED INFORMAnON THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS - DAY OF , 20_ BY WITNESS MY HAND AND OFACIAL SEAL NOTES: BASIS OF BEARING: NOTARY PUBUC LAND AMERICA TITLE INSURANCE: TNEP0001119, 3/31/2006 FOR LOT 1, NO mLE COMMITMENT BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE SOUTH ROW UNE OF ELKHORN AVENUE, SAID UNE ALSO BEING THE MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SUPPUED BY LOT 2, HOWEVER, ENGLAND SURVEYING, INC. USED THE IMPROVEMENT LOCATION NORTH UNE OF LOTS 1 & 2, OF SAID BLOCK 4, ASSUMED AS BEARING, N7730'007, AND ALL CERTIFICATE SUPPUED BY VAN HORN ENGINEERING, PROJECT NO. 2005-04-01 ALONG WITH FLE OTHER BEARINGS HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO. WORK SUPPUED FOR LOT 1, BLOCK 2 FOR LAND AMERICA, TNEP0001119, DATED 3/31/2006. ENGLAND SURVEYING, INC. DID NO ADDmONAL FLE RESEARCH. GARY BIEN (OWNER) KIRK BIEN (OWNER) 1. ITEM 7 OF THE TITLE COMMITMENT REFERS TO A RESERVATION OF RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OF STATE OF COLORADO) ANY PENETRATING VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT HIS ORE IN U.S. PATENT RECORDED 9/14/1876, SS BOOK 1, PAGE 207. COUNTY OF LARIMER) 2. nEM 11 REFERS TO A MOUNTAIN STATES TELEPHONE & TREGRAPH EASEMENT, 7/10/1979, BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT STATEMENT BOOK 1967, PAGE 933, THE SPECIFIC LOCATION OF EASEMENT IS NOT DEFINED. THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS __ _ - DAY OF , 3. ITEMS 12 & 13 REFER TO EASEMENT AGREEMENTS, RECORDED 5~1990, RECPL #90019025 BOUNDARY UNES INDICATED ON THIS MAP ARE ADJUSTMENTS OF FORMER BOUNDARY UNES OF THE 20_ BY i & #90019029, NOT SPECIFIC IN THEIR LOCAMONS. PROPERTY DEPICTED HEREON. SUCH ADJUSTMENTS DO MOT CREATE ADDmONAL LOTS OR BUILDING 1 4. ITEM 14 REFERS TO A QUIT CLAIM DEED, 10/20/1995, RECPT. #95061385 TO THE TOWN OF SITES FOR ANY PURPOSES. THE AREA ADDED TO EACH LOT, SHOWN HEREON BY SUCH ADJUSTMENT SHALL BE CONSIDERED AN ADDmON TO, SHALL BECOME PART OF AND SHALL BE WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL ESTES PARK, REGARDING THE RIVER CORRIDOR EASEMENT AREA, (SAID AREA UES DIRECTLY SOUTH CONVEYED WITH, EACH LOT AS SHOWN. AND ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTf SHOWN HEREON). NOTARY PUBUC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES BOARD OF TRUSTEES' CERTIFICATE APPROVED AND ACCEPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO SURVEYOR' S CERTIFICATE BY A RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON THIS __ DAY OF 20_ (LIEN HOLDER) STANDARD INSURANCE REP. BY STANCORP MTG. INVESTORS LLC., SERVICE ESSEX FINANCIAL GROUP LLC. STATE OF COLORADO) 1. RICHARD A. ENGLAND. A DULY REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR IN THE STATE OF COLORADO. DO SS HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SCHWERY AMENDED PLAL TRULY AND CORRECTLY REPRESENTS THE TOWN CLERK MAYOR COUNTY OF LARIMER) RESULTS OF A SURVEY MADE BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION. THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS - DAY OF , 20_ BY RICHARD A ENGLAND, COLORADO REGISTRAnON #29415 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFECIAL SEAL DAm NOTARY PUBUC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 847EÂ· REVISION: BY: 191= (=Ful'QMMFNT K NOTICE OF APPROVAL 23Â« - PRajECT mLE APPROVAL OF THIS PLAN CREATES A VESTED PROPERTY RIGHT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 68 OFF nTLE 24, C.R.S. AS AMENDED. (Et-cdÂ» ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED ON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY VWTHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU ARST DISCOVERED SUCH DEFECT, IN NO EVENT, MAY SCHWERY AMENDED PLAT ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS CUENT:;,ABUNDANT PROPERTIES OF THE ROCKIES, UC 'specializing in Mountain Surveying ~--1-~/ surveying FROM THE DATE OF CERTIACATION SHOWN HEREON. OFFICE, DENGNED Em RAE APPROVED BY: RAE JOB NO. SHEET SHEET P.O. Box 908 Lyons. CO 80540 (303) 823-5461 LYONS DRAWN BY: LE DATE: 1/13/2009 2008/DWG/234 & 240 E ELI<HORN.DWG CHECKED BY RAE SCALE: AS SHOWN 176.16 1 1 | i M APR 1 4 2009 ~1 MAC GREGOR AVE. \\\\\\ ~ Amendments to the Estes Valley ~ Development Code, Portion of Block Twelve - Habitat and Wild/ife Estes Park Community Development Department *I==0 Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue _-.-.--* PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Phone: 970-577-3721 Fax: 970-586-0249 www.estesnet.com PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: April 21, 2009 TITLE: Amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code, Portion of Block Twelve REQUEST: To make a number of revisions to the habitat and wildlife protection regulations. LOCATION: Estes Valley, inclusive of the Town of Estes Park. APPLICANT: Estes Valley Planning Commission STAFF CONTACT: Bob Joseph and Alison Chilcott APPLICABLE LAND USE CODE: Estes Valley Development Code PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: This is a complete packet of proposed code language addressing wildlife and habitat protection. Staff is continuing to refine the maps to accompany this code language. 1 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review Â§ 1.9.D SETBACKS - BUILDING AND STRUCTURE SETBACKS. 2. Development Setbacks from River and Stream Corridors Aquatic Habitat, and Wetlands. a. Stream and River Corridors Aquatic Habitat. Development setbacks shall be measured as the distance between the delineated stream or river corridor aquatic habitat edae, as set forth in Â§7.6.D.2, and the furthermost projection of a building or structure along a line at right angles to the setback line. Setbacks shall be unobstructed from the ground to the sky except as otherwise specifically allowed in Â§7.6.D of this Code. See Figure 1-2. b. Wetlands. Development setbacks shall be measured as the distance between the delineated wetland edge, as set forth in Â§7.6.D.3, and the furthermost projection of a building or structure along a line at right angles to the setback line. Setbacks shall be unobstructed from the ground to the sky except as otherwise specifically allowed in Â§7.6.D of this Code. See Figure 1-2. Â§ 4.3.C.5. TABLE 4-2: BASE DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Notes to Table 4-2: [2] See Chapter 7, Â§7.6, for required setbacks from stream/rivor corridors aquatic habitat and wetlands. Â§ 4.4.C.4 TABLE 4-5: BASE DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS NONRESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Note to Table 4-5: [4] See Chapter 7, Â§7.6 for required setbacks from dream/river corridors aquatic habitat and wetlands. Â§ 7.4 PUBLIC TRAILS AND PRIVATE OPEN AREAS C. Locational Criteria. 1. To the maximum extent feasible, where significant natural and scenic resource assets exist on a property, the Applicant shall give priority to their preservation through trail dedication or as private open areas. In reviewing the location of trails and private open areas, Staff and the Decision-Making Body shall use all applicable plans, maps and reports to determine whether significant resources exist on a proposed site that should be protected, with priority being given to the following areas (which are not listed in any particular priority order): a. Wetlandst b. Floodplains. c. Lakes, River, and Stroam/Riparian Corridors Aquatic and Riparian Habitat. d. Wildlife Migration Corridors. Critical Wildlife Habitat. e. Steep slope areas. f. Ridgelines. g. Geologic or Wildfire Hazard areas. 2 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review Â§ 7.5 LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERS B. Applicability. Thoso landscape and buffer standards shall apply to residential subdivisions created after tho adoption of this Code, and to all devolopmont whoro development plan roviow ic roquirod by Â§3.8 of this Code. 1. These landscape and buffer standards shall apply to all applications for review of development plans, subdivision plats, planned unit developments, special review uses, and rezoning. 2. Section 7.5.H Fences and Walls shall apply to all new fence and wall construction. H. Fences and Walls. Fences and walls are permitted as elements of a landscape plan and, in some locations, may be used to conceal storage or other unsightly or conflicting land uses. All fences or walls shall meet the following requirements: 1. Materials. e. Barbed-wire and similar fence materials, and sharp pointed fences, may only be used in conjunction with a permitted agricultural use or in conjunction with the permitted keeping of horses or livestock on lots of five acres or more. 4. Fences and Walls In Critical Wildlife Habitat. Soo Â§7.8.G.1.c below for standards. a. In critical wildlife habitat, no fencing shall exceed forty (40) inches in height, except service area fencing, fencinq approved bv Staff to confine permitted domestic animals, or fencing to protect landscaping in accordance with Â§7.5.1.2. b. In all other areas, fences higher than fortv (40) inches mav be allowed if adequate openings are provided for the passage of deer, elk, or other identified wildlife. These openings shall be at least six (6) feet wide and spaced a maximum of forty (40) feet apart alona continuous fence lines and shall be unobstructed from the around to the sky. 3 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review Â§ 7.6 WETLANDS AND STREAM-CORRIDOR AQUATIC HABITAT PROTECTION A. Purpose and Intent. The following requirements and standards are intended to promote, preserve and enhance the important hydrological, biological, ecological, aesthetic, recreational and educational functions that aquatic habitat, including stream and river corridors, associated riparian areas1 and wetlands habitat provide. D. Boundary Delineation. 1. Qualified Professional. Stream/river corridor aquatic habitat and wetland area delineation shall be performed by a qualified professional that has demonstrated experience necessary to conduct site analysis. Delineations shall be subject to Staff's approval. 2. Stream and River Corridor Boundaries Aquatic Habitat Boundaries. Stream and rivor corridors shall bc dolinoatod at tho annual high wator mark, or if not readily discorniblo, tho defined bank of tho stroam or river, as thoco torms arc dofinod in Chaptor 13 of this Codo. Rogulatod ctroam and rivor corridors shall include only thoso streams and rivors as idontificd on tho Stroam and Rivor Corridor Rocourco Map found in Appendix A. Tho rivors dclincatod on tho Stroam and Rivor Corridor Resource Map aro tho Big Thompson and Fall Rivor. Streams dolinoatod on tho Map includo various namod and unnamod streams and minor drainagoc, como of which arc intermittont. a. Mapped Aquatic Habitat. Boundary delineation of aquatic habitat shall be established bv reference to the Aquatic Habitat Mag found in Appendix A. b. Unmapped Aquatic Habitat. The review of a development application mav discover potential aquatic habitat that has not been mapped or for which the boundaries have not been clearly established. In such instances, the Applicant shall retain a qualified professional to delineate the aquatic habitat boundaries. The delineated edae of the aquatic habitat shall be the high water mark as defined in Chapter 13 of this Code. c. Revisions to Adopted Map. (1) In the event a property owner questions the presence of aquatic habitat on their property, the property owner mav submit evidence with respect thereto from a qualified bioloaist/ecologist. This evidence shall be reviewed, together with all other applicable evidence, bv the Estes Valley Planning Commission, and then bv Board of Trustees or Board of Country Commissioners. The Board of Trustees or the Board of County Commissioners is the entity with final approval of Aquatic Habitat Map revisions, depending on the location of the property. If the Board of Trustees or the Board of Countv Commissioners determines that the property does not contain aquatic habitat the Community Development Director shall update the Aquatic Habitat Map and remove the aquatic designation. (2) Property mav be re-designated as aquatic habitat if conditions change resulting in the renewed presence of aquatic habitat on the property. (3) The Community Development Director and Estes Valley Planning Commission shall also have the authority to initiate proceedings to add or remove an aquatic 4 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21,2009 Planning Commission Review habitat designation from the Aquatic Habitat Map. The Board of Trustees or the Board of County Commissioners is the entity with final approval of Aquatic Habitat Map revisions, depending on the location of the property. 3. Wetland Boundaries. a. Mapped Wetlands. Boundary delineation of wetlands shall be established by reference to one (1) of the following wetland maps and identification documents, which are available for reference in the Town of Estes Park Community Development Department and which are hereby adopted and incorporated by reference into this Code: (1) National Wetlands Inventory prepared by the U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service; and (2) Colorado Natural Heritage Program maps. b. Unmapped Wetlands. The review of a development Bepesal application may discover a potential wetland that has not been mapped or for which the boundaries have not been clearly established. In such instances, the Applicant shall retain a qualified wetland expert to delineate the boundaries of the wetland according to accepted professional standards. E. Buffer/Setback Areas. 1. Stream or River Corridors Aquatic Habitat. a. Building/Structure Setbacks. (1) Stream Corridors (oxcopt in tho CD zoning district). All buildings and accessory structures shall bc cot back at least thirty (30) foot horizontally (plan viow) from the annual high water mark of stream corridors, or if not readily discornible, from the definod bank of the stream. Whorc dofincd banks aro not readily discernible, tho cotback shall bo moacured from the thread of the stream. Soo Eigefeq-44- Aquatic Habitat (except in the CD and Id district). a. General Rule. All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least fifty (50) feet horizontally (plan view) from the delineated edge of aquatic habitat, i.e., from the hiah water mark as defined in Chapter 13 of this Code. b. Exception for Buildings and Accessory Structures Constructed Prior to DATE '(fill in the date these code revisions are adopted)J [NOTE: THE LANGUAGE BELOW IS INCLUDED BELOW FOR GENERAL DISCUSSION PURPOSES1 EXEstivt,0 bikiloli.*@s aviol strikati,tres that Gre covuforvlkty as to the prlor streavik or rwer setback as of the Nate of aoloptlovx of StÂ£pple*lel/ut #TBD of this Bogie, avuot that are setback less thaA fiftld (50) feet frovw the e010Â£ of the 5 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review rwqikati.c habitat. shall be exevkpt frovk the -flfty foot (50) setback reciwirevw.evuts avid shall be s@ject to a thErtld foot setback. This exe~ti.ovi shall viot apply to the hortzov\.tai. (plavL vi,ew) expa vusi.DIN of extstlvig bwlloli,0,06 mU strikctures. 1-torl-zovital. expa vislovi shall be 51.*ject to the -fl-fhj (50) foot setback. (2) Rivor Corridore (oxcopt in tho CD district). c. Gonoral Rulo. All buildings and accessory structures shall bo cot back at loact fifty (50) foot horizontally (plan viow) from the annual high-wator mark of river corridors or, if not readily discernible, from the dofinod bank of tho river. b. Excoption for Lots Dovolopod Prior to tho Adoption of this Codo. All buildings and accessory structures shall bo cot back at least thirty (30) foot horizontally (plan viow) from tho annual high water mark of rivor corridors or, if not readily discorniblo, from tho dofinod bank of the river. Soo Figuro 7-10. Aquatic Habitat in the I-1 Zonina District. In the I-1 Zonina District, all buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet horizontally (plan view) from the delineated edge of aquatic habitat, i.e., from the high water mark as defined in Chapter 13 of this Code. [Note: This retains the current setbacks for 1-1 property along Fish Creek.1 (3) Stroam and Rivor Corridors Aquatic Habitat in the CD Zoning District. In the CD district, all buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least twenty (20) feet horizontally (plan view) from tho annual high-water mark of ctroam or rivor corridors or, if not readily discorniblo, from tho dofinod bank of tho stroam or rivor. Whoro dofinod banks aro not roadily diccorniblo, tho cotback shall bo moasurod from the throad of tho stream the delineated edale of the aquatic habitat. Where a principal building in the CD district provides public access, including a primary entrance, on the side of the building facing a stream or rivor corridor aquatic habitat, the setback may be reduced to ten (10) feet with the approval of the Decision-Making Body. b. Parking Lot Setbacks. Except in the CD zoning district, parking lots shall be set back at least fifty (50) feet horizontally (plan view) from tho annual high wator mark of stroam or rivor corridorc, or if not roadily diccorniblo, from the dcfinod bank of tho GtFGam-eF-F#Vef from the delineated edge of the aquatic habitat. In the CD district, parking lots shall be set back at least twelve (12) feet from the delineated edge of the etroam or rivor corridor aquatic habitat. 6 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review 2. Wetlands. a. To the maximum extent feasible, wetlands shall not be included as part of a piatted development lot. b. All buildings, accessory structures and parking lots shall be set back at least fifty (50) feet horizontally (plan view) from the delineated edge of a wetland. See Figure 7-10 above. Development on lots that were approved for single-family residential use prior to the adoption of this Code shall be exempt. 3. Private Open Areas and Landscaping Credit. All stream-Geffider aquatic habitat and wetland setback areas shall be credited toward any relevant private open areas requirements or landscaping and buffer requirements. F. Development Standards. 1. Prohibited Activities. No person shall engage in any activity that will disturb, remove, fill, drain, dredge, clear, destroy or alter any area, including vegetation, within stFGam-el-FiVGF GeFFiâ‚¬|eFG aquatic habitat, wetlands and their associated buffer/setback areas, except as may be expressly allowed in this Section or Code. 7 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review Â§ 7.8 WILDLIFE HABITAT PROTECTION A. Purpose. To maintain and onhanco tho diversity of wildlife species and habitat that occur in the Estes Valley, and to plan and design land uses to be harmonious with wildlife habitat and tho cpocioc that dopend on this habitat for tho oconomic, rocroational and onvironmontal bonofit of the residents of and visitors to tho Estos Valloy. 9. Applicability. This Section shall apply to all applications for roview of dovolopmont plans, subdivision plat planned unit developments, special roviow ueoc and rezonings. This Soction shall not apply to devolopmont on lots that woro approved for single family residential use prior to the offectivo date of this Codo. C. Exemptions. The procedures and regulations containod in this Section shall not apply 406 1. Agricultural activities such as soil proparation, irrigation, planting, harvesting, grazing andjafm-1@GAâ‚¬|Gi 2. Maintenance and ropair of existing public roads, utilities and other public facilitios within an oxicting right-of-way or oaccmont; 3. Maintenance and ropair of flood control structures and activities in rocponco to a Need-emergene 1. Maintonance and ropair of oxisting rosidontial or nonrocidontial structures; or 5. Wildlife habitat onhancomont and restoration activitios undortakon pursuant to a wildlifo concorvation plan approvod under this Soction. D. Other Regulations. This Section of tho Codo doos not ropoal or suporcodo any existing fodoral, state or local laws, cacomonts, covonants or dood roctrictions pertaining to wildlifo. Whon this Soction imposos a highor or moro restrictive standard, this Soction shall-appl* E. Wildlife Habitat Data Base. Tho following courcoc shall be used to identify important wildlife habitat areas for purposos of roviow undor this Soction: 1. Wildlife Habitat map (datod Docombor 1996), as Got forth in tho Ectoc Valloy Comprohonsivo Plan, ac amondod from timo to time. 2. Colorado Divigion of Wildlife habitat maps for Larimor County, as amondod from timo te#imer 3. Colorado Natural Horitago Program Maps dated Docombor 1996, or as amended from timo to time. 1. Othor information and maps as Staff or tho Estoe Valley Planning Commission may from timo to timo idontify in cooperation with tho Colorado Division of Wildlifo, such as wildlifo maps produced specifically for tho Ectoe Valloy. Said maps shall bc applicable only following adoption of an amendment to this Codo. 8 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review 5. Wildlife habitat information required by this Section is intended for gonoral planning purposes. Obvious orrors or omissions may bo corroctod by tho Staff aftor consultation with tho Division of Wildlifo. F. Review Procedures. Tho following procodures shall apply to all applications for develepment 1 . Application. The Applicant shall submit a dovelopmont plan, subdivision plat or sketch plan, as applicable, dopicting tho gonoral location of tho proporty, location of structures on the sito, prominent natural aroac such ac stroams and wetlands, and othor foaturoc that Staff may roquiro for roviow pursuant to this Soction. 2. Proliminary Review. Staff shall refer tho cubmittod plan or plat to the Colorado Division of Wildlife for review. Applicants aro also advisod to moot with the Division of Wildlife and othor agencies as dctorminod appropriato by Staff to onsuro complianco with tho roquiromonts of this Section. 3. DOW Row'ow. For applicationc referred to it, the Division of Wildlife will dotormino whothor tho proposal will rccult in significant advorco impact on wildlife or wildlifo habitat only if tho dovolopmont advoreoly impacts the following: a. An ondangorod or throatonod cpocios, b. A calving, lambing or fawning aroa, c. Big Horn choop or Big Horn choop habitat, d. Raptor nest sitc, or o. Riparian areas and wetlands. A. Roviow Determination. Basod on rocommondations from the Division of Wildlifo, tho Staff will determine whether tho Applicant must submit a wildlife conservation plan prior to approval of any devolopmont application. Tho conservation plan should bo cubmittod to the Division of Wildlifo for roviow and rocommondation as to whothor tho plan adequately addracces the advorco impacts idontifiod by tho Division of Wildlife pursuant to subsoction F.3 abovo. (Sco Â§7.8.H bolow.) 5. Waivers. Staff may waive or approve minor modifications of any development standard or review criteria contained in this Soction upon a finding that such waiver or modification: a. Is consistont with tho ctatod purposes of this Section; b. Will havo no significant advorce impacts on wildlifo cpocioc or habitat; c. Any potential advorso impacts will be mitigated or offgot to tho maximum oxtont d. practicablo; and o. Application of tho standard or critoria is not warranted based on tho location of tile f. development, tho abconco of a particular species on the site or other rolovant faetefa G. Review Standards. Tho following roviow standards shall apply to all devolopmont applications as specified, unlose Staff dotormince that a specific standard may bo waivod pursuant to subsection F.5. abovo. It is tho intont of this Soction that those 9 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review standards be applied in a flexible fashion to protect wildlife habitat and wildlife spocios in a cost offoctive fashion. 1. Review Standards. c. Buffors. All developmont shall provide a setback from any idontifiod important wildlifo habitat aroa, ac specified by the Division of Wildlifo, to the maximum extent feasible. b. Non-Nativo Vegetation. Thora chall bo no introduction of plant species that are not on tho approved landscaping list in Appendix C on any cito containing any important wildlife habitat aroa. To tho maximum oxtont foacible, existing horbaccous and woody cover on the citc shall bo maintained and removal of nativo vegetation shall bo minimized. G.-ReAGing: (1) No fencing on a sito containing important wildlife habitat shall excood forty (10) inchos in height, oxcopt to tho extent that such foncing is approved by Staff to confino pormittod domestic animals or to protoct pormittod ornamental landscaping or gardons. (2) Foncos highor than forty (10) inches may bc allowod if adoquato openings aro provided for tho pascago of deer, clk or other identified wildlife. Thoco openings chall bc at loast six (6) foot wide and spacod a maximum of fifty (50) foot apart along continuous fonco linos oxcooding this longth. (3) No foncing using barbed wiro shall bo allowod. (1) Tho typo of fencing (materials, opacity, otc.) chall bo dotormined by Staff or tho Docision-Making Body ae appropriate for tho wildlifo cpocics on tho sito bacod on advice from tho Colorado Division of Wildlifo. d. Extorior Lighting. Uco of oxtorior lighting chill bo minimized in aroas of important wildlife habitat, and lighting shall bo docignod co that it docs not spill ovor or onto such critical habitat. Soo also Â§7.9 bolow. o. Rofuso Disposal. Dovolopmonts on sitos containing important wildlifo habitat, such ac black boar, must uco approvod animal-proof refuse disposal containers. With Division of Wildlife approval, rofugo disposal containers and onclosuros may be electrified. f. Domostic Animals. Dovelopmont applications for proporty that includos important wildlife habitat must includo a plan with spocificd enforcement moacuros for tho control of domoctic animals and housohold pot Tho plan must includo provisions to provont tho harassmont, disturbance and killing of wildlifo and to provont tho doctruction of important wildlife habitat. H. Wildlife Conservation Plans. 1. Plan Preparation. A wildlife conservation plan required by this Soction shall bo proparod for tho Applicant, at the Applicant'c oxponso, undor tho rosponsiblo 10 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21,2009 Planning Commission Review direction of a qualified porson who has domonstrated expertico in the field and is accoptablo to tho Staff. 2. Plan Content. Any wildlifo consorvation plan required to bo prepared pursuant to this Section shall includo tho following information at a minimum. Specific roquiremonts may bo waived by Staff duo to tho location of tho development, tho previous uso of the sito, the size and potential impact of tho development, the abconco of particular species on a sitc, the prohibition of a roasonable use of the site and other relevant faG/OFar- a. A description of the ownership, location, type, size and other attributes of tho wildlife habitat on tho sito. b. A doccription of the populations of wildlife cpocios that inhabit or use the site, including a qualitative description of thoir spatial distribution and abundance. c. An analysis of the potential adverse impacts of tho proposed development on wildlifo and wildlife habitat on or off site. d. A list of proposod mitigation measures and an analysis of the probability of cuccoce of such moacuroc. c. A plan for implomontation, maintenanco and monitoring of mitigation moacuros. f. A plan for any rolovant onhancoment or restoration moacuroc. g. A domonstration of fiscal, administrative and technical compotonco of tho Applicant or other rolovant entity to successfully oxocute tho plan. 11 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review Â§ 7.8 WILDLIFE HABITAT PROTECTION Purpose. The purpose of this section is to plan and design land uses so that when property is developed: 1. Sufficient wildlife habitat is maintained to support viable native wildlife populations in the Estes Valley. 2. The health and diversity of native wildlife habitat and native wildlife populations that occur in the Estes Valley is protected. 3. Wildlife habitat and wildlife are protected from adverse impacts of development. A. Applicabilitv. This Section shall apply to all applications for review of development plans, subdivision plats, planned unit developments, special review uses, and rezoning on property that contains critical wildlife habitat. B. Other Regulations. This Section of the Code does not repeal or supersede anv existing federal, state, or local laws, easements, covenants, or deed restrictions Dertainina to wildlife. When this Section imposes a higher or more restrictive standard, this Section shall apply. C. Qualified Professional. All maps and reports required bv this Section shall be prepared bv or under the responsible direction of a qualified biologist/ecologist. The qualified biologisVecologist shall sign and date these submitted maps and reports. The Communitv Development Department shall maintain a list of biologists/ecoloqists who have established their qualifications to prepare reports under this section. The qualifications of anv unlisted biologist/ecologist may be submitted for acceptance and inclusion on this list at anytime prior to preparation of the reports required under this section. D. Wildlife and Habitat Database. 1. Adopted Map. The adopted Critical Wildlife Habitat Map is set forth in Appendix A of this Code and is incorporated bv reference. This map, as amended from time to time, shall be used as the basis for review under this Section of the Code. 2. Unmapped Habitat. Review of an application mav reveal potential critical habitat that is not reflected on the Critical Wildlife Habitat Map. In such instances, the Review- or Decision-Making bodv shall have the discretion to require review under this Section of the Code. 3. Revisions to Adopted Map. a. In the event a property owner questions the presence critical habitat on their property, the property owner mav submit evidence with respect thereto from a qualified bioloclisVecologist. This evidence shall be reviewed, together with all other applicable evidence, bv the Estes Valley Planning Commission, and then bv the Board of Trustees or Board of County Commissioners. The Board of Trustees or the Board of County Commissioners is the entity with final approval of Wildlife and Habitat Map revisions, depending on the location of the property. If the Board of Trustees or the Board of County Commissioners determines that the property does not contain critical habitat, the Community Development Director shall update the Wildlife and Habitat Map and remove the critical habitat designation. b. Property mav be re-designated as critical habitat if conditions change resulting in the renewed presence of critical habitat on the property. 12 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review c. The Community Development Director and Estes Valley Planning Commission shall also have the authoritv to initiate proceedings to add or remove a critical habitat designation from the Critical Habitat Map. The Board of Trustees or the Board of County Commissioners is the entity with final approval of Wildlife and Habitat Map revisions, depending on the location of the property. E. Review Procedures for Sites Containing Critical Habitat. Wildlife and Habitat Impact Assessment Submittal. A Wildlife and Habitat Impact Assessment shall be submitted for sites containing critical habitat. However, if a site is identified as urbanized on the Urbanized Area Map set forth in Appendix A, a Wildife and Habitat Impact Assessment shall onlv be required if the site contains one or more of the following tvpes of critical habitat: aquatic habitat: wetlands, or riparian vegetation. The study shall be paid for bv the applicant. 1. Wildlife Habitat and Impact Assessment Waiver. The Communitv Development Director, Planning Commission, Board of Trustees, and the Board of County Commissioners have the discretion to waive submittal of the Wildlife and Habitat Impact Assessment in one or more of the following circumstances: a. Upon review of a signed and dated document from a qualified biologist/ecologist stating that there is no critical habitat present on the property; b. For applications that do not impact wildlife habitat and wildlife species. For example a special review application to permit a new use in an existing structure with no additional construction mav not impact wildlife or wildlife habitat. c. For rezoning applications that reduce development potential; or d. For applications in the CD Downtown Commercial zoning district and I-1 Restricted Industrial district. e. For single-family residential subdivision applications in mapped elk severe winter ranae or mule deer severe winter ranqe habitat that are designed in accordance with the Section 11.3 Open Space Development, without requesting a densitv bonus for clustering. The applicant shall have the option to request a determination about a waiver prior to submittal of a development application. Any review bv the Board of Trustees or Board of Countv Commissioners shall be subsequent to review and recommendation bv the Planning Commission. 2. Colorado Division of Wildlife. Staff shall refer the submitted application and Wildlife and Habitat Impact Assessment to the Colorado Division of Wildlife for review. The Division of Wildlife mav comment on the submitted application and mav provide an evaluation of the related assessment. 3. Other Agencies. Applicants are advised to consult with the Colorado Division of Wildlife and other agencies responsible for regulation of wildlife and habitat, such as the US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Department of the Interior-Rockv Mountain National Park, US Forest Service, and Colorado Natural Heritage Program. These agencies mav maintain maps and databases that can aid in the site-specific confirmation of the presence or absence of wildlife and habitat on a specific site. 4. Review-Body and Decision-Making Bodv. 13 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review a. The Review and Decision-Makina Bodies shall issue a finding as to whether the application, including the Wildlife and Habitat Impact Assessment, complies with the requirements of this Section. b. Plans found to be adequate bv the Decision-Making Bodv shall become binding upon the Applicant. Applications that do not comply with Section 7.8 of this code shall be denied. F. Wildlife Habitat Protection Standards for Sites Containing Critical Habitat. 1. To the maximum extent feasible all applications subiect to review under this section shall be planned and designed to: a. Be compatible with and to protect natural habitats and features, including the plants and animals that inhabit them, and b. To integrate the natural habitat and features, including the plants and animals, within the developed landscape. Through means including, but not limited to: a. Directing development awav from critical habitat: b. Minimizina impacts and disturbance through the use of buffer zones; and/or c. Enhancing existing conditions. 2. All applications shall be planned and designed to ensure that significant adverse impacts, as defined in 7.8.H. below, are avoided or mitiaated. G. Significant Adverse Impacts Defined. 1. Significant Adverse Impacts to Wildlife. Significant adverse impacts to wildlife shall mean impacts to that threaten the health or viability of a native wildlife population in the Estes Valley. 2. Sianificant Adverse Impacts to Wildlife Habitat. Significant adverse impacts to wildlife habitat shall mean impacts that threaten the health or viability of native wildlife habitat or wildlife population in the Estes Valley. 3. Examples of Significant Adverse Impacts. The following are examples of significant adverse impacts: a. Wildlife Impact. Impacts on wildlife that: (1) Disrupt necessary life cvcle functions of wildlife; (2) Cause stress on wildlife: or (3) Cause physiological damage to wildlife To the extent that the health or viability of a wildlife population in the Estes Valley is threatened. b. Wildlife Habitat Impact. Impacts on wildlife habitat, including but not limited to elimination, reduction, or fragmentation of wildlife habitat to the extent that the health or viability of a wildlife population in the Estes Valley is threatened. c. Impact on Wildlife Movement Patterns/Displacement and Adaptation of Wildlife. Impacts on wildlife movement patterns/displacement and adaptation of wildlife, including but not limited to: 14 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21,2009 Planning Commission Review (1) Disruption of wildlife migration or movement patterns that keep wildlife from using their entire habitat, such as blocking migration patterns from summer to winter rancie; (2) Displacement of wildlife into areas that cannot support or sustain the wildlife over the lona term, such as causing wildlife to find new routes that expose them to significantly increased predation, interaction with motor vehicles, intense human activity or more severe topoaraphv and climatic conditions; or (3) Inability of wildlife living within or in close proximity to development to adapt to the new conditions and thrive To the extent that the health or viability of a wildlife population in the Estes Valley is threatened. H. Wildlife and Habitat Impact Assessments for Sites Containing Critical Habitat. Wildlife and Habitat Impact Assessments shall include the following information at a minimum: 1. Existing Conditions. An analysis of existing site conditions. Including, but not limited to: a. Habitat. A description of the location, tvpe, size, quality, and other attributes of the habitat on the site, including, but not limited to: (1) The total acres of each species' habitat on the site: (2) A description of any vegetation or natural communities that are ranked Sl, S2, S3, Gl, G2, or G3 bv the Colorado Natural Heritage Program: and (3) The health and viability of the habitat in the Estes Valley. b. Wildlife. A description of the various types of wildlife that inhabit or use the site, including, but not limited to, a description: (1) The species spatial distribution and abundance; (2) Use patterns of wildlife habitat within the site, including, but not limited to movement corridors and feeding areas: and (3) Critical connections or relationships with adioining habitats outside the site. (4) The health and viability of the wildlife population in the Estes Vallev. For sites that are within one half mile of a raptor nest and do not contain anv other form of critical habitat, the assessment is onlv required to evaluate raptors. 2. Assessment of Potential Development Impacts. An analysis of the potential impacts of the prolect on habitat and wildlife using the criteria in Section 7.8.G and Section 7.8.H. 3. Avoidance and Mitigation of Development Impacts. A description of how development impacts will be avoided. And if not feasible to avoided, a list of proposed mitigation measures for each wildlife habitat, wildlife species, and/or wildlife movement patterns/displacement of wildlife populations and an analysis of the probability of success of such measures in pre-construction, construction, and post-construction phases. 15 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review Mitigation efforts shall directly address the potential adverse impacts of the proposed land use. Examples of possible mitigation efforts include, but are not limited to: 01) Clustering or locating development to avoid intrusion into migration or movement areas and/or to avoid intrusion into or fragmentation of habitat: (2) Minimizing the development footprint or reducing density; (3) Creation of buffers around critical areas, with larger buffers for higher quality habitat: (4) Locating structures away from nesting, birthina, or feeding areas; (5) Limiting/prohibiting fencing that might interfere with miaration and movement patterns: (6) Restricting location, hours of illumination, and intensity of lighting; (7) Controlling domestic animals and household pets: (8) Timing construction to minimize impacts such as reducing impacts from vehicles and construction equipment bv limiting hours of operation and/or seasonal timina of construction. (9) Minimizing disturbance of native vegetation: (10) Eradicatinq existing noxious weeds on site and preventing of introduction of noxious weeds; (11) Avoiding or minimizing use of fertilizers and other chemicals: (12) Enhancing or restoring equivalent habitat on the site or elsewhere in the Estes Valley. 16 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review 4. Implementation, Monitoring, and Enforcement Plan. (1) A plan for implementation, maintenance and monitorina, and enforcement of mitigation measures, including cost estimates for the implementation of the plan. Describe the role of a homeowners association, if applicable. (2) A demonstration of the competence of the entity responsible for successful implementation, monitoring, and enforcement of the plan. 5. Enhancement or Restoration. A plan for anv relevant enhancement or restoration measures. 6. Professional Qualifications and Certification. A description the professional qualifications of the plan preparer and a certification that the plan preparer has the expertise to: (1) Evaluate the proposed development application: (2) Evaluate the impacts to wildlife populations and habitat on site, including aquatic populations and habitat; and (3) Prepare a Wildlife and Habitat Impact Assessment in accordance with EVDC Â§7.8. 7. Additional Information. Any other information deemed necessary bv the Review or Decision-Making Bodies to adequately assess the impact of the proposal. Â§ 7.10 OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS In addition to any standards required in the underlying zoning districts, all development shall meet the following performance standards: A. Noise. NOTE: NO CHANGES PROPOSED. B. Refuse Disposal. All development shall use approved animal-proof refuse disposal containers. With Division of Wildlife approval, refuse disposal containers and enclosures mav be electrified. B.C. Operational/Physical Compatibility. The following conditions may be imposed upon the approval of any development to ensure that it is compatible with existing uses, including but not limited to, restrictions on: 1. Placement of trash receptacles; 2. Location of loading and delivery areas; 3. Location, intensity and hours of illumination; and 4. Additional landscaping and buffering. C.D. Evidence of Compliance. NOTE: NO CHANGES PROPOSED. Â§ 13.3 DEFINITIONS OF WORDS, TERMS AND PHRASES # TBD Aquatic Habitat shall mean a water body in which communities of organisms that are dependent on each other and on their environment live. Examples include lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, marshes, springs, seeps, and boas. 122. High Water Mark shall mean the line on the bank of a stream, river, lake or impoundment to which the high water ordinarily rises annually in seasons, as indicated by changes in the characteristics of soil, vegetation or other appropriate means, taking into consideration the 17 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review characteristics of the surrounding areas. Where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, it shall be presumed to be the edge of vegetation growing along the channel bank. In braided channels, the ordinary high water mark shall be measured so as to include the entire stream feature. For streams where the presumed edge of vegetation cannot be found setbacks shall be measured from the thread of the stream. #TBD Qualified Biologist/Ecologist shall mean a person with at least two (2) years of demonstrated experience and expertise in evaluation of development impacts on wildlife habitat and species in the Colorado Rocky Mountains that: (1) Has a master's degree or higher from an accredited United States university in wildlife biology or ecology: (2) Is a Wildlife Society of America Certified Wildlife Biologist, or holds a higher certification from this society: or (3) Is an Ecoloaical Societv of America Certified Ecologist, or holds a higher certification from this society. Or a person with at least five (5) vears of demonstrated experience and expertise in evaluation of development impacts on wildlife habitat and species in the Colorado Rockv Mountains that: (1) Has an undergraduate degree or higher from an accredited United States university in wildlife bioloav or ecology. 209. Setback shall mean the distance between the nearest lot line and the furthermost projection of a building or structure along a line at right angles to the lot line. Setback also refers to the horizontal distance (plan view) between the delineated edge of a wetlands, designated ridgeline protection area, ctroam/river corridor aquatic habitat or wildlife habitat and the furthermost projection of a building or structure. Setbacks shall be unobstructed from the ground to the sky except as otherwise specifically allowed in Â§1.9.D of this Code. #TBD Veaetation, Riparian shall mean terrestrial vegetation that is contiguous to and affected bv surface and subsurface hydroloqic features of perennial or intermittent lotic and lentic water bodies (for example, rivers, streams, lakes, or drainaae ways). Riparian areas have one or both of the following characteristics: 1) distinctly different veaetative species than adiacent areas, and 2) species similar to adiacent areas but exhibiting more vigorous or robust growth forms. #TBD Wildlife shall mean any animal life form, includina but not limited to amphibians, birds, mammals, reptiles, and insects. #TBD Wildlife Habitat, Critical shall mean aquatic habitat: wetlands, riparian vegetation: Potential Conservation Areas as defined bv the Colorado Natural Heritage Program: Bia Horn Sheep Winter Concentration Areas as defined bv the Colorado Division of Wildlife: raptor nests and a one-half mile area surrounding the nest: Severe Winter Rancle for elk: and Severe Winter Rancle for mule deer: migratory bird habitat associated with riparian vegetation and aquatic habitat. 18 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review APPENDIX B.111.C DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS gg. Anticipated Phases of Development and Timing. A graphic phasina plan shall incorporate recommendations found in submitted Wildlife and Habitat Impact Assessment. 19 Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions - Draft #5 for April 21, 2009 Planning Commission Review Note: Only the newly received public comment on the Wildlife & Habitat Proposed Code Revisions are included in this packet. Please see previous month for complete copies of public comment on this topic. Karen Thompson .@IM Â©1* OVE '=ft om: Mark Elrod [hellomde@gmail.com] ~1 MAM 2 3 2009 ~ 3ent: Monday, March 23,2009 1:41 PM ---d To: Karen Thompson; Dave Shirk; Alison Chilcott; Bob Joseph i 166-3 CC: Ron Norris; Alan Fraundorf; Douglas Klink; Betty Hull; John -tuckor Subject: Estes Valley Planning Commission Apil 21, 2009 Attachments: EVPC April 21, 2009.pdf I am attaching comments for the Estes Valley Planning Commission at their meeting currently scheduled for April 21, 2009. My comments are focused on the Stream and River Corridor Resource Map of the Code and the need to provide a method to make revisions to the this map. A similar need is addressed in the draft to the Code relating to the Critical Wildlife Habitat Map which is currently found at 7.8(E)(3) "Revisions to Adopted Map". - This seems only reasonable considering that these kind of maps can become dated and appear to be static and not dynamic in nature. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Regards, Mark D. Elrod 675 Summerset Court stes Park, CO 80517 1 7 Â© E 0 V [~ 1 ,0~~ MAR 2 3 2009 ( Estes Valley Planning Commission Amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code, Portion of B ock Iwelve Stream and River Corridor Resource Map 1 Â£3 April 21, 2009 Comments Mark D. Elrod 675 Summerset Court Estes Park, CO 1. The Stream and River Corridor Resource Map was created over 33 years ago (1976) by the United States Geological Survey using standards and definitions for streams no longer used today, resulting in streams being shown on the map that do not in fact exist. Please see my previously filed comments of September 16, 2008 and October 21, 2008. 2. At your March 17, 2009 meeting you asked Public Works Director Scott A. Zurn what he thought about the stream and riparian areas shown on the map. Director Zurn offered that due to the age of the map that some areas that had shown stream and riparian areas created by beaver activity were no longer actively such areas since beaver activity no longer existed. He offered that the map should be dynamic and not static to be accurate. 3. In the draft of revisions to section 7.8 (E)(3) you recognize that the Critical Wildlife Habitat Map to be adopted could in fact need revisions and provide a method whereby such revisions could be made. 4. l would suggest that section 7.6 (D) be similarly treated in referencing the Stream and River Corridor Resource Map, by providing the same method to revise this map should the occasion become necessary. 5. I would suggest you favorably consider adding the language appearing below identified as 7.6(D)(3): Â§ 7.6 WETLANDS AND STREAM CORRIDOR PROTECTION RIVER AND STREAM CORRIDORS, WETLANDS, AND AQUATIC HABITAT AND RIPARIAN HABITAT PROTECTION. A. Purpose and Intent. The following requirements and standards are intended to promote, preserve and enhance the important hydrologic, biological, ecological, aesthetic, recreational and educational functions that stream and river corridors, associated riparian areas and wetlands, aquatic habitat, and riparian habitat provide. D. Boundary Delineation. 1. Qualified Professional. Stream/river corridor and wetland area Boundary delineation shall be performed by a qualified professional that has demonstrated experience necessary to conduct site analysis. Delineations shall be subject to Staffs approval. 2. Stream and River Corridor Boundaries. Stream and river corridors shall be delineated at the annual high-water mark, or if not readily discernible, the defined bank of the stream or river, as those terms are defined in Chapter 13 of this Code. Regulated stream and river corridors shall include only those streams and rivers as identified on the Stream and River Corridor Resource Map found in Appendix A. The rivers delineated on the Stream and River Corridor Resource Map are the Big Thompson and Fall River. Streams delineated on the Map include various named and unnamed streams and minor drainages, some of which are intermittent. 3. Revisions to Adopted Map. a. In the event a property owner questions the presence of a river and stream corridor c their property, the property owner mav submit evidence with respect thereto from a qualified biologist. This evidence shall be reviewed, together with all other applicable evidence, bv the Estes Valley Planning Commission, and Board of Trustees or Board of Country Commissioner The Board of Trustees or the Board of County Commissioners is the entity with final approval c Stream and River Corridor Resource Map revisions, depending on the location of the property. If the Board of Trustees or the Board of County Commissioners determines that the property does not contain a river or stream corridor the Communitv Development Director shall update the Stream and River Corridor Resource Map and remove the river or stream corridor designation. b. Property may be re-designated as river or stream corridor if conditions change resulting in the renewed presence of a river or stream corridor on the property. c. The Community Development Director and Estes Valley Planning Commission shal also have the authority to initiate proceedings to add or remove a river or stream corridor designation from the Stream and River Corridor Resource Map. The Board of Trustees or the Board of County Commissioners is the entity with final approval of Stream and River Corridor Resource Map revisions, depending on the location of the property. Thank you for your consideration in making our Development Code more land owner friendly. Mark D. Elrod April 21, 2009 ~EÂ©2.M.Â©~ "11' 21-2 3 2009 ~~~~ 1 4-3 Karen Thompson om: Bob Joseph went: Tuesday, March 24,2009 12:00 PM To: Karen Thompson Subject: FW: State of the Birds Report Released! and VIP news Attachments: State of the Birds Final 090319.pdf; SOTB News Release.doc; KeyMessagesState of the BirdsFINAL.doc Karen, Please add these attachments to our website, and email to PC. %13*%29% -bob 144 MAR 2 4 9009 ~L) 11 From: ROBERT AND DIANE ERNST [mailto:ernstb@q.com] ill L-----_./ t.. / I Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 11:48 AM To: Bob Joseph Subject: Fw: State of the Birds Report Released! and VIP news Hi Bob: At the Planning Commission Meeting of Tuesday, March 17th, 2009, and with reference to 5.b. (Wildlife Habitat Protection) discussion centered around set backs from rivers and streams. Alison presented a number of studies regarding set backs that indicated a set back of 50 feet was ineffective, but that set backs of 100 feet began to be effective in preserving wildlife. Discussion tended ebb and flow regarding what should be proposed in the Estes Valley Development Code with reference the amount of set back from rivers and stream. I would like my e-mail and attachments entered into the record. Said attachments reference dwindling bird habitat and resultant reduction of bird species. I believe the reading would be of value to the Planning Commission members as they go about making decision pertaining to Wildlife Habitat. I am in appreciation of your time and consideration. Robert C. Ernst See below and attached. The State of the Birds Report was developed by partners in the North American Bird Conservation Initiative and was released today by Interior Sec. Salazar. Please forward to others that may be interested. From: Partners In Flight Implementation Committee [mailto:PIFMSC-L@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of Ashley Dayer, KBO 1 Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 3:13 PM To: PIFMSC-L@LISTSERV.UARK. EDU Subject: State of the Birds Report Released! Hi PIF, The State of the Birds report was released this afternoon!! It's an exciting day for bird conservation. The website is live: www.stateofthebirds.ora. Attached you will find the report and press release. Please help us share our key messages (also attached)! Decline of Bird Species Signals a Warning (WASHINGTON, D.C. - March 19, 2009) Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today announced the release of the first ever U.S. State of the Birds report. Based on a new analysis of 40 years of data, the report was developed by a partnership among the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Geological Survey, state government wildlife agencies and non-governmental organizations. The report documents the decline of bird populations in many habitats due to habitat loss, invasive species and other factors. At the same time, it provides heartening examples of how sustained habitat conservation and other environmental efforts can reverse the decline of many bird species. "Our collective ability to prevent extinction and reverse environmental degradation are reflected in this report, exemplified by the remarkable recovery of waterfowl populations across the continent and the comeback of species that were once endangered, including the bald eagle and peregrine falcon, said Secretary Salazar. "This shows that we can meet these challenges and maintain the integrity of our nation's natural resources." "The issue of declining bird populations is not just pressing for bird biologists and conservationists - nearly 50 million Americans are bird-watchers, and each year more than 45 billion dollars are expended on " some form of wildlife watching, Salazar added. "Americans love wild birds and are willing to spend their hard-earned dollars to see them in the field. This report provides actionable information that will help us secure a future for birds, and a future for the next generation of wild-bird lovers." The U.S. State of the Birds report synthesizes data from three long-running bird censuses conducted by thousands of citizen scientists and professional biologists. The report calls attention to the crisis in Hawaii, where more birds are in danger of extinction than anywhere else in the United States. In addition, the report documents a 40 percent decline in grassland birds over the past 40 years, a 30 percent decline in birds of arid-lands, and high concern for many coastal shorebirds. In addition, 39 percent of species dependent on U.S. oceans have declined. However, the report also reveals convincing evidence that birds can respond quickly and positively to conservation action. The data shows dramatic increases in many wetland birds, a testament to numerous cooperative conservation efforts that have resulted in protection, enhancement and management of more than 30 million wetland acres. "These results emphasize that investment in wetlands conservation has paid 2 huge dividends," said Kenneth Rosenberg, director of Conservation Science at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. "Now we need to invest similarly in her neglected habitats where birds are undergoing the steepest declines." Habitats such as those in Hawaii are on the verge of losing entire suites of unique bird species," said Dr. David Pashley, American Bird Conservancy's Vice President for Conservation Programs. "In addition to habitat loss, birds also face many other man-made threats such as pesticides, predation by cats, and collisions with windows, towers and buildings. By solving these challenges we can preserve a growing economic engine - the popular pastime of birdwatching that involves millions of Americans - and improve our quality of life." "While some bird species are holding their own, many once common species are declining sharply in population. Habitat availability and quality is the key to healthy, thriving bird populations," said Dave Mehlman of The Nature Conservancy. Surveys conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Geological Survey, including the annual Breeding Bird Survey, combined with data gathered through volunteer citizen science program such as the National Audubon Society's Christmas Bird Count, show once abundant birds such as the northern bobwhite and marbled murrelet are declining significantly. And the possibility of extinction also remains a cold reality for many endangered birds. "Citizen science plays a critical role in monitoring and understanding the h reats to these birds and their habitats, and only citizen involvement can dp address them," said National Audubon Society's Bird Conservation -irector, Greg Butcher. "Conservation action can only make a real difference when concerned people support the kind of vital habitat restoration and protection measures this report explores." Birds are beautiful, as well as economically important and a priceless part of America's natural heritage. Birds are also highly sensitive to environmental pollution and climate change, making them critical indicators of the health of the environment on which we all depend. The United States is home to a tremendous diversity of native birds, with more than 800 species inhabiting terrestrial, coastal, and ocean habitats, including Hawaii. Among these species, 67 are Federally-listed as endangered or threatened. In addition, more than 184 species are designated as species of conservation concern due to a small distribution, high-level of threat threats, or declining populations. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service coordinated creation of the new report as part of the U.S. North American Bird Conservation Initiative, which includes partners from American Bird Conservancy, the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Klamath Bird Observatory, National Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy and the U.S. Geological Survey. The report is available at www.stateofthebirds.org. Contacts: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Alicia King, 703-358-2522/571-214-3117, Alicia F Kinq@fws.aov 3 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Vanessa Kauffman, 703-358-2138, Vanessa kauffman@fws.gov American Bird Conservancy: Steve Holmer, 202-234-7181, sholmer@abcbirds.orq Lab of Ornithology: Miyoko Chu, 607-254-2451, mcc37@cornell.edu National Audubon Society: Nancy Severance, 212-979-3124, nseverance@audubon.orq The Nature Conservancy: Blythe Thomas, 703-841-8782, bthomas@tnc.orq Klamath Bird Observatory: Ashley Dayer, 541-324-0281, aad@klamathbird.org Ashley Dayer Bird Education Alliance for Conservation, Chair Partners in Flight, Education & Communications Working Groups Chair Klamath Bird Observatory, Education & Outreach Director Cell: (541) 324-0281 Fax: (541) 201-1009 Address: PO Box 758, Ashland, Oregon 97520 Email: aad@KlamathBird.ora Web: http://www.birdedalliance.orq/http://www.klamathbird.ora/ Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - http://www.ava.com Version: 8.0.233 / Virus Database: 270.11.9/1991 - Release Date: 3/9/2009 7: 14 AM(See attached file: State of the Birds Final 090319.pdf)(See attached file: SOTB News Release.doc)(See attached file: KeyMessagesState of the BirdsFINAL.doc) 4 News Release Ooint release from USFWS, Audubon, TNC, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, American Bird Conservancy) Decline of Bird Species Signals a Warning (WASHINGTON, D.C. - March 19, 2009) Secretary of the Intoqpr Ken Salazar today announced the release o f the first ever U. S. State of the Birds Miâ‚¬Mhbsed on a new analysis of 40 years of data, the report was developed by apartnership among the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Geological Sur~pr?.s~~ go,~h~~~~ildlife agencies and non-governmental organizations. ThE'report documents ~ecline of bird /4 populations in many habitats due to habitat less>t35e'~Mts and othef~~frs. At the same time, it provides heartening examples of how sN:3ci habitat conservation and other environmental efforts can reve&~the decline of ma y.bird species. "Our collective ability to prevent extinction anj~verse'ensironmental degradation are reflected in this report,efFI@lified by thelf2;kabl;kedtry of waterfowl populations across the continept:'514~~Â§~ack of spe~~at were once endangered, including the bald eagle and per~krin fal6dhÂ©aid Secrdtary Salazar. "This shows that we can mee t~alleT.~~~a~~etifitegrity of our nation's natural resources." "Th&1Jbi~f declining bird ~opulations is not just pressing for bird biologists and conservationCh~rarly ~ pillion Americans are bird-watchers, and each year more than 45 billiort~iblll~ge d<pended on some form of wildlife watching," Salazar added. "Americans love wi~birds and are willing to spend their hard-earned dollars to see them in the field. This report provides actionable information that will help us secure a future for birds, and a future for the next generation of wild-bird lovers." The US. State ofthe Birds report synthesizes data from three long-running bird censuses conducted by thousands of citizen scientists and professional biologists. The report calls attention to the crisis in Hawaii, where more birds are in danger of extinction than anywhere else in the United States. 111 addition, the report documents a 40 percent decline in grassland birds over the past 40 years, a 30 percent decline in birds of arid-lands, and high concern for many coastal shorebirds. In addition, 39 percent of species dependent on U.S. oceans have declined. However, the report also reveals convincing evidence that birds can respond quickly and positively to conservation action. The data shows dramatic incr~pe<in many wetland birds, a testament to numerous cooperative conservation efforiofGFRhve resulted in protection, enhancement and management of more than *11*land acres. "These results emphasize that investment in wetl~Â¢31 co~Iservation 1~bRa<huge dividends," said Kenneth Rosenberg, directot06frdbn<rva~bQ Science at tl~9 Cornell Lab of Omithology. "Now we need to invest similarly ift~th#tgkcted habitats where birds are undergoing the steepest declines.~1- "Habitats such as those in Hawaii are on t~e v~keflbsing.entire suites of unique bird 1,7.37 species," said Dr. Davd .ast American~ird Consegvancy's Vice President for Conservation Proggam1 "In ad~ition to habit~oss, birds also face many other man- made threats such as~*420 ~dation by ca~nd collisions with windows, towers and building~~-~p g tfle ~~~Zi~~~~an preserve a growing economic engine - the p 0~(ar pastime o 4lRlwatcni bthat involves millions of Americans - and improve our quali~bf life." ~\ t~,1 "While some~BEjp afe holding their own, many once common species are declining sharply inppulation. Habitat availability and quality is the key to healthy, thriving bird populations," said Dave Mehlman of The Nature Conservancy. Surveys conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Geological Survey, including the annual Breeding Bird Survey, combined with data gathered through volunteer citizen science program such as the National Audubon Society's Christmas Bird Count, show once abundant birds such as the northern bobwhite and marbled murrelet are declining significantly. And the possibility of extinction also remains a cold reality for many endangered birds. "Citizen science plays a critical role in monitoring and understanding the threats to these birds and their habitats, and only citizen involvement can help address them," said National Audubon Society's Bird Conservation Director, Greg Butcher. "Conservation action can only make a real difference when concerned people support the kind of vital 14740 habitat restoration and protection measures this report explores< Birds are beautiful, as well as economically important'aApricelbss'p rt of America's natural heritage. Birds are also highly sensitive to environmental pollutig~and climate change, making them critical indicators of the'Cltk~~~nment o A~ we all depend. The United States is home to a tremei hs.dikESity of nati bird; with more than 800 species inhabiting terrestrial, coastal, arl~oc~t~.t~tk.i~11~~ng Hawaii. Among these species, 67 are Feder~Â¥<i'*~at endange~~~thre~bed. In addition, more than 184 species are designatâ‚¬d'as species bf conservation concern due to a small distribution, \ )1 \9 high-level of threat threa~, r dectiningpopulations. The yd~ S~dinated creation of the new report as part of the U.S. Nath American Bird~onser*tion Initiative, which includes partners from \\ American Bird â‚¬onservancyâ€¢ the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Cornell Lab \\ 1/ of Ornithology, *lÂ¢n~~#frd Observatory, National Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy and th~W.S. Geological Survey. The report is available at www.stateofthebirds.org. Contacts: â€¢ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Alicia King, 703-358-2522/571-214-3117, Alicia F King@fws.gov â€¢ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Vanessa Kauffman, 703-358-2138, Vanessa_kauffman@fws.gov â€¢ American Bird Conservancy: Steve Holmer, 202-234-7181, sholmer@abcbirds.org â€¢ Lab of Omithology: Miyoko Chu, 607-254-2451, mcc37@cornell.edu TrÂ« â€¢ National Audubon Society: Nancy Severance, 212-9)9 -1~~1, nseverance@audubon.org â€¢ The Nature Conservancy: Blythe Thomas, 7~jÂ¢8~4782,~h~~@tne.org â€¢ Klamath Bird Observatory: Ashley Day,~541-32Â£-0281, aad(@101~nâ‚¬~ird.org V V 9 . Em--1--PURIRASWA# A UN/MWI=*590*.9- The State of the Birds United States of America 2009 Many of our nation's birds are sending us an important and troubling message about the state of our environment, according to an unprecedented report based on 40 years of data analyzed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, state government wildlife agencies, and nongovernmental organizations. The report also shows that investment in conservation works, exemplified by the remarkable recoveries of waterfowl after more than 30 million acres of wetlands were restored and managed. Birds are beautiful, economically important, and a priceless part of America's natural heritage--and they are critical indicators of the health of the environment upon which we all depend. The U.S. State of the Birds report offers heartening evidence that strategic land management and conservation action can reverse declines of birds. --Wetlands: Although many wetland birds show troubling declines, conservation programs have protected millions of acres and contributed to thriving populations of hunted waterfowl, herons, egrets, and other birds. Lesser Scaup, Northern Pintail, and several sea ducks are showing troubling declines, but most geese are increasing dramatically and many ducks have held steady. --Waterfowl: On the whole, 39 species of hunted waterfowl have increased by more than 100% during the past 40 years. Successful waterfowl conservation is a model for widespread habitat protection. The report also reveals sobering declines of bird populations during the past 40 years--a warning signal of the failing health of our ecosystems. For example; --Hawaiian Islands: Threatened by habitat destruction, invasive species, and disease, nearly all native Hawaiian bird species are in danger of extinction if urgent conservation measures are not implemented immediately. Since humans colonized the islands in 300 AD, 71 Hawaiian bird species have gone extinct; 10 other birds have not been seen in as long as 40 years. --Oceans: At least 39% of U.S. bird species restricted to ocean habitats are declining and almost half are of conservation concern, indicating deteriorating ocean conditions. Management policies and sustainable fishing regulations are essential to ensure the health of our oceans. --Coasts: Half of all coastally migrating shorebirds have declined, indicating stress in coastal habitats besieged by development, disturbance, and dwindling food supplies. --Aridlands: The aridland birds indicator shows a 30% decline over the past 40 years. Unplanned urban sprawl is by far the greatest threat to aridland birds. A regional system ofprotected areas can enhance quality of life for people and enable birds to survive. --Grasslands: The grassland bird indicator shows nearly a 40% decline in the past 40 years, based on birds that breed exclusively in grasslands. Farm conservation programs provide millions of acres of protected grasslands that are essential for the birds in a landscape where little native prairie remains. Additional Findings --Forests: Representing eastern, western, boreal, and subtropical forests, the forest birds indicator dropped by roughly 10% from 1968 through 1980, then increased slightly. In eastern forests, the indicator dropped by nearly 25%. Sustainable forestry, landowner incentives for forest preservation, and urban greenspace initiatives can protect natural resources and help ensure the long-term viability of many forest birds. --Arctic: Because the Arctic is so remote, we lack quantitative information for most species. Arctic- nesting geese are increasing dramatically, but 38% of species that breed in arctic and alpine regions are of conservation concern. The future of arctic habitats and birds depends on our ability to curb global climate change and to explore energy resources with minimal impact to wildlife. --Game Birds: Of 19 resident game bird species, 47% of species of conservation concern. Cooperative partnerships have implemented landscape-level management benefiting both game and non-game bird species. --Marsh Birds: Secretive marsh birds are not well covered by current surveys, but the data we do have suggest relatively stable populations that fluctuate with wet and dry conditions. Marsh birds respond quickly to management and restoration efforts, and even small marshes can support large numbers of birds. --Urban Birds: More than 100 species of native birds inhabit urban or suburban environments. The indicator for these birds shows an increase of 20% over the past 40 years, driven primarily by a small number of very successful species such as gulls and doves. Creating greenspace for birds in cities can help adaptable urban birds as well as migrants stopping over during their long journeys. --Endangered Species: Four American bird species have gone extinct since the birth of our nation, including the Passenger Pigeon, once the world's most abundant bird. The possibility of extinction is still a cold reality for many birds: 13 species may no longer exist in the wild (10 birds from Hawaii, plus Bachman's Warbler, Ivory-billed Woodpecker, and Eskimo Curlew). Several species face unprecedented conflict with humans from development, for example, in peninsular Florida, mid-continental prairies, coastal California, Texas hill country, and the Pacific Northwest. â€¢ The United States is home to a tremendous diversity of native birds, with more than 800 species inhabiting terrestrial, coastal, and ocean habitats, including Hawaii. Among these species, 67 are federally listed as endangered or threatened. Additionally, more than 184 are species of conservation concern because of their small distribution, high threats, or declining populations. â€¢ Habitat availability and quality is the key to healthy, thriving bird populations. That is why the report explores different habitat types and the threats they and the birds that depend on them face--and offers - recommendations to protect and restore them. â€¢ The U.S. State of the Birds report is the result of an unprecedented partnership among the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), state wildlife agencies, American Bird Conservancy, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, National Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy, and other conservation organizations. â€¢ Using new statistical techniques developed by U.S. Geological Survey and Audubon scientists, the report integrates long-term trend data from three bird population surveys: the North American Breeding Bird Survey administered by the USGS and the Canadian Wildlife Service, National Audubon Society's Christmas Bird Count, and the USFWS and Canadian Wildlife Service Spring Waterfowl Survey. â€¢ Each year, thousands of citizen-science participants from across the United States contribute data to these important surveys. However, little is known about the population trends of birds in many habitats, hampering our ability to help them. Greater monitoring efforts are needed to ensure that we can identify where birds need help--while we still have time to make a difference. The State of the Birds United States of America 2009 www,stateofthebirds.org - I. I /:I .. I .0 4 9-= # - 2 *49: ' rAâ€ž 1 /* - *W - -4 Â· WT-K '.-C. - 1 = ET . '3, 9 m 1 -Â£,4 -7 9 9. .4 0 :Cr 1=1 .U - t... 0. 0 4- 4 - -, -- ' I# .514 ' + -/1 , M; 1 . et'.. 2- j E * 0 27 -, 3 x f t .#.4 6 34. 4 1 431 - 4 I f 1 N â‚¬ b f -+ t f f Â¢1 I . / I ht I - , . I -: : tr â‚¬. + 04 + ....4 .'' I 1[ - Â£ 41Â§ 22-- -. . . E ,Â». & 2 1 4 . r , U' 2 Â» . 'A .7 0 1 . -- . 41 ... e I =1-1- = - 1- .4 Â¥ 1%. ~S K.... . _ 91-- 1 1- rvt-p , . - , :. t.i--_'ff*ay 0 - ..d C V , 4 E-4 - . 0 - 4 g k 1 Â¥I//eV { :/49 , ..4 I 'Â· Â£.~A r '3' 4 ~11-. < , 1 1- /-> f 7 4 - c Â· C--3 2, A , V. I I. . .1 1 ' CL -2 --1 . 4 I ,/ IN - 94/r I L ' Ir ' 4/ 1 1* i I 54Â£.1.-fic : 1 * '. ~ a~: ' 1 L.@~2 -4 1 R <f 4 4Â« - ;* 1,6 ? 11 f Â¢ f + . Al> I . :. f . 71 , f .: f 9 34. I 3.tyÂ¢,1, 'f . Le.- 1 A'. & I J , -P I .... . it) 1 + I . I 1 W - 1Ir 4 - 4 ~â€¢- 1 I '. . ---15-PAA#.230Iii'-a C ?* "r '16 I I - 'a f U. *41 "- w-Â· fÂ© k ~=t,n , : f . I. .2/. /7/Il - ...... , 1 , .U Â» r Â¢* %â‚¬11077*K '* 14}T- u 44 4/ ** 4,1 , f C .., r. . y..A . 2 .r-,0 .1.. 4 7 , 4 i .1 )143 * 4 -4 *. Â£ ~ 4 t,~ ~ 7 4 27 . -1.. . U.- â€žt 6003 :fo s,lvls paltun 1 - p - k - ./ (O ' 4 9 W A 6 0 q : 1. I . 11 1: 91Â® 4 Ch' ON 1 CO a'.0 C 6. - 0 60 *Â». L 00 . > 4/ 4- C 2.- In Â® a -5-2 : ~MEiag ~ 2. t = 9 2 .E *7. 7 O CO ~ g CD CD 5 9 03 8 W /0 4 = g f I i Â§ 4 5 1 - Â°eme}&226 ig-~i% 0 Eu .= Cr)91-CDODO,-CNICDOO ace .r- .nt- r- O .E W 4 2 -8 â‚¬ Râ‚¬ Eam G) C CO LU 2.19 p m c J 0<COOD O -0 4 E .8 > = - CO 6.- 49 4 BJUOILLIOO a, â‚¬ , - 91 I . I y I + I 1,4 4, , I 14, - =7 lue , , St; b Â·Â· - .2C /4 <44 9 M $ 25* 3 ' 2, d *=5 . 9 8 2 . 52 >- 2 4 CLE I M 4 2. 4 . . I' . -bl Â§% p . . 99 . WN - 52 . 2 M , &491 - fili ' - , 3-r& Â· . p WNet 1 C j. I . 5366, y i 6/22 b . .4 0/ t. AE 1:.,949 - : a M g X 4- E fi f f 412 - z *tly//L 0 . L. =1 - , 1, U<U'Ja 4 F f *ir & 3 r 4.0 - 1 h DE. .- - ,,.. - - slse]03 * 'lkipinNOIN,VNOUVN ONVI]Dys 911 t reveals troubling declines of b d populations during the past 40 years-a w signal of same time, we see hearte nce that ~ strategic land manageme servation W *Ueue 1 J seo.Inose., s,emjeu joejoid 01 2 "Â· BZ' 'saloads P J 6ue ,-11. Â·Â·,E :L..til@Mpe[MOU>10Â¥ C - ' ' - spuellaM Â£Â£- -- --* ' 40eold Ail 'VASV tÂ¥ 'Villa M.LAU JLDHV YNAA Â·LIMHdg i + /% calls attention to the collective eff They are beautiful, they ar ~. important-and they reflec environment. This State of failing health of our ec action can reverse declines 01 empl!AA pue eldoed sluejuoo Birds are a priceless part " Afl '4018210 '199}17 7.W~) '191>TO:i A I t}IN-15) Ag NltyÂ¢NV.I. Ill?fÂ¥DS :91#97'91Â¥{InVAI NAA 11211112 At{ .LWIA 1Im{10') a.1 11Â¥1: Z. I. .rt 9 % 1 . Â·- .4t' 1. 7.. . 3121Â£ j Q) 4- bo Â¢ C , cÂ¥ 4 234-4 - 9 ..1 e t) i k f t f y. 8 C -C 'SEâ€¢'A . . . .1 -. A : I W 63 O 0 3 E 44 1 liM.11/, y '' .: 2 ..2,- 44 1 RE,Eâ€žEt] 8 5 % :E .6 â‚¬ 16 , A H A O 0-, 2 0 1 , IE # U .alk ..1 -0., 4 El- (2 5 M + - 1 24 'IM/65 h.?1 ,.J....... 6.- CO -bp 00) + rt 0 - M O Â· 12 . -W (16 1-E - A ..4., . '74 MU b O M 01. ...4 ZY'lu.. * /9 70 .9 1 Â»-cs 9 i = 6 -9 bo t , - HÂ·Eig "~1- . 9/ h >~ CUE Â¢ c r, I 2- # O . re ~9 9 29 0 1.9 E f F PE ZERRE* A Â·H EL 3.. 9 1 .6 8 3 E 4 2 8Â·2 2 0 71. 1 8 gr -1 ~ 3 dU.5 i 3 *289.NE E E 6 84 E . 1.1.i. : d 11 .2 * 6 3. 2 M bo E ..6 % t 2 4 2/=M /2 - 4., t H * p *C 5 .5 0 2 510 E 8 0 3 g Â¢ p - O .6 8 e ME 5 .8 i %Â·MR DL 8 [,4 10 .m 8 83 4-4 t U) .23 11 * g zE -ED -@ 4 -E -4 -* 43 m -B CE --% --2 E M m zE E -- v % Â£ * 41 * * b g M E W k = 32 2 0 0 4 0 0 aE *a .1% OffEd#3 .@ ..9,4 2 E .E) E -0- --8 0 1 0 04 g N -0.. rs 2 - U Â¢ U 61 9 + u .0 9 - E e 3. +1 3 2 CO e O 0... U ~ ~~ U ;-, 0 = u.j - a) 0 2 C.) 4-' U 0 4-1 # â€žC Â¢ 42 M . 5 24 u E % 3 & .R 9 p 8 71 2 43 9 5 8 Ef~E 8 a .g % O u) A C â‚¬ e S 04 == 2 .2 1-0.%3 21:-2 -2 1 1 E i -2 ME 0 M â‚¬-g-%-2 IM I Â·=: S 1 "gb.% 4 4 4 0 u & ca 2 1 94 g bo # =1 ..0 a O % 0 58 cÂ¢.92 00) v Esct '01 c q. .t< 8 4 16 +1 8% 2 re 0 44 0 4 -0 2 1 1 -O 6 6 + 0 8 2 > = Ul -14 c 1 â‚¬ .2 @ Â·-5 1 H E. tb. 2 "14 E 1 fl Â·M --2 -M M ~ :9 -9 M 1 * 1 -g -3 .E bo E -5 1 -8 * 3 2 *1 3 8 SE g. 2Â· .R a:~ * 2 2 Â·5 t E = E M c =5 211 Â·C m M ,-9 6 -W .2 MEÂ©6 m .2 9- N -14 18 al -2 Â¤ O .0 rc - 56 3 0.Â· E - 0 0 k OC P= 0 & In .ma 1 71 49 52 ~00* taÂ©C) - .2 3 . - 1 0.4 0 0 Â·a 0t * R t,322 0, 4 Cit~+ - U C -t a.) Ui = C bo >41 + U~ Ef -m -m RN -* tt 8 -M Litai '0 3 0 2 tb R g 4 4 0 E Â·E F % fo E .E . 5 1-0 w Â¤ â‚¬6 0-- u~ U -- 41 a 07 1/.6 Z &6Â·=Eg EB 9 -2 0 1 -2 m 9 -a W J -m %4 & 7 0 4 .91 -E 4 0 3/ .6 (G OD Ch 2 -O -O (0 64 0 1 9 00 *-' C,6 u~ U) d 5 = 4 # + a co m > 6.1 64 0-1 0 .- U 0 60 0.1 ..13 T WE U V O re 0 1, -0 C 4 2 1,) t c C .- ..C -1 64 , R W (5 00) fic$ 4 44 111 .0 + 6. t .-C t< e 64 #- 0 0 -0 4 Ut -P + NEW bo 4-1 Â¤ 641 = 83Â£8 8 0 22 Gl 64 K 0 42 0 d .2 N A.M CO 3 8 1 C 0 .9 5 53 0 9 9 63 .2 C .t: â‚¬ A f Â¤ C 2 21 - 4 fQ 0 16 as C 0 0 CO -% I CD .1 :-1 2. A Â£10) - -6 -3 -M 2 2 -% m -M m * 180 Ja /9 im Â£ U 2 0 3 0 45 m m -32 Ud a :i ~ria zE -@ :1 =1 9% E * 9 17 (S - 4 81 0 10 .- C - = 3 13 m OEE + -1-J =3 #09-*gi@EE" t fs U Ve o g Â·68 U ESE t t 2 2 3=1 4,$1â‚¬ Â¢ 4-Â¢ e * * E,.1 Â¢ *Et E B @33*8.2 #E ,5 Â·r 2 -3 2. c â‚¬ *st C , = 2 -Ao 07â‚¬ bo .6 & * .3~ B o. 1 UD 5 - 3 -C 1 -E % -I -=13-2 %4 1-1 1 -E-IM 1 --i -* 9 -3 u , 5 -4 -2 2 20 Eom 0 &1 010) EN C Â¢ r t a E -2 1 LJ U) v COE- 1) 50 (5 0-1 a, m C.0 . 3 M S R Q E (3 -c Ta : 2 O +J O 50 ..W # L m ~ Â¤ r 1 9 1 4 ~ mt ~L ~1 <.6 % 4 7 E 2 2 -- 2 5 2- 1 -0 CE a -2- E :E J d --8 * M -1â‚¬ -E @g E .-2 = a a E Q Â¤ -9 4 Â·-5 U~ 1 4 Â£ 5, M &1 2 4 -c g .8 N C .6 A.* 41 0-~ 9 .8 - US.1 E E d N E N 4 b E Â£ 4 1 .3 3 % 2 z :2 2~ 4 5.92 (0 1 92 1% .6 e E ~ 80 3 0114Â¢ .O 4 cd u af\1 3.IaLIM. 'SUIalS/SO/3 I aN SUITIBJ ali} nt too long i, we are on lt citie ate landow iea y are birds and na nv o mental Health dence that birds can 1 -actable salou@B ~PLIZ~Usg rnell Lab of Orn Aim A 0 40 PA 8 4 lue 1 National Audubon Soc Aoue,uesuoo a.InteN 041 aaeq s 0(}!ju0S 01!|PI!.M pue 4Sy Sn 0!JUU O alels aip Jo Ae/uns 180!601009 'sn qsuly '16314 1.impoS pallul-Jug amon North Amer portant Indicators se landsca esources, an wildlife, ion has nb ino 041 Jo 1512 aAâ„¢ sapads aDUIS *OUI S,PIJOAA 341 33-LIO 'U U -UOUUU E n}BU /no JO S.IalI DAR DAOS 3112 Al< g vernment wildli e a SUFulpap 312 61 , UPUI U! SUOIJUIn :S uaqos are OpAap JIUIOUODD ino Foreword e DIdoad eason 9 1 00 t. 8 Â¤101* 0 2 bo ,= e M 50 O Ic u .4 - A 4 t,2 : e W m rd .2 0/) U O 0 " P &Â·847/1 Cd . m W -m 0 41 â€ž-4 A- -5 A Â·42 122Â¢02â‚¬ C 50 73 g -0 g U U : 0,4 g k ~ 9 4 4 -0 @ 429> 4 Â® 2 0, 0, CD O 9 3-0* S 8 :4 E t .t ~ 1 E E 9 - i 4 . m 0 tu) 4 0 41 .- le i E 8 2 @ - 9 9 8 + 0 4 [A 12 -00 'm , 04 t<b. 44 i CU .MC A M 0. .. 0 te .Em Z & a '- -tf ed ~ = %44 0 Â° M a E N E .0 . M % S E Â¥ 2 c Ck . -----1 -4 9% 2 f ka 2%2882 - (1, K <ce E 3 8 0.1 y. u 0 sepeds Jo efelueNed . 5 70=& c .6 E E Â·6 3 4 Z Al* E -8 222~ JAck J EFFREY 2 EX 4 1 Ul bo {C f 2 2 6 8 fa 41Â¢ 2 4 -E a w.. - 3 i .0 -5 -0 ill.----<-i---- Ut 5 m 8 ..0 & 4 04 -813 rc Â¢ A . 6- B '' 4.,,. I 4. .50 - .... 01 4 50 e 2 1 1% - - -2 8 -IE ZE 0 h3 n '-,1-%1 .- H )1 -1,21/7...75 21 , vib~ ~21/ .~<2 N g Zi -53 0 1 1 2 2 * 1 Z :: 3 41 1 .5 % 1 3 4 5%0 I 5.E Z ~ '-8 -5 ..1 ,@ 2 Â·Â·R a; a.' 00) C E Cu Â© v 4. R â€žc 0 E E c tocm 5 CS - m '10 g g 'i -4. OL O 0 4Â¢02 2 C .. 4 EN pi 3 W I Eus C ,6 0 5 I I I" 1 5 &:9 1-1 - CO - f.f.-31,/4 == 302 . (0 =00:C ' 8.'16*. ..: . ' .chi# f 2 5 60 g.6 8 m '09'M 3 8 8 O 0 P i H C. $ bo i ul U C .6-1= q- The results reflect the influence of human activities and g].obal chai our nati ds. Every U.S. hab harbors birds in need of conserva focus durina~it~is~)~ic>ad (~ ~eUaindgstc tion and manaoement. IZ pue Iful\41214 ut .Inioo sapads pi!q pals!I S'11 IZE JO pmp-auo 'suogpIndod Bum! 81 'uounqulsIP IIBUIS JIalll Jo asneD pap U Xp-LIaS.In ale sainge aUI UOUPAIDSUOD U AO.Id Putixa aq Xul IDAOU X341 sapads uounu birds and ocean bi appear most at etland species, wintering ds, and hunted w Species of Conse rva ion Concern Federally threatened Additional species of or endangered conservation concern Lnpajoid in Juaunsaill.r[ SU[GED,Du! SuppnI Out 0 3%211 reqoIS s!41 Ipn JU f collapse if immed iate conservation m Ist 34 paZILIOIOD SUBU.Inq aDUIS *U!}Xa DUOR aAEq Ul.IO;U! sannbaI uoge - CUD} 1236 SUIUI.IUM pUP 'SURISIJ--13AO 'Uounnod tuoi:J 6123141 airi Sp,I{q as -0Iddns 01\4 .safiuele IelualUU O.IIAUD 04 JAUNSUDS }S 02 Oil? plI;;eje~~~3~%12 opulations i n orasslan S.IPOX [12:6203 pUB pupts! 42 61123.Ili} 612 Ham se 'afiump 0112UI[p Xq pasneD 60.Inwad snooJ 11241 SX,AinS ialpO XUI?W WOIJ ell?p 41!M 10 I}BUIJOJU! s!41 Pa}U@UI 511 JO uoupotpu! DIC[!SIA 1SOUL[ .Ino aq XEUI sp,Itcleas BUIUIpaa 'sal!6 Bugsau Upajo 612 1pns '101!~OUI 01 1Inow{P IO 'paIOSUPpua '3121 aie jet[} Sapads uo Habitat '3 u! s')413 ue! U.IJOUOE) UOUWAIDSUOO JO sapads aIr f IpuoRIPPE UÂ¥'paU@123141 e 'sloippaid moxa 91.INBUIUITIa 'S}SaloJ 9UIU{Plual pam aM 's S}SI}UaDS Uaz o spuesnoq 24 ut?200 04 palo!.I}60.I SpIIq 'S'fl 341 Jo %6â‚¬ }sear e O.1 papplsal ale leql as ds aleS!Iqo Jo saouel[DUO nopUJUIall E o} aluot[ SI leu6!S sp/!qees Bululloea pOSeq 312 SJOJUDIpUI d Xaqi saoiluas I UOUIUOIIAUD 341 ,34 0,9 LI-;SaLIa-1 Sunfqequi Sop *SS@.IlS lapUn UIa}SXSODO Ut?300 (spON:aUI 10; te-Â£Â£ saBud aas) -Spi{q lenqeq ueajo ian Islands. More bird irepua se pals!I XTIEL[apa; ale Z9 'sapads asatp Buouzv 0 puB s}21!qulÂ·I asall J 41 ; SIO}BE)!pu! uon ndod pitq al ulnerable to extinction s.[123,( 0* 912 9 OI 612 1 Uaas Uaaq lou 3A1?q saIjads aiolu O-[ }seaI Tq paiafue I /4 241 ainsua o Sapads X,[DAa JO A i ..91 t .. Â· gii 1- 23- 79% S, -r Â·~ Â·. . .:12:1, ... 2:659'St..4 CA I 1-0 Qi e U ..C + (5"2 8 C . 4 , I ... 4 4 2 w-a 2 -4 -M 13-5 1 4 253 1 13 * 32 -1 -1 -, #Ab Â·- .0 91 4 % .CD 5 1 ..E ? 4 'N j 4 U bo 1) 1% bo 3 -ab E- t E 1 -- â€¢,-4 M C r.% M In C O-4 Cu .gb d 9 5 4 1 * 292 4 .6 m 4 UN .2 2 8.-5 U CS Â·8 3 e - ..13 - 8 c bo -1-1 , 1 . . 8 51- .22 21 AND -E _ E Q M Z 4 9 le , ..0 1 .4 :...1 '......1 ..1 1 ... I E- . , . 0 >ESE.2.2 0.# 5 8 1#Â·~Â·~ . . 19 V E k El m B (3 0 1,2 .!.1 .*' @8 ..J Ccl.E84 m E .5 E t , 2 2 9. i CD IE ZoÂ· A ra u E--1 CD - .. . m .5 % 1 1 1..... 4 8 0 O.71 Â£ act#53 41 7, . E f -2. 04 -M FE Â·2 E H .1 0 ~9 E 30 a 2 4 $ A P.Â· 1 3.51 A. - CO Â¢ (10)""4' ' 0 .. .5.., 0 '02 -0 4 2 0 8 e C > 0 - E 4 3 C CD .W .0 E = E E 4 Â·5 6 8@ 7 9 . 62%:11.9 Â·Â·Â·.Â· f ./1 7-Â¤ b c9-ahy LE N =M c .0.2 . + T C m *SCE e E w m r -a E o w .O 50â€žC U u 21 = c./.***e' Â·4'Â·~ % ~Â· "~.Â·Â·Â·Â· ' A-Y / 4 U) Â¢ +1 M - . 11 1. 1. ...~ M rs "C A -O 16 92 32 -6 Eâ‚¬F TE W ly 1- C. 9 10 t CO - bo /@ 1 0 1 J ) -11 0 1:1 1 C 9 a - t= m Z 5 Z .3 i 1, / 0,60 :f' , â‚¬ -ce *3, E "8 m 1 17 ~ -2 2 2 4 e . 1/ f ZEN K . m u 2. -0= (5 Â§01* t 892Â°Â°Â° .0 - as = ,Ak=ru 2 -2 2 2 rES E Â® Ew 7 9- 0 0 54 e5ue40 enejueojed 2Â®%3 will inundate shoreline coastally increased severity of wildfires, and a barrage of exotic fore ests and The will of our nation to preve extinction and reverse en ental Concern for Coastal Shorebirds Forest Birds Face an Uncertain Future for breeding and refueling on migration are besieged human tats, man s ecies have suffer steep declines an remai - some coastal birds are increasing, shorebirds that rely on coastal Although forest birds have fared better overall than br 1 Conservation Successes for Endang gradation is exemplified by remarkable recovery of 1 n~etorfebdirThfcÂ°opvuelra~~~ m sutcheesse~lft~~te~hf~tfCY~~2~uelt, opulations after the bann o.Id uotleA.IaSUOD een loca te, tribal, and federal gove * ment, noncy v rbance and d dling food supplies. Sea level rise cause y acceler- unplanned and sprawling urban development un Ild proactive m easures in o ving P UOUPAIDS pandsu Ate pas!21 DABq purpi 00 10; sarizunlioddo and private citizens ar Bird Population Indicators our common s g trends for obligate to conserve In ns of acres of wet a o decades, unprecedented n four major initiatives sue rds have declined; ex rr have declined diseases. 82%. Because of thei hly threatened continentally amon C a, the United States, and Mexico, indicators based on Ventures, have been highl pUB loaISOU #UNUIWIP IpuSts spnq pueIP!12 pue puBISSPIS U[ Sauppap Suplu lzNSZ101 1,14114Uy 9131(Jlultals/fo liJZ1167 lojsvol Â·TVUIN v s.1 ssol Juvqvl~ ll3tlm simplu:}13}sRo 11)41 31116 ua dlaq Saa.liS31 SJUIpap asal{} OSIJAa[ 01 papaau X~UaS.In 012 SlumSXSODa IP:[ieduq o pue 'mX)03 1110 Sullulmi Pull shorebirds are of h conservation concern. ard trend for wetland birds in the U.S. is a testament the amaz- Birds Show Amazing Resilie ce a model for conservation n other habitats. LOOZ/2001-9661-866 1 886 1 E86l 8L6L EL61 8961 tle %32{52%3~-31~131(~Lle/3~JU~CC~9~~~~Se1s ur -- Wetlands Bird population samopid (31<1:G LAVA1 Y 3 3 92 1 . (u '-(3 b -b KB= / -89 03~ i 1. -:PA:tal. , 4 E 5 . 0 5 C 0 tgUE 45-& O â‚¬ 2- & 8--3 -E /7 111-3*-6 k % El %:! - 39&2 â€ž01 bo E 0 0 0 J .2 Â¤ 0 (D 8 1 1 ~ IM ki -lil~U C 0 0 m V . M .d N 0 0 5 .t: t 5 ,~.,All*:1:- -. Â·gl~ 8 92 - 4 n 4 4 0 C : 1 - p E % 50 0 UÂ·, ...,2 5 10 -8 8 3 9 -2 21341% bD re %502"% EMU O A CD U) C 2 %C .2 WE 1 0 1 c & GS ..C tr. E B 2 9 2 3 f m . 2 UD 4-1 2 1 2 LL A H O :06 8% YE-g RD 1 0 E 0 4. 0 0 m U Oe 1 Wi 5% %9 182 A k T .. rc t - t > # 64 'U (9 1 g m a 9 4& % â‚¬ C CD (1) C 2 5 2. L.) 3 3 2 0 2 6 - e o:?CÂ®XEB -2 0 t rs U 9 VACP 2 43989: Imli g J 5 5 2 49 1 %34 1 1 p 4 (1) = 0, .9 .0 -C W M E ... C f 1 2 U.32% uÂ¢~C[faQ 0 - -C & - Â£0>EFE ./ +-1 .- ~ "0 M D~ -4-, O 0055**10 . 110'Pi .1, A A 0 a - 0 CD) = 2 1-6 1* a 2 0 0 -2 0% rtR Â¢ 18 E--1 -Â¤ 3 6 603 - 0 v *- C h ro e ./ 9 Em 161.12 .- f W ed 7 3 + H * 13 2 M 4 2- = M 3 a 0- 01 -6 - - m *0 A XY . UO 7/ . 0&6 E a, 9.go 0 02 i~ _ :-AlÂ·..2 - (D Â¤.= 4- "0. 50 1 0 055 m 11 1 2 *E E -g -8 2 : Â®480 Z 2 30 E .5 , =23 - O 0 03Ui 0 0. m - = EC '0 .CF e 91 S # 4 - & a 7 2.9 & 3 7 T : 3 6 U bot < u 2 ~- co w m .10 ~ -5 Â¢ m E 2 bo 9 . Â® -8 25.9 4 _ %3 -/ M , 28 E 6 .2 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 &* : ill # 25.8â‚¬ 5 M ig j le Ft fl 3,5 * 0 Â·d N CN â€¢4 - 3-31'N eBuello eBejueo,ed : I E 1 4 0 4 4-, 32 4- E .6 ui -6 EC) 9 c Cy) CO o cmc -0 L (D i 5% ~ 9 84 E - CD 0 <1 4- 12 2 0 E~ ~~ . 1 0) 2 1 8 2 G E . O 1 b D-9 0 0 0 J0 0- C . M .9 . US 9 k E â‚¬ Â·.- w B ki ..A 2 E 18 ~ *394 Z - - , >30 -3 68 -Â§-2 0 2 -5 -E- fe E 0.-2 2 acni 0 0,16 R 0-82 2 E 2-5 -6 -2 8- - . L- & 19 4 -= 2 * co 5 8.- R g -Ce Â® 9 Ui 0 ' - co C O 4 k 5 aÂ»2 U) c -Â¤ c,~ -2 t.i E -1 Â·8 0 C 71 39 Â·p u~ u, .. co c -0 co .2 4% 05 M co -8 -27 Â¤)15 .5 . - 2 1 2 f .t 53i -E i.%-%1 -13 -~f -1 0 E p -0 u) b co 10 c ..Q -a -Â¤ C -Â¤ (1) L- --Ue L 0 L .- 0 . L - C CD curoc62 Loba~ U < 15 co 73 2* .6 95 8 I -Cco On <,e.EE . 3Â¢ v Â¥ 9 t>Â· e NAA liMMED I I (C UOUWAIBSUOD JO }Uply E paiagns @Auq '1!eno paiess p Birds in Trouble jn qv 91121{qul[ aI!924 Ital{} JO an . uoo Xq paualea ,Ilp Dip pUE S 1 .Iratp JO 36 12 U.IDJUOD n od gunn pap 10 'stpa more than 80 nesting 83 aridlan ng bird species, 39% are spe- Federally listed as re especially vulnerable because of Aplomado Falcon, (San pue Jeleel E) Su q seq }121I 21{ LISniqaSES 1{1 SplIq OUIPS }Ua PmaH I BuideeN /sadxl le}!C[Eq ,Iaq 'suale ueqin * Species i LOOZ Â£00Z 8661 Â£661 886L Â£86[ 8L6t EL61 896l decline o r th y nearly 30% onal 13 species, many unique concern, inc endangered: Calitornia tricted habitat requirements, r ows a ste d icant ion concern, '(3131{ umoys) Ilaga i apnpu.1 Â·s spuulp.uv inills jofvul puu 19 pUD '3 untivnit.140 'nuamid SPE 3 9300) SUO} 31003 qn.OS lulluall~~~.i/~vl,~ ~~~~s~zi,1~~~~2~~~~~ uo.livi?d.tiald id species and % Colorado Pla razing seem peloaloid Jo elepOLUIUOODe olpe Ge el! AA luelud beautiful irds fo nd only in n..,2 *9044 Â©m. - 1 1//5,5,AWN*kitl 4'MP,. 1. 1. 1 11*"8*%+44$% ~2 2/16*2 1.19,/N 1 1 6 516 8 3 k p et.. -All-- t * 1 rE ,2 -2 to r~ 0.) "Cl 6 % 8 2 L x,4 9 Ff E N d) S .:~ . 1 4 Â¥1 4 ' 0 2 M & CL' Ji 2 79 'd % A O M 9 -f~ ~~~ 1 1 DIP,1 4 â‚¬.1, -1 f.m /'1,5, 1 3 -Â§ m Z q t i 1 2 f :3 % g .~ . 4 -r, r-f ...Â· m... ,+I,1 ~t,-1 E 1. 1.-1~1:1 1.1 c m E .0 3 4 3 us 4 ,2 CE' U .4 e ''.. " - 46~ 60 (0 -w 2 2 2 0 8 A Q 2 a. 4-1 P (5 Pi O 2 . 47 + c ad 0 112 ZE Exce k ll.1 2 4 4 -0 "S A C,0 4 43 Uj (1 86 0 0 1 .1 -111,-1-Â· , ... 1,ff. 6 e. 6 73 4-1 20 1.41 . Ir 4 20 M P , .2.:i# ~:J~~.3- , - I , 'r r. r 41 1- I L . , - 64 Sr L r 3 3 h 3 got . W E- S *E & 2 1 T 3 8 L 0.) il 260-~ , 1 '264 5- 1 ~.1 f i E % 3% 4 1 F- ' /9 .kKE:Â·lii...- bhN >#8342 Â· /4Â·:#.&,Af-; 1 ' ~ :tz NVAITIns -7 NÂ¥]Mis < 111 42 5 E '8 5 2 26 0 - '.W bo C.-0 + uo E u Â·-5 .â€ž.1 mt â‚¬ 4% 0-1 73 0 C . 3 0 5 0 Em~ aa - E E 2 2 Ng i# tx 45 Z .6 U) BO 6 0 -O - C . E t .2 -3 :g e E Z - 6 i =ZE* *~98 3 - I Â¢ d Z . .41 Â·* bo % al Vatc TAL RK Eme-4-4 *L@-0 -Â® f -E 0 5 I . E .2 Â£ 0 629 2 .8 50 * 9 E'a g g Z 1 d 7% r.Â£ .6 1 @ F #f) - E C (101 = c, a u 0 8 -* 2 6 51 . 0 4 8 2 2 9 1 7 1 8 3.9 C ... 00 g A .fi A Â¢ rs .B M Â·M 8 2 12 U 0 M -0 0 Â£ 5 2 2 0 & 2 A k C > ;-1 Â¢ u,Â® e v 0. en d .% E 3 Â§) 3 Q V < O .es 50.6 â€¢ I . . , CD '26 2 re 3%4 4 r'G -9 0, 7 - f m 50 - Ul * 4 - 0 0 8 -0 - a,2â‚¬ec 4 % uND E F IE 2 2 3 ; I .C - 2 9 . 0-1 1 -O 4 4. 0 - 4 9 2 3 1/2 u, E E E .: C 40 - 0 - *16 '2 Z.@d 0 - - et . I I d NE E A-3 m bo . E .C d t 5% 2 . m e. 5% 4 . =com C .I *2 16 B- 3.5%% . H I Â¢ 2 03= I. & E MA E u t . 5 a U - 0 41: 2 = O H *E i n. L > ~ 21 8 S 4.5- u .01 t = 92 M O D. 5 C C X 4 9 0 LE â‚¬S 0 2 Â¢ 0 I UC 0. -~ . 9 * Q.1 . Â¤ C = 2 :3 ~ ~,p ami 3 -2 = i .g 24 22 8 0 & El, B *4 9 oroqE # 0 09 9 Â¤ M % i 6 2 â‚¬ D â‚¬ M o ~ 80 ~i 9 2 .S 3. U E Â¤ id G L LU .t: .M A = 9 native habitat patches, RF.'T Vl N production of seeds needed by birds. Improved Reasons for Hope monitoring of bird populations may provide the onser vation measures, such as ensur- increasing pressure and na- life-compatible grazing ;SOUI Sea,IP UI D pe d Uelp DIOUI 'SUDIE la , , UORBAIDSUOD 312ALId plIP lua -ul?pua aqi Sulp nIOU! 1?DI.IJUIV I o; palioddns aq isnuI sd!qs.[auwed I 4~/tl :~~~~t#K~Â§ t,in:11,~~~~f 42'M f:0 â€ž48Â¢Fit. 2Â·.12â‚¬~iÂ©: ; ~'h '~FI .;~*255 -A 42'P >1~ -,. of native aridland birds. iurban, supporting nearly half of California s ill provide oppor- birds, as well as for elopment and Energy first indications of changes to habitats. e agriculture and env gy development a seed mixes in disturbed 41 M uoquioquIIO) asop Sannb U! 13[U[Al Sopads X.Io}PISILU 16 pilq purIPMe Jo %09 u241 3.[OK .aIN Jo alu a PUB AlaN 'I@Iq.IEAA PO>Iaalp- -Wip s! spurIpup U! aSupqo all?lu apiog ino puoAes nluiwoo lul?Id liosop pue qsniqahes 012161?Aap '1 12 JO IPAIAInS alp J.Insua A41 }Ja92 XIIUME LUU.Ip XPU[ U areas. p m Xq papage Dns sass1212 painpollu! Xq paipuBuop st residents of the U.S. ar the greatest threat to aridlands. Some of our nation's fastest growing cities are in aridlands at and * Imm lanned and sprawling urban development Los Angeles, Phoenix, Las Vegas, San Diego). 1 sage and ch arral of southern Califor- present a glob biodiversity hotspot with merous threaten or en dangered plants and als. About 40% of the area is now urban or ment and exploration have ma or oorly planned energy Jeqi sal-UpI Ai Ian; SaSS]219 aAISEAUI 661219[12 Buumscu 'SHos pagpluep pu 1 IqUH P pri -Buetp pue SUOR{pUOD IOUIIUM inq .poid UI paAIOAD 1124} sluEId aA!}EU BURBUIU[Ita DUP.I 12'OISOMI DIquu!12}S ides conditions species. . . ....0 Dl),NA.1 11 MIÂ·-1/,NI l< 10 6.7 11â€¢ir,~ 0 0 9 2 93 6 2 G) 0 0 cD 6 c 10 & 1 KI e /*h. Ill~ a=.1. , O - U) M +Jo EL E S 4â‚¬Â»4 .2. 4 13 CD .0 9 E .10 Egg 4,91 W:li.4..9. 6 7= O .Â·,0 2 C 'C C .- CD E LU 54Â¢f D ...0,~ ~K -.- .ti EN#1%27 .Lâ€žE M E = C L . 04 493,2 C - -22 ar ma gE m matc 6.4 2 U) 2 C 0 4 8 g f n I . 2 9 2 k ,6 f 60 ok 2 0 -2 -2 ~; t-- 8ugo;H.~ 1 . LL W 4-4 -a: O O.0 p + O u,t 3 c 16 2 o -1 E 8 61 (0 4 MES' b fuEE@kt~# R 1 2 6 1 3 71 z Â¢ vi - . O 44 1 34 7-2 *664, % 2 25 * 0 K 2 . 4. &2 bo 1 e .3 3 f h wE M $ A 4 2 4 Â£ c (9 1 *.Ff ~ .S 27 1 0 2 -0 z -21 5 Z .-8 E 6 -0 -O co jo cu ig -* b E . E .8 ;8 rs Emut /. 0 1 C Aft . m 2 91 -2 23 0 6 .tz 3 0 9 U R P .E t 1 8 4% & 1% 52 E 4 g %02</' 76/ 2 E F m 6 2 i .5 * 3 - 94&: W - - Z 4/ -8 = 2 ZE + 15 5 cz 8 -M -1 E IE e* 3 :* .E:' 3-3 f 11 cs 2 ,-~ IM 179.4.* -/ ...... A . 4 2 0 *44% ie*â‚¬Â£1/? /1.*- W bo â‚¬ft 4 CO \4 -* '2 - 4/ j,i li ~R/ .w > 581 4 tr O u U rd 1 U -r v N t Â¢ 2 00 0 g C g â‚¬ t .0 E 0 03N . = K Qi) 2 4 -O 0.00 0 bo 0 UT C 4 0 16 3- 6 bo M 510 N M Z ec .8 â‚¬ 4 0,7 A 8 8 01, N - U & 5 ..0 0f 0 0 -6 E .C C m .2 .31 6 U -u . 0 2 Â·B - 4-1 eg bo Z D u 10 C Â© C -./ . U 3 4 on * 0.1 - d 4- - - ...0- Â·C Z is g. 1 2 â‚¬ E w E E 9 gon . 06ue40 06eJueo,led P. 4 0 CD 0 -2 2 2 4- -6 4% 3 3% 13 5 12 f-- -C .- a.... - -2,9 3 -5 2.2 68 0 (0 0% 3 T C D Â·-2 RN &3 6 E 1.14 .. O - .co 3 noen > L 91- y -- 9 02>0 _ v- 0 L L - (/ Â·~ g ~/////W/</9/////////////3 m %-0 C J 0 .. > ED g A# ED 92-6~-~ m o * 42 0 CE ct .- CD ./- ...~Il '- CDC - 2 C L. +1 =b (1) -S.. -8 * -2 -f@ E .6 0 -h Cl *04/ jilillillisillillillillill = M -9 65 0] 002}C --2 E % 2 2 -6 12â‚¬ -3-23 0 1 -9 E 1- CO G E -5 = 00 b -2.9 coe & %â‚¬2% 5 6 11 9 O -5 W .0 L O J R tb - 0 0 E 2%@&4 -24~11 8Â·43E-28% I co < bt.c E co o c .c -2 Â·32 2 -~ ci *a) c ~ CD B o co c g 3 -@23 -P E EÂ·li ~ R L 3 -a co .g m o -p= P =3 ui g i (-~~ O.- .. c o 0 0 0 3-8-2 co -2 g E cl gÂ· 1-1 E %-t g-2 5 5 ,~:,2~ElilillII M CD ZEB .6 0 c) co -5 8 -5 0-52.g-con L.L. 0-00-5.6 1: 7- k.?~~ 0Â® ..1-r- Â¥ 1 *3 + 8,4- I - 14:, ./ /1/*i.-- NOSMallyd ainf oc 8 3124-Sp.I[q 3UIPS .IPIndod IIE-del pe5eueuu eq ueo puel 3 Lp lapun BUIASTI .tc .4 asse- 'spuBIS JO Ill?-JUDUI J U I BAJOSUOO ns that are f derall endangered. Eight Falcon, cape's most SaUIpa 6>i N 11!eld Jeleal 903!log pUB '81!4/V~qOe Ulaq 1-ION esnOJ Â£661 8 61 Â£861 8L6L EL61 8961~ 6601 Jo asneiaq SI@AaI DLIO ester PV saIDads u,0 Sall,ls pai.iun 34; SS(100 pall)13.49 30110 Spunl@St).(8 30,4DN 90 iD D SUID JU}low A>poy 341 ula#istja puv '00?X,I/v 01 vp u obligate species, d ped by nearly 40% Â·,9.- , I concern. t he 42 grassland species of conservation ncern, pawatto] 1039 Sull a.uivid ssvt.Suvj 341 fo %96 uvt# 310PV rpl~ Sal.quid ssna-pmut pUD -Uotls *sn 13410 pUD 3.lnjjnmiST 04 Grassland Bird Indicator elve sparrow the baseline valu (DZ) smeD!140 pueisseig - '3 113.u& 01 pallanum aq 01 anwl UOJ grassland birds in evident in the last fi ueo 5ulze35]eAO BunoX Ji where birds S ABLU merica's Heartland birds are amo - cy 4-4 - co VAc, â€ž 3 6 E q 2 f 2 1 9 19 4 / .. ~ . . 8 8 & 8 9 Â·4 M E kLE E s ... -. rk ' ' 44 K '9 L 2 .t % A E P O .2 :15-~ 9) C :g E . ;Â»f: 1 - -'Â· R 55 * % p., bc) t (13 M E r.> * 1.- : ~ ' 4..3 422.Ew Cre COM.loccu ' 4- 44:.:. 4.W e . e u 5 2 E h. 4 & c, 8 0 f- 2 bo C . ritel. 2 a; k Â·% 3 C tb E e o O E 3 2 2 =5 0 0.6.2 9 4 4 t = .4 4 U M {C - / +' U) W~ CG Â·:6 + E N @ to a 92 K o ..m BU EUM...&% . Â·Â· - -4*. 3 -O F C H + . 0 0 ' lOt& U E N cr' R bo bo N M u w ~' CD v .* C U'J , 91- M (11 R 73 A Â·=5 0 9 9 alle,AAâ€¢e ' Â£-Afwi 41'' E TE-8 - L~~~~~~ ~~-I â‚¬ - ., '~~ -Â·.-' ..i;Â¤~2 . 'al.. 8 *33 21 4 7 2 g N.6 Â¢â‚¬23/0/#irÂ£/F U o G.> r co H - 12!,11, b.,4 I: *7~ Â¤42'5.6Â£*160%0 ALVAVE[ 0339 Â¢ 0 0 UU e = 3 .0 Â¢ 4 10'C 4 C M up ~ 69 ag-a 4 -2 2-E -rs Â·- 5 le E 2 5 u c UD U -Id . a EN C 2 a f u 2 0 4 0 0 (IS M.M h cim .c .8 2 M t C E A E 0 CA C re U , 1 9 1 Ilf f WI 1 .M 0.6- r- S k E Ja E .6 Â·s * 0 C 60.16 A J--8 -0 -2 3 8 +. = 4 -22 f ~ tj % 8 -0 .1 g Â¢ 8 1 -m o.Ei m R NU1' r[: E E pr P cd M - 4-1 ; E .5 1 0 %8 . 1 4 1 N .% 34 4 7 r-Ef 2 41 (3 2-; 4a 1 0 8 M Q - ti -2 - 0 8 -0 rd C -2 E Mo ~218 C Eg,ENE Â» -9 M E Mo -6 â‚¬ > E El u U CO U (10 = 83* EL 3 * 2 * PE E M & 3 2 Â® 6 ?t 8 0 5 ES N . 0 0 15 8 M E-@Â·EntEÂ·fi~N3%% i m W 2 2 0 - =AR' 26% bo bo.Eb ~ 2 S .2 % M M D bo %Â§11 C a M A T ;-1 5 2 rs = O 2 F.- 4.2 8 9 ec /4 0 504.-t m E 3 -0 222 O -5 3 8.= u O.12 4 16 3 8.- E 22= 4 1 4 2 5 F -E ad K W cs f Â·52.2 UE. d 3 KE Z 2 E .2 -8 ._ tu 50 Uj +1 0 0 *ged 2 -2 ZE 9 -2 -~4% 5 4% 2 3 C0 2 M -M â‚¬ E =E 1 4 g S W kb = -â‚¬b c --8 21- 1* 1 -9 .... cc .Mt & E E .6 8 8 8.2 4 .5 51 8 2.% S 66 IE Â¢ BY GERI<IT VYN wer grassy edges, native weeds, and sts can be compensated b grassland spe ciatists, Major Threats birds, especially in areas of row-crop agriculture Reasons for After recent, alarm- declines in some Agriculture Hope spueisseiS pejoejoid bo seioe #o suoill'ul ep'Aoid sule,Bold uo!,eA,esuoo uu,ed and across the short-grass prairie. tensification of agriculture, including larger usually at very small cost to ucer. ji~ vegetation 4aLIPA appA 12 1 ame p jOIFFpe Bugsgu ldrus[p pue spur[S r, but more than a -laAO Ua}JO am spuBILIOUUM 's.reaX JAy ised a 'le/\Old-Ueplog U eopelliv 'sledldplies Del a. 01[Al e/IialUV 41nOS O U >IMel-1 S,UOSU!BAAâ‚¬ SUO!*nloS u! 3.In}Ini!1212 01 pallaA q 324 saoe uo! Grassland birds have declined because of the cted in ways that are c as er s control. benefit grassland bir forest instea of being man nt should in -Uns pue pueidn >1 !loq08 Se 1.pns SliIFISI ng, grazing, mowing, f of grassland obl ate spec wirRInouSE 01 pallaAUOD Nulaq ale SpUBISS isaq ino umual sule,ISold UOUPAIDSUOD UlleÂ£[ 0 auufl Iellu ;UaUIneqUE) 'P mIs XI:[adoidul sting season or the end of the ch areas are d, causing desertifica ion. equently, or burned at the be ruling tinue to incl abitat. Open are s are freq sitions from will tool for restoring and maintaining grasslands for production. suiewei e!.1'eJId eA!1eu elwl ele4AA adeospuel e u! sp.'!q 84 1 Â·'01 le!1Uesse e.,e je41. 11 as the spread of row crops into nnot support many birds if over azed, ~<tif~~22,~ 24~tptlr often laMOI 01 Sulpear 's UEISSEIN U{ suompuoj spitq loi XIddns npal pue XuALIjnpoid 11.INno.Ip aseaDU! 01 X0 61 9UJUI.rEAA IectoID Â·sua>[0!43-0!neld lassal su tribute to reduced acreage commodity prices and d m UD U) 4 I ui *EXC Â·2 EL=% %912 4 4*06312~,A<.05*15<f,k ;* v EME#El /19$0 2 Â«ER.M /2 1.1 f Â· Â·-6 3 8 9 1 UD +0 la- .2 Li,~LQTÂ¥2~yf i 99~rl f-*.Wil -O F:(DEN 8 .... 1 - .... G.) L A HO "rle>C I. r - -1 1/4 t/*10 , ,: : Cu Â·7 4 b LI-~ &9 . ~ M 5 bjo R h . 5 4 . Â¥-{'..D: .ll '... . 444< i .U-:1Â¢92 O boÂ·+ bo 04(frufc 8(11) tr ..Olh/R#99 d 'neke, 1522 . *1Â¢r..,S CU 2 22 to'- 1 + A- 12 < 4 56 *.0:Â»(UPY.'.,41*J>*44. '~*~'44#4.,-,-*~i<;1 8 -3 i -â‚¬ g .0 o E -c; fip: 7 kÂ·Â·f Â·prÂ·-431- -1, 41 Â· Â·m#- -r.2 1-, ~~ -Z 2 13{ Pâ‚¬ c i rile-' . ..,5 *, Â· * . %.6.2 21 8 + 75 . rÂ« -4 M u 5 4 5 0 , -4: . 7. M : I. : 14'P. .04,1. U.:.M '- 4 -t, JI C C Q. -9 U C k Q O Et ///~ d#'' '4*AR-Â·.if....:19Â·'..'Â· OEM R n .5 A~ 9 0 2 11 4 I 9= .. Â»....::1.0~.?j':%.~~. ....: 14 t.- ' i 1,4 . .1-1 M C 0 4-, : 444-:90.:4/9 -- rad 8,24 .2.*0 P.24 9 $ ' 914 -0 130 *cs#-*t v.2 O E h 00 CD U TW ' 2**p:L I:.:.): ~ - 4 . Del.-/.-- . - -PA 1.'1 CU 4 2, 11!30 u=-3 '38 F B p --- i- ind -- pa n +4 4 1 ':Ei * E ~ D-, N tt I 53 Â¢ 0.P Aa u, P ~ 0, O A Â¤ r O -:ak.,1 >. f H M ./ CO X H E~ .W k A .0 UD .C A ~ 6 1 3 3 0 d 4 C 6 M ~ 5 4# Â£ 6 4 ro 510 0 K , C -2.6 * 8 ~ F # 2 bib to 1% 1 1 2 2 1 -2 -2 -m ZE i . c 2 2.* O 2 . 2 6 kI 4 % , 55 1 M 9- t; 3 E CO k 5 = 14 A * - 0 CIO 0 1 bo 4 P a .2 3t s [10 W e m IZTE+~ai I bo .CE H / C Gro Â¢ 43 17 E E et = CD E 3 4 3 4 0 .4 1., tri 2 1 + - - U) 0 7 1 3 46 % pm Â·to 2 t~ 50 Z C C C 4 1 5 .G * as ..8 2 0 2.6 .9 60 -C qu j~ & 3 2 2 0 -23 41 -0 5 .M E ~ ~ 8 N 09~ 81 6 u~ S &6 Z d UD .0 4-OL 0 1 0 2 6 22 4 4* 8 1 2 1 G ~ E b ~. M 0 0 13' Â· . /34 MZEM 50 ~ '~ *~ ~~ ~ E E -M S :-6 -2 3 4 ~ -M -m % -2 ca h.01 co B 1 2 . .6 ' e c Â£ 7 -2 & .. 2 ru a, - -0 82 u u I E - 2% 1 j - M hÂ·Q 0â€¢ r-4 F ~ .= C -4-J $ 2 2 1 2 2 * 1 Â§1E 5 0 0 3 Â£ 4# lieD-~ la E Jm am 2041 ZM 71 4~ - m E $ &1 2 -tj i ... -1 2 , â‚¬ 8 U 00 1 B .5 9 .9 m L to (3 1 2 = -9 Â£ m 5 3 4 Sm<0 3%*Ag ----1 m p ce Lo 7 0 *0 E & f Â¢ 5060 R > . RE 0 0 5 -C ki t -0 - (5 8 -t t 01.1 ..(C %23 22 EnG M C -23 4 =P'=m :* 3 0 4 g . 4/ c * E to 4-1 /1 e r w . r e .92 2 - E E 2,E m * -2 Â® Mu 9 1 IE N JE -9 E E - 99 YE , A 402~EE 1 . D .0 CO E D-1 2 - I N +A Z 4 -2 .E ./. 3 ti CE C. is .M /5 Â·92 S . 9 + M k , M -16 = ,1 4 b 27 Â¢ = 4% r â‚¬ E r o f 1 49 41 2 n Regu A 03 1 4 6 2 1 &2 1 4 4 00 . (4,4 -C rin In (1) 4 .E M . 0/ 20 M 923 1 1 m 2 e- 3 4 3 3 8 7 12 Â® c . . I 1 1 -E .2 1 A m g =( 8 :3 0 6 0 g f# Ebittg E~*â‚¬43 Â®.0 In 5,0 Ed W l k LL 0 5% 2 2 A f 4 E 20 28 1% 2 M 0 U) '15 1 Â·5 i g 50 C % e ni N . 0 0 0 - n e . 11 , 12 V ret U E.~228 , .2 2 3 .m * . m 23% 564*19 2 0.1 2 0 â‚¬ a- E .M 8 :2 A 2 3 &- 7 3 c~ 8 M Z k -2 5 Farm Bill programs that result i the re tiremeii t d near numbers are augmented by captive-breeding and Prairie-Chicken populations have bene nto recent Farm Bill offer the greatest hope for the on g in the United S ates show stable overall populations; however their agement of many resident game b recreation for nsed hunters lease programs because of demand for recreation- the crea grasslands Spotlight on Re ident Game Birds Reasons for Hope g Land for Gam B rds Helps All Birds of millions of acres of intensel -te entire U s suc as the 1900s, most irie-Chicken, (Masked) Northern Bob- These efforts landscape-level rn Bobwhite has declin 75% over the years because of alteratio f grassland JUJUILpi?OIDUH pueISSE.IS DAT#BU ISPAUT pUP 'Il? 0 pal U,Ialsam 'afu BUOZIly U.IaqlnOS U! l!enD elunzejuo'Al 141 UIFI alil II ;Slopun -Â» + U Federal isted as endangered: (Attwater's) 'SI.12 I UapISal JARFU 61 FAququiog Sasse.IS pue s}Ul?Id Buu >pOTOMI UINJ le -eMes s,uosiuung 'as , jeleep 'Sailnos n p EU UITIa oABLI sluEId JARBUU lands where the m use Soc ty. 1 species that 7 1!quq Sainpai and federal m 'sapads ssei LuoIJ elep }saq 341 uo poseg 3 JIC[P/laual 0!43-0!3!ejd Jaleal pue BulzeiS >IJOISaAI[ 702\23 '00!Xan[ U,I/41Â·IOU irds -n Trouble eration, rn Bobwhite together on ran ide management UlaDUO U Ill?ARSUOD JO in 2006. ns assist hrub commum es i 8?64$666-1~4rpeit,-iÂ·~:i,, ..:4.49. 1:, t. -Â·Â·Â·-7*.54 4 /3 2 9 23 52 4-2 u 1 -2 4 7- c,5 -0 @ CD CD -0 > .Â©/. defig/1/ 2-~ 0 iE 0 -0 f --I--Â·Alk,2 4Â» o f"-42*44% ~,12942 ..1~ 0 CD) S .E -8 $+. .:* 1 ~ibl 0 -0.= S *3 CO > .r? : 4 3-1./.) CD = 00-E E o f ED ~ 9 06 LE a 0 1% -E E -5 il 2- 1; 2 E 8 .4 3% 2- LE *2 2)% .5 -2 ( IJ .- D 2 ECCE(c,Cl)*.~HEi--ge-*932% -2 3% CD 2 Â«5083% a 18 -c: 6- Â° ,c E g 8- 8-) 0 92 co -2 42 .: *. â‚¬*22213*â‚¬it ~~ ~-~3 8 0 E c- - C.2 0 2 ti*@4 11~ IilMo9 F/*C-0 0 -0 22 B -~ 2 .2 E 14 -5- g --2 -* E u >0 -=2 ~ --M -M ~ 2 -0 CD CD 8 o .ti LU g .63 -2 M .. 6 AL cio _C n r= L (.0 4-' 0-0- - CO .-, -aD â‚¬ t=< O -W CO J.E> 0, E COE ca g i ca 2 WRE TIC L CO "- n E - - E-4-7 SE ENE-O M [3) . CO CO W Â»_ 1 CD 16 -** 2 -0 m .- 2 15 ~-Â· m n . co M -O 0 2 1 4 .2. 2 d & 8 3 E NEE-Ec 13 20 p.t 8 Â» 2 5 -3 8 2 2 .E R.%:3 2~L i._ C E .- 49 -9 * 4 -8 3 9.6 - 4 4. a 4 E 2 i -2 NE 2 -2 E d CM 1 . 0.1 ~ C 4.4 C p~ 2 â‚¬ 9% i O (6 0-1 420 0 m -. r.... .71.. M pt .1-, A-2 2 + 1 0 .9 2 1 6 f E E. M I.SIA; t: O ro 1- 3 0 c 2 4-1 0 8 0 CM to 16 -g "30*E.E CUE L 2 8 Co -2 I or = M tic) C cs *2 4 Al g H m. M , -%3 .. Pt 3 LA ---- bo a it ~ 6 '8 2 4 M fift 534&{t o 0 1- p. 0 3 -g A ;O 2 rÂ¢ M . I. A. 5 Ul ~ co .:; 4 +7 U) milk:LO - Â· - 4 2 Â·3 4% 84 q=3 -8 =E N 2.8 0 Â¥ 3 0 - C E-,â€žg -Â° 0 11 0 3 1 0 2 4 & T = 50 0 4 uD ., A - 50 bo 9 - e e dr t .05 keR 600 022 .t E =C 2 Crot (.2 2 27-0 S - i a a . 61 . ~9 1 4 K I -C .-- -1 - - kb ~ * 29 - ~ -0 ,LE N ~ 2 --= E ~~ ~ ~ 3 4 -E -22 2Â¤ 2 22 E 'R!'6 1 2 -E E 0 4 E--4 N.. 5 3 E 2 6+ .E =5 IM 5 A ;u.6 2 2 .2 e[Suello eBejuaoied *0 0 w WEE . 8 50 W 6 9 $ 1 73 JE Â£ ci la 75 A co CS 0 C 0 4% m ? 11 im E -E leE -- 2 L Â£ â€ž 2 29*~2 1 3 2 U A CD E 1 ~CD . CD D 0 lij C CO CD 0-Â·- e ..4 ./. P u E C~ CO - Cl) - -0 al) h '4.21 0 11 AÂ·-1 2 0U C Ct - A GO - CO al w QI â‚¬GE 8% C un l# '0 9 0024 m A E 7 Â·9 C .6 A 44 9- 0 502 E 8 m M .O A . 20 E Â¤ 31 .0 , C 2 mâ‚¬21 0,43- m 49 1 4 11 et 1 g ZE -9 2 -C P 2 3 t; 44 (n + E 8=.2 :: .b M M M a a m 6 2 m m 4 4 m _ Ef m b 0 $ 7 10 ~ Eornm= uÂ·%< (0 61 C.) "Â¤ S~ 8! S - 8 "Â° Â·2 6 6(2 G Q % 'u U Â¢ bo f K. f 6 2 0 2 =ER,ro-*(( . ~ 2 ec N.E W 2 2 bo N ,15 :0 2 9 2 -2 -= m = A bo E.. Â¤1 : E 0 >1 9-" .2 53 E. & 9 50 0 (,0 v .Â¤ bo w au Q 'p g U Â·0 6 S bo J i 0- 0/ bo ~ + u) rs 8 .C O/ bous 0 .5 2 "9 - * k w co > czÂ· 6.- 00) .O 0 21 3 22 L Â·c â‚¬ r, .E -M 2 E .9~ 2 [% C "2 ~$* E (16 uj 1, CD > # 4 2 5 2 9 E /3 1 -4 9 1 -4-1 -1 J % 1-* -1 8 E-* gi-g * * 11 other parts of the tic species also occur ~ in most natural h rica and imany Exotic Bird Species The most commo nearly every urban ADDV7 INDIA A 344 S:flifufcltÂ° ~, environment are ex American Robins can thrive have significant other wildlife damage see and f tive birds for same from Eurasia n the ducks and geese grazed aquatic ve gher overwin positive economic ' Pheasant, ome have een es OUS S riety of native birds now o cu aero s he ial habitats to the u r House Sparrow, show stab 8.18 98!oads peonpoilu! Allue:)8,1 I 'SJUJUIUO A VAA 'SBAOQ-pe.lelloj UeisedrEI oue ain}oa Jul @Aeg 00!lnquls'P al pue 'SUOISIIND 3Onpal 12 UlmSXS SUI Of the 17 ban a eas underscores the i luding Rock Pigeon, Eur WOO Ul .Sde@A 017 1.Sed elli pqin I aoudsuaaig Suquao Â·SUOUPIndo xotic birds |IM @JUq A C 1212; apÂ·1$8 0844 - - 8Alledau sPJ'q GA!.leu Jno 01 Sloedul! -1121Uud uakup 'SIBOX 01~ aW m bil ulutivs 341 01 P, J pUE 'lpll! 3 samd Mes Suppas sjue L00Z Eooz 866L E66L Â£861 BL61 EL61 89 SONump I]21UalUUO.I[AUD 01 â€ž+IDI12 16 112Inippads nalp B in maiiy habitats, includi eral, urban-adapted species fro Jojeo!pul spi!8 ueqin urban yards and park manent resi ents, InO UI Xaid luepunqu pue sa 10; elep uo paseq '10120!p sapads Inj ssaions around humans. ant earthwo lue.JOLL-1-103 palsaj Â·Sap{Spea[ BUOIP pue sdlunp y422223% pu s O 'luauIdoIJAap upqinqns pue ue ve to southwestern aridl st puy saol~A'~Ol s,1 , rprising num ainmsq rquuns 12 GAm !1. itCÂ»EN'F,Mt 50 B *C .- -4 ~ 13-~ 1 ME R - - -E=.- R i E g Â¥ 41 &1 0 60 24 bo 5 2 N . I Le 2 9 . i.':.:. - 2 S6W %~'rÂ·At: 6>~ E i - f 4 00) 4 1 \ - m O 0 UD 1/ S ly/-/ i.;.32 i i .A...... S E U 0 1111' - 1~ 2 Â¢ 4\ co & . -2-1 -- 1t v - -a %& - - . 4.1 I. C CO _ -A â€ž W M Â·Â£ ub Â·- * 0, C ;-4 Uj= 0 .. - - ..11.. . >,3 60 4 2 E Â·s E % M 5 Â· 4 1 1-2 . 4 . 2 0%*0- %64r .- 92 .0 A 1 * %* 2.:.rE I ./ P/*0 1. - - 0 6'6'6' . . 8 2 21 0 Â·0 + 6 2: '9 1% *' CE cr) =r 61 N Â· 9 ' U r,-f .. U gg 22 3 B o 2.5 032 @ 71 8.5 2 2 06ue40 86elueoied . 1 1 COR 0 [0 10) 2 p 2 K] 3 4, 2 2 .4 o bo . 92 N 2 + A u 8 0 O W C Col > 0 H 5 4 502 1 312( ' 0 -2 -2- M * I -54 -2 0 h . E o O ku ; U .0 - . 4 2 2 M g E .. L to 8 - ~ C M m m N (0 -1-1 **44 - .6 3.6 0 H â€žC -b l 9 3 .8 8 1 bio m Eb 4 . 2 C - M 2 p .2 Ld 6 8 4 -2 , ri . o k * 1 1 0 0 1 -A.M Z Q 3.6 c U U 0-ERE31 Â§&e~ es A = -01 1 2 E A Miwi T - Â¤ 2=1 f bio 0.M m . A 0 - t K M = 1. b 0. 0 0.1 1.6 1 1 L= U K . 6 H E O -CS et)21 g I K -0 -- Ad 4- .0 h g g .6 - .Eb ..JOC .= k :1 am U U CP 0 8 0 I co ..C bo 4 A XY A 60 . -4/ C .4- A - U m Oj bo ('0 14 - .- U : # 15' Â£ 00) .. , /3-0 b .M .r .9 E E B 2 B. .9 2 + 02 "0 2 i- 2 --E E C al . - \0 ./ 9.11 .22.- A 2Â·.O 6.4 .0 -5 E 2 Â® 8 4 g m to & CE g .M 3 1 y .*.4 6 8 21*.:-6. 4,$~~ E Ralk 20Â¢41 2 1 r Â·0 -2 9. 4 * 2 5 M M UD . k U re N fc W If) - 2 b 4- ~ 2 Â¤ M a, u, +1 1-0 = 90! 0, L u g ap . S c~ 46 (10) a.) .w 1 1 6% 1 . i.= -- = 2 03 ED 5 -E .ti E & 2 2 2 9 E Â» 2 2 7 -6 i m E -9 ~*D-=Df ~ 4. 2 + -9 m R m M --4 6 -C .O 0 .0 0 0.E Â·~ b ~ ~ ~ â€žÂ¤ 4 e 97/22 0 . 0*+PAL *'0Â¤ Le â€¢- A O A Â£04=11 U.0> HO A OHT 11 4 F 2%0 C + CD 41Â·f#d,1 - & -RWRI.gullp cc 22 5-tg 268%-23 O > E u; -0 -I CC 2- 2 o r ~ 95 .6 56 m E .8 w .- P â‚¬ 2 2.2 2 t 2-2 %2 218 0) 2~8.9 . 0 8 6 3 5 > 9 -a '- 71 Â·I b CO U) U CO 0 - Â¤) 4-- 7-Dti CO m F (1) O -1-1 .*.5-% (1) ~~ d) 2 ~ % % u .g _g M 2 -O O N b 0. := m -m = m 45 4% m C C CO L 0.Â£ co -a 0 -2 t; 0 % 3 32 p co r -41 1553gf//M#/~///8/l .. L ~COC E (t)2 b Q -2 01= Q) CD v 6 3-2 - r. E E . E R. 13 1 -0 3 8 a 2 4 2 3 -3 2 9 * Ir M .0 ~ Â·~~~ ~~ccu(1:) , 4 23 2 2 & 2 8 â‚¬ 2% CED 8 Pi *7 dE/"frt*El#MO5/Ze/5,%31//W/2/80:W 1 (D 4- L 0 Â¤~ 0 ~_ ) u.; - co O O +-, CD 32 0) 18 2 Â¤~ 0 62 fr>~ 4.*94..gr .. E E 12 * f ~ -~ 2 & i .% 1.@ 2 % 5 E .9 co Z 1-L %## .2-: ...~~~/~~A:52~ 1 3 0 .2 R m . '.t 0 .h 2, 0 22 - Â£ e.% W U 4-J A C a U) O -O (1) 13 C co 4-' a) CD U) 6- - 0 E /CO-a Â¥ 1,"5/e,Ir<# - C -c @ 09 92 3 512 -6 Â·8 -% 2- -~ JE MT 2& 55 55 2 9 -D; E O -CCD c E=:332 d) 0 1-u (032 0-0 2 2- %89?uj-Â·in .. O.2 9 0 8 m 1 -~.Fiftma - - . w zt-:b uÂ·j *BER- 2 %533-8% 6- Eti}2=jz h 1,3,:~23:TD. =.~ .. 8 * r t A-i,~ UE[IDOS SSaNNEIal[M UNV SN}Ivd NVIDVNV) AS31.MflOJ 2. SCARLET TAI\.4(-.Â·I.Â·4 BY GE B. Â·- \'~ ird population indicat imelipul sp'!3 1&810:1 Salo e dolwins u! 9(ZIEI 1 1Â£11801 1SaloJ lIla pr'Ul@DUOD UOREAIDS 0 sts of South Te ethreate d ese re peratures. -Eastern (251 861 BL6[ ELGL 8961 enb p 41!m apads '' 'suourindo e e]De uo!11!LU as endangered or threatened. rend; ecies, declined ste over the p by nearly 25% s e 1968. DIOUI 0620.DUI IBIal[38 E uaqi pUB 'SlwaX overall indicato trends in fo sts indicator, p XneÂ·[aUOB E lpI fenD BulnzaluoIN s lu,uog 3 rest ob o pas q 'Sisal J Ipaioq tremendous forest-br decline IIBUIS 341 J o asneoaq 1 I m t'te borea 'S3114, pnmn +04'UI 4#uos 1-1 *Â¢f ri' 6L Â·f 2-1~1/ t i '~ ~ ~'4-=f) /) .0. 4 2Â¢mil 1, -0 . . i./1. l.,; f# D d ,Â· lt)" .: F C -11 U 2 9 Iii 4 60 u.j .> R *22 'Â·O 2 2 ~ 60 Cl 0-) D.., O >d 5 8 ER â€ž2 8 4 -1- ' Â·' h . - O T c.o,g 42 .. , 1.-1./te , I C.0 0 L. 9 2 21 4. E 4 8 .-.Â·4/' o Â£13 6 0 22% E I 4 - CL) t:~ - 'u + O > % C $ 0. .- 11 4 13 2 2.9 w + I. 73 y 'bÂ¢ U X 31 {. 4 :... lili 1.19': 1 ..0 : *lit,1 1 1 '122 . 1 - 1 3 -1.1 tiv ~, f.. * = 4/ .Â· .to . 'A - 1 0 4, r- -11 " f , 0 0 . 1- 11 1 9 ic ms C , . 1,111 11.1,1. I qu f ... 4 a IL fl - 1 NrD[NOD - H HNVHS 0 - 4 9 ~ ~ 9.4 7 bo k U'J Z 4 9 0 K _ 0 t 0 4 2 01) C > -44 -9 - E 5 -9 -5 50* 0 1 0 C E .6 c R 3 t E--2 . 3 A N -8 uz~2 O 2 v -5 a = a â‚¬) 2 .~3 84 9.2 0 N 8>, 2 4.71 O A bo F= s c ..0 Â¢ 0.2 118 M #a a % s 5,0 13 t "13 A Â¤ 3 0% E bo O E 8.6 5. C A.4 M -O ./ E bo E E r- .2 9 0 Ul t 00 Â£14 0.1 C .M k 0 e 6 0 L -5 R 4 4 * - rs d E 0 CO {In (101 u' 3 22 .5 0 Ed 50 Z .0 e 5 8 LM E ~ 3 6 40 - Cd ,= = 4 B O b 2 :u|iN 71 , >Â· E c tB % - 4 0 4 6 3 2 2 0 - - Ht - *E E 2 2- Flia --3 TE E -i -E .5 m k -C U D 2 â€¢ 000 CÂ¢ 0 -2 2 2 IE .C 3 O ,-1 CS a 0 0 4 M a.1 O.t - 2 u~ 2 4 2 A. Ul ec Â·.0 Â·E 45 503 5 E 0 0 bb + CD # /1 1 1 .V//"m%m'u/" 1 CD Ul A 4 CD . M e CD 401.6 Ab 0 1 3 A M 0 92 81% 1 2552 13 -2 -2 0, UN= 91 0 4 2 17 2 m -Fy,-â‚¬ @aoE - 0 3% SEE 1 - a 4% *12 E 1 Metic .. . O :2 -81 0. 92 22 U -5-) .1 -5 -22 ~ > CA U E t y 441 2 3 1 3 j 3 * 1 1 9 * e ./11 â‚¬ F 0 0 --' 0 2.0 Â¤ E k E .2 't % E ~ 9 69 2 A.Â«M = g K -- u - 9 0 4 0 C U - & a Q 4 -22 IX - ~ iki~~11 I . E n. u o m .n #0 C Ke U k Â¢ 04 W 9 20 -- I z.-.+ li 3 A. g *NOME =6 0 > t k. - 0 D-1 - - CEE EC#-4 = A 30 ..2 8.2 -9 % 2 4 6 6 3 â‚¬ 7 E E 8 -5 -/ - ... 0.2 uo U t ..R- i.. . 0 .0 C 80 -2 = .5 34 1 -0 & 2 - E a =El L C - 1- E-3-5 2 ~ = M .-â‚¬ 0 -2 2- imi ..I ..1, - 2.1 E b 6 -O 0 AE 0 t C X . 49 0 .2 0 2 6 1 E k - 0 2 = C -=6 ..EL==- If & 2 3 L Â¤ 6 @ LO C ,-1 C tb 3 - 0. = =E -2 ~a 3 8- Â·i f~~ 6;0 3 2 0 -6 4 2 B.M 8 4 ~ v Et > X U) 0 4-1 A -0 * S m E - 22 :i ~ --a -m -~ g * ~~ --8 ~g * ~ -â€¢-' ec 2 .0 "a - m D C 'T: - !'1 1,4~ fIC 0 CO ... li EMEQ)}~ g 50,0 2 - 50 CÂ·Â·ti E .0 4 1 - 4 1 c 00 16 P. t= 5 -2 0 -E % K r m > 6 c .0 * M = A ...M t J u o f 2 % 2 Z L 1 .E 2 ~:'-* EAN WARBLER BY GREG LA\Â·AT) ns of white-tailed deer Forest-breedin to 60 million acres during 1945-2002 and is still and Merlin, as eastern hemlock with extinction within 50 years. Reasons for Hope Decades of unnatura prey in urban areas. rubb understory of many Rapid urban growth threatens forests in all to declines in forest- h of forests. Economically viable on private lands and incentives for pri- wners can provide a mosaic of forest upq,Inqns JO ap!1 341 1 q '086I -JOUUOo pu Ilvieids p41 10 -paaIC[ UIO,I; ale:[9!tu sapads pitq JsaloJ IIP Jo JIPH 141010?fo spoads 01> uvit; atotaio guo st .tal*tz,M Uzgill.tal all_L sput?Snow 3124%.11Â·U /Lazii 'Sisal#'s'Il U.1 pallq 1 _21401 R PV '5300403.N 341 u? 131 11!m 01 /410111UD 31 U '3134ds 111 SSO/JU 6163.lof created fuel and additional reserves and ages and structure to benefit diverse birds S 124!U! aoudsuaaIN ueq.In pu Ienuue 6160101 UI 2008, 13% of fores been eserves. Cons v forest bird aouI .SUIM SODa 3103 Uj la[UIAt 01 UpPUBi pUB 'S n al[[ -IallII SUIAIOAU! SaA!12!lfu! aAI}BIOqUIIOD 20!13 q X p }pqialexa Â·sle#qI?41!34; pue sapads asalp Jo uotleA.IaSUO) S Ilf' p#Iape UV SS Oll 4 pJUMZW.ltg 3.117 S stry practices improve the management, such as su 09 pue Iel}Ual pue 'oop<3* se S p Jo rad past DOnS .IOJ Imuassa aIr sdiqslaulled 11?uo! siepiog ino puoAes rise in eco f forest * The U.S. m orestr regions. Development increased from 15 million ates The loss of econom incentiv for priv uauodxa Sulsealout loss and fragmentati n. ba increas' gt a , acres bur al fires bu n IE s}SDAII?q 'S'fl essentia m federal KI; .Nl i :-i V 14: :-, 7NI;I'l:, CO p b rc -4 - E =9 4 -9 w UL eu 30 9 1 CO >D *1 -13 . 0 UJ 2 . A r) L. + 'L.11 1.13 10 0 0 -2 9/ d Â·94 * O 0 W 0 4 E 116.2 2 r--1-1 c U tEt% e CD ... + UE, 'Â·Â·12 9 23 -2 9 t at .2 A ~S C ifit 2 4 E E 4.-ZI ac-0 K 0.1 (/1 8 i ~ .~ â€ž21 , - O -k- CD kme %2 4, O 8Â¤863 22=# U + Â·- 4-1 . *2 60 ~ 5-2% 0 0 4 -1/ 60 S # . & . r b Â·M E % C) m 602.W - Lae MB a, c SK.K .E # 43 E tj .5 7 .m 0 M ~ 4 & E 2 E .5- O A O C -- (10) UD D Â¤ 0 2 00) 2 0 . 2 4032 Un u .0 0 4 0 'N64 1 33 â€žC Ekd Â·b 442 4 0 21 4 CO -1, ) & CD 4 - C -bo Â» 4-U - % . . U e ./ L = 2 -=5 - rs- bb ~ al,) T riG t 0 bo ' C 81 -2 CO 3.6 , = 59 8 0 Bk 0 K CO Â· 0 6~ 518-2 4=1 -% .22* Â©3'E~ - E .2 .0 2 N m as g 0 @twilimill"ART"//4 #/11/1/ e .E A â‚¬ es K 8 % 2 1 2 ,P % M E .1.- Â¢ f :1 t '% ~t ~ 3 Q ~ 9 ~ 3 4 2 3 -2 2 = > M.H rE 5 .c E 3 E v 6 2 6 0; 3*EV E W(EU Â¢ 0 2 9 .~ 2 .5 re ,-1 C h *2E * ME - 640 5 7.-c E C) Â¤8e : O 6 W boo- 1~.il- U O U ' Q 0) - b .#3egr.144 E 07 iiI ~E -9 8 ES R Z E "2 2 5 E 0 Pr 92 0 co â€¢ . e . /jill GrvanVAirl SHINVf NAA liN>Mi~ ROGER ER1CKSSON 2 Ed 2- M = .2 4 â€žEi~ 8 kÂ·Â· 1 U) - 24/ e g M N E & C k 0, Ch + k. U O Il 34 -2 2 W .5 4 3 N .6 9% U E : AF 0 -0 -6 2, 1 8. a m 'El , .A . 4 Â· E bo 00 -W -4 9@ - .Â·- u M 2 Â¢ C.0 802.3-=Urs 00 x - M~ EF& E-@25~C*Â·Â£~ 0 g ec R- /9 a) CS ~*9~0Tf.â‚¬Qd %8 Â® MEg- 1.2 W O 04 0 / I * I * 4 + -8 -Pa 9 2 11 2% E.NE 82 mat (10 Â¢ 4 0 Â£ b W e .9 4 recoc = 0 E 2,5 Z 3% M C * 2 u g .1.5 E .2 1.,2 ~ 1- 2Lf tat F k .4- C= &.(D (0 -0 Q 1. U 2 50 60 Â·- C 4 8% M [1- E G (D U] 0 *U 1 .C t %- 2 -B 3 2 gp 8 22 *ae % 229 0 0 E % 5% 3 bo e rs 9 *2 2 5 53% fiE ~ Clo UJ 0 â‚¬ -1 0 E E -g g :2 2 o A 4 0 1 K E F m 4 Mg e AC -O .~ ~ ~ Â·J E I M . * u â€¢â€¢ D 0 50 1- .#lilli.........,E... 6 U f . c (0 - 01 6 (101 2 21 F -0 Z % Cl, a) 0 W=O,-10 S Flpe 1;62/21/W/AI///friÂ£.: rm b 2 k.2-7 A om -3 62 2 E *+' r. .0 E 4 Â¢ .C A. = 3% &24 E 4 rIC 2 & b 8 0- k a E -8 110 t E 3 4 E c POE g g (0 - b KE E o C B M 2 a' CO O = 2 51~ , . a u) f :@ cn ~8 0 : 2 2 5 2 9 -2 8 2 3 5 27 4 .1, . Iltllili~~~~ 3-cÂ·c-EZE* 2 64 te . 99 -<1 -61 Â·Ics al .7.1 a (5 o (0 O Ul co = F 2 -2 m.,M 5 CU-+ E S o i * 1 RECC UP.RE E -0 2 -0 0 -6 0 7 0 0 2 -5 9 :E p. aÂ£ co (18 =to -/*-u ,-"-; ./124.-,15Â»-36- i J/lti:jillj d X E 4 %846 8 8 @F.8 %24 .% f R %2 7 i 4. Â·.4,12 .Ii..'I'.".'.pr 5 0 - P ~ G '0 m =cof Z vE< co =-0 L> 9.'.mi -:- 2&# Â©53% ~E . e . 1.tja~=2 ~.23* MA ll}ED NIA lINNi[D OUDLID m u SULIO}Sal 31#ZODd 31[1 60 61â‚¬31 f 4-suljnoci puu poompil[ & aztlqi) slunl ;satof 3 Jpl ptil 0 9193.lof p3Xlmlatgo pl 4 11131#lou on mature pine forests, includi Vireo, Grace's Wa - bler, and Cass .spllepoom ott]O pUD '613(lu 10[!JU{ 811011) 13(1,1 plil) 'llivld iuisuOO 'slil}ilpl,luddv 0111 Federally ted as enda d: Wood Stork, Federally listed as threatened: Marbled Murre- cockaded hernl Spotted Mexican) Spotted Lid.1 nt-11 & Ld pi v oati 'Asomp!W taddn put) }sua 312 12 ){Iqnd uo q 'MOJ U,Ia}SaM Jo ng of riverine fores . Thi-ush, Band-t il c ed or early successi nal forest or natural Chickadee. M r OHIO# suo }gaUOq 1- d ol sea[E ueued stern forests include ~ Coast are 1 'su.Zuqunoul (O slsi.tof snollpi)Dp 131po pliD Rimplit-)[Do Flycatcher. (threaten massiv a migra T~eckS~~~ ~ 1 Birds in Trouble Birds in Trouble punfualfuol ulgisvawnos puu '54118,2 loz~ Panods Jo sloa,Ja all} mq'glied pue large blocks of intact forests, such s such as Northern Bobwhite and ine ecosystem. barrens) including the Gold Warbler, Eastern Towhee, 1 ftp 'slayoadpoo.i slash pine forests. rush, and Eastern Wo 9 31 UI (9961 Jours leak ountaintop-remo Many characteristic easte Paidepe akel[ lyÂ·1'U Pl/M FL la....6. e"; 'Li...Be F 1-k . Â· % Lf MA).1. K]Â·1Â·1111.Y 2* .. L.+1~. KliNNE11! V. RosEN'BERL; Â· 5 f . y - .4. - al.1 4 111....ir./4&pmF -441 .i U) I 1-0 03 0 - r' 94 > U - :T /4..E.:1 - e .:73 tÂ«Â· B I -i.< r#*%,m.r' CD -4 Imagra m= fm#478Â£ U.' 9 5 9'Lpillazirj"illill"Milli I. *. ..M -1-1 1) 2///rA=.Di=j--#i1 0 Â· 4 k ....~38"l ~ I.' C J / & il-/I-W.-LIM B,- kh U 31 e a. --=-< 2 8 . E M. 6 218 9,1 lumr..841 1..... 9.er".... * "C X O 01,2.7443 22 ....1 C C. 44 * Il-=---&g- (10) 6 I *1. e A . r de - co , 8 = - 04-1 04-1 - 11'# 1 - -4-1 (111) E i # W 4 . 2- EL * E 74:27'/1 4, 011 2 - a .2 5 '10 9-1212 4 2 -5 '0{ M ZIMON) MVS 9% P M /6 g -~:' C k. 4 1 3 1 N 4/Dulo 4 - ' 9 0% E Â»4 E.I.Et E E â‚¬ '-8 4 ~ u 62 0 -t; AE Â¢ E u , 0 730 Q) '10 4) S E S : 4, 4 M .0 -O .4 -0 - .:6 5 8 C E B E ..2, -2 4 3 .M .0 4 Y J' 4* 06 -= i M -Â·=2 --M M-EL# e CO t .0 10 92 1 0 E 2 .5 E-' A .- - CE A 4 .â€ž. A E- 8 k C. 0 0 00.Â© CD 3 El .0 ng 11 4 _O -9 0 2 3 -9 12 2 -5 3~ u -8 2 3 -R- -2-~ E k E-! CS :2.- .Eâ€žZ 32 -a=N ... 0) a 2 (4-4 - 1* 63 Q.) rs al C 2 4 28 of 32 Â¢ â‚¬ 1 W * 3 1 -0- 2% 9, g t 0 E (/3 UC 1- D t CO W - 2 + u) 01) o :3 bo (10) C H K ----. 20 0 -.- % O - RE In â‚¬ /6 924 931 %@451% =i31 45 34 g 3 p p .5 ~ b 1*8 N i UJ t .2 71.2.8 2 2 of g =% f g E Q â‚¬ E g * 0 9 8 L 2 9 -5 NOM ZE - 5 . 16 E Z 3 4 18 60 Â·F K. 6 2 S 6 E EEw 3 8 1 5 * 1 8 2 --0 2- 0 -E * T* a ..% L & M Cd g - 0 2 2 k E di ~ . :W O E- T H 0. 2 -4#-c- 4 r= e -1 -se = JACK BARTHOLOMAI GARTH LENZ r d.1 9 'lgi ** 1 2 1- 1-0 X X q, al E %2 0 rt' 2 .R VJ %+0 I - 4.1 44 + 1 -9-li ca 5 3 % 0 .0 C 5 - 0 ce Â·Fe aj Q 0-1,1 OC 0 4, 0 2 Â¢ 4 2 0 4 Al " - â‚¬ 3 -= i ti;F i i ro g (9 2 4 00 m .a -S= 1 E 4 8 h t g 0 .12 4 Â·i lk~Â·40*, 7 0 FE E *0 1- g Ubl . 1 42*J,- . 9Â¢r.4 5 â‚¬ .#-0 i -5 --~ 15 =Egalz r.2 1 - 40 ' L*.,2/4// Â® . % ts 0 0 8 ~ . 'E WE~.'fli' ~r 9,3. 49 3?1 LE D C a= 0 3% 0tm Z A rs 6.1 9 9 . 'L<. , EY~ a) 33% z M=E il 0 2 u Al t 'MP . 4 #.#-* br ./. =33 g E -c; ro 2 jO ~ % h: f..9 8 ~ Â·~ g 2 2 ffLE E 1 6 4 4% 3 A -3 0 -8 -0 bo 25 --4 -- W (S . r- P P Â¢ 71 0 2 . R (0 4. 4/ 0 2 KP (13 - (0 0 / -9 -C E bo 0 OV U u g J 61 4-1 - 9 Agm g g 43 0 be 8 -*St ENI 5 2 0 4 u 2 0 M J .6 W M D-1 e Ul - Â» â€¢ = 04 9 -5= .- COW (E Â¢ 2 4-1 - , 0 0-me':E~ O E H - M -2 --8 1 2 .2 m 31 â€žc -Si R g CIO > 6% 00 Gs (D :9 8 r.22 Pb N Ed *2 22% Â¢ > 1 ul .- Â® b â‚¬ 2 2 3% 2 5 -2 1 jg 0 8-3 EC % < 1.0 2 UD Â·HOC Z & 2 -@ 2 1 i.2 i f 5 1 2 2 E 4% h Â· - Ul M 3 ep 79 5 1 , F 0 8 26 MD .t i CE a .9 ~ ..1;9 .2 0 b .5 : 2 3@ t b U .1 ft 2â‚¬#1159 114 9 -- 0 3% .8 1 -g E * $ 5 -2 1 I* 2 1 2--0 $/ 2:*= 5 4:4 ..E Â¤ 8> 2 2 5 -I , 1 ZE *04 6 242 60 SE 0 2 0 t; 1 .2 Â¢ 2 1 - E 2 4~ 5 O 0 32 .5 Â·23 24 4 :,1 63 W- i 402*Â°0 ~:Â° ~~ u.j ~ >Â·, .S 2 1 ' 1 .%* ~ ~' ~ ~ 4 t'LI - 11- a.1 - $ . tr ** t . C .J MEN.1/4 UC U 0 3 i E E U 7 a 13 42 t R .. - Ul H CD C t $ -C D-1 v 6 S to)*9 U L. . '2 A 19 2 = C AACUrst)('0 2 0 a.3 I- CO 2 air E 2 29 . 4 50 0. 0 . 0 1 ~ im NONIS 93a 7 '1 ./. Sls . Ipirdol nos JO ne KIIBON Federally listed as derally listed as endangered: Wood Stork. Lesser Scaup an White-wing ed Scoter nest or a and 3 roove- S Z[ It?UOI le.N ssaidil B{Â£[ al[} .Ird IBU IleN saPPIBI aAE[ UIL{JIM f~in~&~1.~ - s n tle dubon's) Cr ste d Caraca both have declin n reasons. Other less-common spe many sp 1 OUPAI@S Do 3041 0 163.toi V 030 glms Pal ds 10 111}lq D '4â‚¬310;1111)1 low UNd,Wivuall) suxâ‚¬L "?Wl,72 un,JO spltull)01 -Wivo in boreal forests Ani in Texas v 04) .told ininsuzzod 341 olill SpUJ#Xa J. .loq 11001.1314{Â¥ 4.110!4 341 dic ly come south in wii ~ north such as Alt.an vate partne r, and Olive U patraiD a}U UIDIdluI J X.Iols!4 ue DI JUIÂ¥ liNo S }63101 -Ioq u A JO spare 1 ortunities udsonia r. Lesser Yellowl OUII P doals .Iia4 !41!AA XIal!:tua ged Crossbill, and ~Utvoco lturt 18310 orea estin â€¢ Harris's Spar United Sta 1 1 4 ky.7 183:128 G]Â·1â„¢11 VYN "CS 6 -O 9 0 - hi 0 0 , 4 8% I . . . 4 4 0 edged 1,-4 r: - - - *~.t- .St -1, gLEE M O UD - r- 0 1-1 .r r . 1, P â‚¬ A 2 .4 ..01 :~ LD C h - 0 EN U) C CO I E - I ui Cd . '. 9"WI 22% v 2 Â® -.6 9 E CO -1 4 2 - E E e .2 1 84. 21 g= - 1 0 0 9 U - 1 MA * Z E 0 0.6 y C - ' 1 Upbo W - I 01 4 4 2 3 5 g 4 4 8 Gre==C O 4 2 e - u efc, ;./... (D 1.-u E E c p m s ig ~ 2 e C ( 0 4 /6/1,-i 00 % O - * 1 1.Â©lilli 9 M -6 2 U.1 4 rEfÂ© 8%002 2 -a E 4. 55 1- .U w w P g: Ec bo E 0 2&.5 9 904 .1-1 (G U,92..8&Â£% E< E .9Â£3 -*U-M - NE O 0 < m 1 EN Ki C) - M CD C J a.~ -= U.6-1 0,) 4. CO --4 UN M M 181| U. a) O U) CO â€¢ e eBue40 86elueo~ed bo l! L -%3 , --- SED %.-- 223 -43 2 c e O 'B o .5 -0 9 3 ' 2 "2 n. 0 * e c -03 * #19 -- -3 9 --â‚¬ 1 0 -1 -2 -8 9 -*â‚¬2 -* E .2 9 - - \10 W O O 2 CO> m A.~â€¢C : 0 2 c .2 y 27 qu - a 4%24.-% co m O . r * B E j 1 . A L 4, A" .-0 = 2 2 2 g. c t a b .= A :14,c 9,(1 N :6 O 50 Â¢ 2 8 0 U k f.5 0 04 -a al) H f i 2-El E% 0 -0 - t 0 . k 0 v ZEE E > a.) 3.. - 9.M -6, C V 416. 1 E ,2 2 9 -8 E-[04 Z i _ N t: k A (15 . - 00 44 6 2 *Ela- . ES . 509 0 g 4- 1 8 Â® 1.5 -8 4 .4 Â£ E E f - 1 m 1 0 0 k BO U W - 6. C . 2 - 1 . 1- 9 m â€žbt = E p i LÂ·- 0 : k . ~ -= & M E % 0 ~ :2 439 3 ~3 0 2 .9 4 - 0 2 22 OW U, 2 9 : 4 -2 -% 95 7 â‚¬ i.g 2 UB . 11 U O * - 1.w _ L:*r )> n ;~~ + Â®. 92 U 1 2.EZE: um= 00 uNE %14 C...1 - 6 h ~ C ~56 60 922 A ~ -0 qd ~ ~4 13 B 2 9 *ch#14 ..3. i i Â·Â·'~b), 2374 f / r . u u f Â·E Â·a u c 11 M ?' t.- - . -0.- , m O 2 .6 E 8 % 86Â·53 0 4 a : cic m . eBue40 06ejueond Â£ Ul Gn Of - 0) CO ..y CO CIo C j> 0 4 Â·- CO C 5: 1 C DEÂ·O C E ~ 9 3~ ,~ B & 0~ -2 0 c -5 @ -a. i 71. F r Â« 47 I 3 1 4 ~ ~ E 9 1 --p ~2 1 2 -5 E g -mÂ·E 2 3 -~4 4 i E@ E -c= 2Â· -2 9 4 2 CD +J E E 2 E 2 =5 23 -- -2 ai d f a, 1 70 A O Q W E - M J co M CO L L CD E (1) 0 0 OC â€¢1Â» , -m 2 M -9 m *2 . C CD.-P 0 co 0 0 CO L (D 2 .- U) % ~ f *14 anma . I -0.52.92 E Â·tr > (0 co) :=E h a *= h f Â£ 4- . mi,i . 7 4 tit a~ 21 (41~-2 22 2 -2 -M- 3 2 -3 % m *- i 9 -E -0 5% -g 22 -C= ; : 4 0 & if: Co -* + -8 r co c J Ot-< ft' = c _com CD O-0 0 (O 3 - co * g,9 0 0 9 1 4-'_mpla C CO 23 E i 3 1 i - R e ~a -2 ~ b .8 tg o .v a. Â· 0 0 C 3 - c 15 9 5 4 -2 k -2 2 2 (0 (D E 92 -2 3 -3 13 -9 2 E CD-6.2 E ... O E (D -& 0) 2 g g {3 5 8 -2 % .0 2- 2 2 -U -2.W -2 -6 2 & 2 4 - 0 2 â‚¬ LD -6 -M > m U U) 0 (0 5 0 0 0 0 co (0 0 M u) co -Â¤ 0 I . , 14% . 0 == CO = (D C _Â¤ .9 .0 j E '; 2 -02-5 M E z-* 43 7 F IN -* câ€ž R o --e A CO L /4- p CO Q) J "1 0 Â¥*:p Â£ e e , -r NIA 1[XIMaD loJ U 6 w lie pue Buuds ems ducks that winter i ma rine LOOZ Â£002 8661 8661 8861 2861 BLG E L 8961 specie ends on arctic sea ice for f ed r ecially vulnerable to global wa m lined. The nonbr piIql[046 fUI all Â£ 192JI JV â€¢ 'papaau XITUOR!.ID S! suoupIndod s! suoiss!Lue Bulon meA Â·sdoqu.tujunoul Uo svilv beauti he las ecade. This 00Â£'l od uen pue Illa Loot Â£002 861 , Â£861 8Â£6L ,Â£(6[ ~ ~8961 in arctic and alpine concern, includ- ndicator, based reased steadily ov Arctic oj JO sapads aIe spi Je U'UujeAA ge and wat wl. The arctic reg u ssal,3 7 puu Spuuldn luatti.lou 13.1.l Sapn~Jil.1 Of SpL1911001 32Â·llott ms ness o present only Al :SUIUTIJap ~~ and Energy ~ev n nt olleAJGSLIOO 041 eledodioo I I + /$/% -6/W a..~wÂ«g !101\/ siellqel.~ sno.le lun u eo o e e 1 Bulloe} 0 Speeu 1 31 Dly tIL -- 4,0 ; 4-44+1 - le. - - 91 -,Ii -1 - . 9- â‚¬p <-kr -= 0... , . 11 4, ... :-: i*Kt-3 ~~.~1= 1, ~0' ~.~0.1,-~,rL' Ny- 41: .laj,Pri#$~ 3. ... . -- PO-1,1 -7 -- 4.- - 10 ~. .r 111 i i -- - -- ~~11, r 4 94 . . - I -2 -- ./.1 9. - Ul ed â€¢ 1.â€¢2 17 - 2' -.1. ilkÂ· 12/ .. - .* -_1. ak#/5/&- ~ - w h . - , 4. 'p '- 137 .i 1-Â»n'- - Â· j NK. 04 - ... 5, -1 1 '10 P 1 - f. 2 1 ....... 4 L p i - I >f . . :%*F . U...4 *5 â€¢ I fil tn to 0, re m <1 93 = ~~ il E .2 3 1 ~ i 4 e 2 56.3 G E to Â·Â·0 -Â¤ r 0.5 -0 E E 6 -t: .9 Ag .metg ~ 4 33 .t: 00 0 4 / 9 C h 05 219 Ti rd ; o U â‚¬d 31% 0 0 8 3 5 E- > 0 3 8 4 M 1 9 9% 0 i 5 -2 1 1 2 A CD +1 8 50 2 t; E ~s .0 :3 k. 0 bo u] U O â‚¬ C boc W .11 1 :4 â‚¬ 2 Z & 9 E QUA C 8 0 -m - (C - r-4 â‚¬ E /0 39 C R o -0 - Q.J (C ~k 4 5 2 0 8 3 & < -1 /5 E E bot O Â¢ C Â° 2 2.9 m Â¢ . e + - =1% # 4-400 0 0 - .ileym 4-1 -0 Q 41 - Z ~ /4.-Â»+'".40".aq k 10 88 D N . Â·* 2 4 .6 d .2 = P 0 9 - 4 0 0.1 9, O3uEBO Ell-U - ** r-2,1 1 h. * A H g .E Z $ 0 3 .El C Â£ f. - ci ~7 2Â©g= 9 2 2 8- 2.E mf, 0 1, ..... *-1 . o u 4 3 6 ..1 4 & S g .E E d i M Z 6. 1,~ .9, 4 AE ..8 H- m (10) 4 0 M M O-U ES Ul W I. 0 ..0 71 0 -e .4 E a A 4 > -uu*41Â·89/2 E 046 < 66 2 M N 8 Â·1 -5 <.6 M E-, 9 4 0 (,1 .5 0 moo _ â‚¬ 0 m EAE *BEâ‚¬<60. NAA LIM>139 F A 6 E Ed oft E a C A U) (15 4 50 0 N.E'IE E.E# -9-0= %28 - 32 3 bo t 4 2 2 A 1, N 2 , O 02 0 9% E CIM ~.8 -2 2 50 WOM 0= Et SU 2.:E Ubum Et b to 0 2 * 4 3 43 - O -4-1 . = rc E rs 2 61 0 r 2 P 8 60= 32 6 0 9 9 2 4 t 2 4. w E T O 0 -9-1 k . =. 0.'*'#*-- SC 0 C 0 2 4 0 0 > E * E .3 = 2 2 4 4 .0 co g 5 U) ..M 21 c,6 a ag pgu*Ow == 20 k e -10 C 6 50 Â®C U Q.) -10 C r'S C 0 44(1) (15 2 E * , E E ,-2 ,Â¤ 0 f "33 - C 4 H .$ swoddns lpIqM 'ge Slia;Ja 24} pue}slapun o} p OUI JO Siaq 'S 012 Bu!921% pup Bulpaa.Iq Xal ploAE PInoqs >Indial{Sal 6,123[SEI .Iallag 'aSUPLP MEUITIC' IeqoIS Jo spajp MOIS saBISUa aJZIPITM Dll D.II? UNY::Wur ~" m of protected areas in pr e anagement actions continue to be overpopulati n of geese develop conser strategies. ing will make it easier to de p da, and some also inh b .UV 4 09 mog 6121!424 II!1 +Flf' swds Iani JO >ISM 341 BUISEOCOU{ SSa SI SPa[12 72[01219!UI pue aoueqinis!(I pue lualudole,laa Jo suoquIndo luatudoIDAap UPLIInq leaU JA!Â·ItI} lutil SIoll?paid ilsnv '819Â¥ 'UJUJUI %883 641 uo Xa id unS pue saxOJ 0!10112 se qons poles than i other of the arctic is needed to energy facilities and to transport p ia. Birds that breed in th minimize effects on bree ills and other hazards, mafrost in ve areas to use as conditions 39'IOU U{ paa.Iq jew sapads Climate Change aster responses. een the timing of nesting and availability of orebirds. cr as ost arc g out coastal tundra supporting sities of breeding shorebirds and Warming temperatures may cause a mismatch Melting sea c e cover will affect seab as Ivory Gull by sing shifts in th wpack could affe ngs, important and production threaten major area of importance to arctic-breeding birds. plIC[ 342}SEAap UPJ Spul?Ist 01 poinpoil 01 Xewiloa[!p Xluo 3111 s! suoiss{UIa BupnpON â€¢ od resources. nd young of ground-nestin birds. P â‚¬ Energy and commercial development p suo!*nloS .suogpIndod asaa -92. 42*Â· - MARIANNE DiAN IONID bo h B. r Â·33 P O .9 9 07 er- Â·76 - -0'1~ S , u rn U) S C . r-4 /1.112'll.W= Fe P E 4 z C co ~ * 1 25 U) 9 .5 (0 2 - to- 0 . i <1 - m _ p.g CO Â¤ -0 2 * 4 - :4 Â¥ ~ -+Si,i~~. f ./. 1 4 b ~ %3 62 E -25 :>' 2 3 9--g Y ej .M E 1 . 43,4 c 9 2 3 =U) Ai ? 39 11' ..A. OF (6 - - Â·- - 44 60 -9 0 0 Qi . .. .g r 041- "- . 4 (,0 4 4 3 U) t: E k Cl D .5 4 L = . 2 42 3 1 Lt) 9 .c .0 L , 5 ffEE#gam,0 e (0 + C .2 9 3 > E co bo CC ~ 3 3 Â®%2% 2 -3} bo.:E; OCCUPC C - .. 4 V I '1 r -2 5 52 = &02 3 12 9 -2 2 1 --2 9 E -IN -* 2 -2 z U 'LA. r 1-1 -O 0 CE rve - 221ypu) Â£ 25% c .3 65 2 E 9 13 r.1 4 .0 = - , # 8 6 6- 0 0 9 .% i5 4 -9 .2 ON ,-, 2 alt + e - 2 22 2 3 3 ~ & 5 2 5 t 5.23 3f:t>. . 1 .- i a. CD 9 0 C 4 , . >-00 cO.9 W . M bat 3 f.' I i N (0 5 2 0 & 5 0 2 1 E =4221 rs C -4 .. 0Â¤ 2 & at* i 1- W .L - CD 4-1 - W al)Â¤)L ..0 5 4 a 32 2 a, E .8 e cm w K. Da .12 - C 5 rig 9 t g- Dce (10 =- 5 ZE 20,6 9 .6 ie 938 01 3% m 2 2 452@ .3 -3 O U) LU * * . ' 2#9 -6 mao m.5 1 - E 046 1 1 . IttoR 2*8508:P , 41.=1 9.51 - t -2 -~ M 3 M 28 -2 g Â¢ 1.10 Ut h .E uj P U m 9 50-6 .03.0,3 : . 0 9-9 02/0 1 3 4 C ' #t" C bo iE E 0, C -0 . u 2 1 0 ~ e ' 51=45 1 0 3 1% 9 A .20 1% 2 $1 9 j M f - 1 -* T t 44. = 1 - 1 Q R 1 I 0 , 0 - 3 & tl 8 5 -2 M -a e 'j"jif 00 . Z O 01 . 2*472 M E a % 1 M .# 11 Â·Off i 09*y 0 3 2 .6 6 - 44. Q :. 2%Â·6Â¤a.oÂ©.SEEEPE: 01 92Â®8 9- Â£ a -N .s a mum IM â‚¬ 58 2- 1 *40 06uello 06eweond ~ 2 Sco - 4-1 A.01.- I 0 CO -0 0 OU 1 :4 44 3 co -8 & 5 + x 2 1% .2 2 E LM U) 2 -6 4 g *.. ,â€¢,74 824 - 52 E) r -0 2.E . L c O 9 7 0 2 0 f >00 ........ M E %1 +5 .2 5 6 0 5 2 - O - -O 3,4 H'.4 r E- - 0%== 28Â«32%= (6 11 .1/4.- r. CD+-1 a) - 1.. L." f.' 4 - . .. 4- (D . Â£ (0 cn . 9 -o (0 U] -b c.92.0 g + CO -c 14 ok-Â¤ -0 + co CD (0 6 0 20-0 9 r -13 -40. .!2 . 7 9) 0. % -3 -aE E J (1) 4.0 0 2.2 6 -9 cnEE o UN-t" I F 4 ff - Â·C 2800 Cl> ,- O-0 -0 u CO . CU ..9 .. crl CO co 00 92 -92 5.9 Â·g -O 51? 2 & 230 RE op o w- 6 9 0 Â§2342 7 2- U 1- If) . C LU +J - -Â¤ +J h..3 7 -O 0 2-3 +86 6 f:E Fl. *4 - P M P C - .9 3} 23-0 24 ..P m C 92 -2 8 -m -2 E 4 CO (0 CO --3 U) CO CD -E -P -0 C C J U) 5 2 3 p ~ - O co= C-04-USE 9 0 [9 -2 25 PU -%6 -9 U .E 1 $ 2 ti; -2 ~p E iR *d E & 2 . O z 2 E g E R -8 % 8 k R n R 8 E i~ 2 2. 4 -c n 4>l * I ..: * 8 2 49* 4 '9.73 0 1 M U 1 1 Â¢ 12 1 - cnesEY - rS ' C> .,+3 2 .. CO . .0 -5 00) Â·Â·= m A boy 4 1 . -Qj 1 0 i .A: C IN E r- 9 4 2 co 52Â¥4 : ./ 439) 02[3DNESON A H1HNN3N UO UOUBUTIOJUI 3.IOUT .IOJ n pluoo pUP 6163.IOJ IEDIO q 'spupISSEIS UI cie~scite~~fb~eo~~ei~~ati~~~e ... and bird po data rane, Piping P L.?02 1 3002 866L Â£661 886~ ~ Â£861 ~ BLGL Ef61 896 .. . 0 ~fifj~*clur contribute to wans. i the arctic, Wetland Birds Indicator . The wetlan . Half of t emaini Dramatic incr as se!0eds ,Â·17 p pe55ei- have peau se 77""IN ..t . Id BL + 3 0 03 j - 0 - CL) C (/3 % 0- 4 51 0.1 4 6 A 1 0 49 0 1 2 3 4 Â° 4.-4 Â·c a := "* "2 0 O 4 E ..11 , U) 0 0 0 2 LE 1 N A M -53 2 0 -2 -% a * 2 m -28 -0 -* 7 2 4 -1 1 ad 21 3 9 2 12 2 2 1 m, ./ '#1Â£'. At'- 03 4-4 LU W A ...., f .=, ~ w -M .Epa -m .=* 2% J* ~ E- -9 14 ~EÂ« 2 -E * 9 -g ~t,Â·414 3 -- j-~,~~â€ž ....fi li 1 - . (0 m % 1 9 0 c Q = o Â£ U '-2 f u - _ ..2 M Z M . ga 20 8 6 - ~O ip.C' 0CUM 4-J Q. .8 9~MEQ'' 9.'t i !1! Â· u d & a f '12 5 -2 E P A : = 0 8 2 2 % 6 3 ES co C O e -1 ([3 -' r M , '~ M - t -0 C 0 %4 - .1 - 1 1 1. '. u 31 5 GS 8 73 C .t 0 2 bo Â·42 f 4 w 4, .1 0 . f' 1:N !1 D 60 73 14 ti c .4 U) 2 t .7 5 ~ ~4 AR 3 U 4 .&.110.'!%,41.4- m C o rd as .2 1% O h.4 9 f *Â¢ .t: Â·EF#*b i U.1 Se Â¤ Â·42 R# 1 60 - U 4 2 12 44 re A ..0 1 Ep> 1 2 M f 0 2 21 2 .8 0 2 M E * 4. i Â·]i g}iÂ· j ; C DC 0 EEPEas i Â·: '4,4.i t i.1 ., c ; $ :33: Fl *52 3 16/14 4 e 0 0 9% h--e:*....F.}71: 1 -Â·:3 - -I. Â· D. 1 1.1 0, : 0{Â·illiNG '14] % 44 râ€¢.Â· Â· fÂ·Â·â€¢ . 8 1 M 1.3 2 4 0 t~ ~~ b 8 ..4 4-4,13 1 a 1 Â·A W 2 % 2 4/ .0 E j f E Â· f .':4'tE M k E tv .3 ~& er .~148uet / 3 14 * C t /4 guSCUR;1~ $ 4 0 Er:O W tb 8 * E * 6 61 < 2 3 -i g .2 4.Â· Â·m '".NtÂ· ~'iÂ·Â·- i H31!nS 1391IM 1.1 1/ 9 G r Q -.4 i Q: *r- 33 a -~ . a UD 1 442 33 . 'tilk 11~ a.) > u >,2 8 9 71 0 0 C ,-1 24 !10./L 1.~1 1 7 21 m 40 KE 1 Â·M -9 8 2 .0 C U , 1 Gllift 1 .9 N .2 N 4 C 04 0 2. 1 2 1 '9 N O 0 d it 4% E 8 13 â‚¬-EM 800 HIt. B * ./ilp* 91 bo -3 E E ZO * U 2 Â·01 > 0 @63 Â¤ 16 T Z P 4 -14 1 m f -2 i .-1 -G -1 51 12â‚¬ f 2 N .=e 2 1 M -5 M E ;01" '11.*4.~?. J Â·050 a. a, O 3 6 -3 92 Â¤ 9 23 & FAS . M.:61, 1 CD 4 A Zi.s m* =461 .2,4.'Flihow/*L .Â¢ 4 0 C= & 4 4125 3% . Am bo Â·43 0 C . C E 0.6 2 -* 2-9 -am . ~ --6 2,~ 0* 45 0 -35 2 1 E 2 -9 ,(C UD U ..i.: A L.i; 4-+N'- J/J"L .01"rj .F=:t 4 1 96 - 0 M %3 --- .- . - 4,4.* iN//91/'TF -4 0 0 1 26 p > r -2 8 -& :2 % t =93 ENRE .r--4 0 50= 9 m A = it O ui i .-m 0 0 0 v t 4 2 Â·99 - E + >52.48 Â¢14.-C E 23 2= cE .0 0.6.6 c,0 'E Â·6 3 Â® 09 ~ 'f - 4 Nre =4 111#/- m Z 4 8 R:% 2 e - 12 6 -O C OlD 4 E CE 9 Â·= W E Um 9 8-5 â‚¬.2 <,6 T % 2% C.) a.) S > C H al) 04 4 Et C 2 r national bird, Se'[13>100 from unsusta agriculture can disrupt the and ecotourism are pro tinction in Excessive chemicals, nutrients, and sediments â€¢ Increasingly ng leases, bird watching, recovered ajor Threats and enforcement of regulations, have enabled Reasons for Hop water and other environmental benefits, and A S 3.Loa nor-I oju! isa.iv~ papupdxa nservation and pesticides. Mo elization, construction of levees, dikes, and removed from 1 Energy have contrib cormo uPI[V alR Suore quou 041 aSIaA/1 padIaq suoguInfoi [ualuuiDAOB minating critical areas needed by wetland birds. e md purchases can be st secure form of etlands conservation. Wi more than 96 mil- pue ueDIJOWV Ulleâ€ž1 Â·aouepunqu Xaid pue 'sautfununuoj owners to ma in 01 UORepun J PHOS e apIAN for the winter. C n ystem is our na ppe ul .PPBUBD 41 '611~nO,Ip 'SlUiO}6 010111 pUP Sainle adjacent orasslandsforl~f rsip~duaionthreab oughts and their no )ns acres ids birds. Poloq DIple UIO,9 luÂ·BId 'KNOIolpA u! saBupip aIquIC)!Paidun asneo v wioN a se qon Suo!*n'OS function of w dramatically reducing clean economic opportunitie pacts of floods and drought on wetland birds depositing of fill, and unsustainable for- ens the nesting h tat of se ecies and 41 -16dwal U 'JJIIPI!*~ 13410 pUB SpI!q Su!}003 exacerbated by degradation from stream Global climate change will de wetlands, af- Ingssaoins 103 ImIA JIB San Julpal JUJUIONBUBUI *Slue.dold JAI}UaDUT lauAtopuBI -njoi pUB SDAquaout uo paseq saI)!Iod /Aneao o UIBISOid aAI,SON spuellaM 341 SE tpns 'UOFWI other birds in the Prairie Poth Sliqua UOI}12/npa 0{Iqnd proidsapiAA Â· I 34 ! SUIrels spuptlaM Jo ssoI iculture sturbance saorpeld insa Rising corn prices noqu uo!}eonpa Su! 0 (A ; C 4 -d C n ./ 2 . Q} ..Â£22 - r--, co (C biD O 3 p. -1 us * d .~ 4 0 '0 24 N 610 [/D m w 0.92 O 2 N CO - u.0613 :B f M -4 0 S .-c, 'tÂ·i .M CO 60 (10) R.4 . 4 1S63 0Â¤#boG EL M (24 2 0 2 0 8 3 0% .2 0, , P =C UJ k D-,4-; -0 UD r r.=508 8 2 6-2 C 99 E t- cubo 1- # C' L. 6 C P 80 8 re 1d g n6 e R. ~M AM 05 $ CO . 3 H 3 '0 0 -Â·03 00(Dra #w Cum M rgb U . 6-~ O 9 9 .... C E. CO 4- - e bo (0 60 , W EE * B a 1 6 t ais c ~4 U.1 -0 Z 0 - toÂ¢ e â‚¬ f 71 5,2 E. 0 92 2 1 'C r~ = 0 - m 0 6 I ~ oj u r- C~ u p (5 ~w .*~ .~, â€ž* C~ "5 -. CD C M rs .4 %5.F E O A B -~ i~1 -2 1 5 2 3 1 2 d./ 2 3 .. . Â®3 =e O â€ž Â·p a H o tb E 22 C ~6 # 2 4 I u~ 21 CD 4~ Â° Â·Â·6 0 E .E :i g & 2% ./ c cu (18 8 E .8 1 bo M ed co 3 8 '9.23 H f - 4 t< E â‚¬ ? 1 E *-,w ~~~ Â¤ % b 0 0 â‚¬ 0 4 3 21 E - 000 O U 2 83 ..4 ap 073 g Â·Â·~huj 12#il ffe##, t ER Z E ..8 0 4 4 Â¢ - 0 0 9 44 ce = 2 ed >bo 8*aâ‚¬08 0 PL+ 2 edo 9 u 2 -3 92 <t 1 2 4 mis Ll E . 0 CO M = 018 2 E -2 20 8 .1 8 16 m 0%08 0 3 re C W t +1 C (0 4 0 0 ,-r -0 ; RE 6 2 -2 7 U -=E! 2 5 ir 2 1 - 52 & & 4 4 = s -2 .E % M F K -g J .6 2 0 8.5 4 &) e AU O A 0, 4 -0 al' a.,1 Et #E = 2 & 8 2 E 4 (1) 00 u; 2 O M O Â® 0 O bo t .O 0,4 1 4 efluello elieweoied i i #m & 9 4 * 3 Z 2 1 0 0 2 0 N p M E 1-. .... 3 20.% LO * 11 0 , L. ... g b 2 9 Â£ i f L 3 f . I. M . E 0 O C 4.4.-1 . 1 1. .1,1 . A.. :* . 0 9 - =*241 1,Ef 9 Mis ~me~~i m ~~ 2 --Eb .1,.% 22 ... P '7(1)- J 8 1â‚¬ .6 46 U .2 13 N A % P . 0 O - EYE R 3 1 3 9 U cgg U A les 12 . u Ei~ 0 2 2 4 4 A .ir'. ' EU Â·E Z* R E , 0 6.1 4 X -,1 t 9 2 3 5 -2 -0 M 4,44 82 UE O t 0 t 01 k ... -. Â·]NeÂ· Â¤ 3 -i- CD 1 4 j t &3 --m 16 24% 4 mi > bo - I , m.=31 AN ,# Ii"/0 provi ded more than $700 mi lio Federal cled Eider, of conservation concern (Emperor Goose and dropped to Sa 30IA.ID xoq-1.sau 01 IIalv~ papuodsm onc] POOM LOOF , EpOZ 8661 8861 8~6L EL61 8961 2 are listed as federally threatened and 2 are ent con tinued ch illen es for wat 4 Osaas SUBS 1 190 'sanu Ott faSUP.I .Halp .,eeA Among 44 species of ducks, geese, and swans, declines of Northern Pint H and _e Stamps"), purchased prima ly Birds in t as well mon 3,8 lIt %00Z U le 3.IOUI Xq paspallu! *LIBLUOSEUEUI Jo'00!pul IMOpejeAA AA UEN@UI 0$00 S,SSOM 3612310 alp 10; S 'SJUIpap Buqqnan Uppealq 000'88I dividuals i America has ensured a sustainable population of conserve and restore wetland habitats for the ben- more than wan). Th e waterfowl indicator, based mi lion in The rich tradition of wat ing, collaboration, and persistence, we can acres of wetlands and associated upland ment efforts. Many ducks, such as Mallard, wall, Wood Duck, and Redhead, show stable waterfowl across the continent. Federal Migratory th wildlife and future generations. State of Our Nation's WCA par species, has increased stea over 11ars and have conser pa-~40 years, reflecting th e success o an- terfowl habitat conserva erica ncreasing popula and most arctic-nesting i Jo suoul?Indod painpaquION ~4IED!112 *913UKS L OL[ Sia#O pue Saff ves as an example for ot se, as well as Tru r Swans, have e Â¤23212512It~Cl ulal{NON 'dneos Iessal XIqulou 'suoREIndod>p mofs oi anuquoo 's>pnpeas IE.IJAas pue 1!El (salia[Is pawn,160 IMOpaleM - p IJA/toi 041 III asaaD UpeueD 1 Conservation Partn ps Produce Results! ~~ 966[ u. ~ ,~ 896 l u ~, n~ _OOL- conservati n. merican ands Con- Spotlight on W Bird Hunting and Conservation ership among Cana al wetlands. In . 0%.B .0 22 %212 - C. U-1 W -Â·-***M-4 M*1-* 4 EE& 0 1 f E â‚¬ -5 --% --W * 3 -E 5 5 a. - Â·Â· -- u, -~ c~ 1= m E a 1- - a> O # r . E S GE V 6 -E g m (0 W 4 0 4 -0 . M m M& .. W 2.3 2 & 11:E R 01) 0 CO rÂ¢ 4 .943kul (3(0 (Disco 4 *ed,,. -M.i.,4.af ~J~~f~*~00'~.. (D o 0 D-{ U) Etlith . .2 , 2 ~râ€¢Â·: - 1 2 ES@SE - r A (1) U) 0 7 -C 60 Â·0 # V 'E 2 4- .; 4..E, .1441 Ar 1.- - y P 04 13 6 9 01 002.2Â·@m 6/3 - ' *./.' ..F 00) 4= k $ 0 0 k H 4 - uÂ·j ,:it: 'Â·-Â·.:-Â·i::;~49(r.*uy,E .:itÂ£Â·.njir- -':19~4Â¥N5,Z'Â·9'4~ Â«*EMEO E#1 4)2 *i ~i -~~.;~:J~~7~244:*,~i',I,&1. 4.3,. r 1.--,m,~ +1 E .9 U)"lu . .,1 A e CXi , r. Â·-16. r.'.0. ,- .2 *Â»â‚¬ E f EN F i CL) 8 4 E C E A jiluj S .14. L .4 -p Ktztle - f 11 < E .E (10 60 CO (072 - I YEE D 7 3 ca M '1 11, - f U. 5 ./ 0 -/ ,-C 4 2 co Z A .,_, t '4 P.~ 0 (10 0.99 Ul U . p â‚¬4 0 -C U %Â¢3.N 9 9, un Qj 4~ - . 45 f 4 u 5 . 2 -= ~.I~.Ill-& 0 - â‚¬it?41 9 . -0 0 9 0 511 C - 6 2 .... g CU , 2 (1) 4 4 1 8 70 r ./ = E -0 Ul 4 Â· .6 3 9615 f. O W O ly A 2 -2 1 1 4 t (D C rs C CS CD 4 3 E bot C $*CUD 0 23=5 0 U] re .Â¤ . 6 - E 3 it 0 Po t; 22 4 ./ 0 M. 9 24Â· r.ct-0 = 5 0 ET = 3 2%8Â·%3 e .0 0 -. m - u] 4 00% - co -01 co M m rs m CE O u a. D o 2 0 Q -, 11 cn a m -M 5 -E M .E 2-h & fa rd 1- â€žC L Ul hÂ£5 e y .O 20 â‚¬ 4 3 3 & 4 -E - 1 - at) \ - #O r 23;~E K 7; 0 + t 9 ..5 2 - O - O 12 k 40 E 583 M C.1.- - 1= 6 1 U r[3 60 e 9 6 * . m ~= dift*â‚¬ % 73~01 2 - . m ..6 (13 . .6 0 . 2 A e :15 3 :3 1 - i i â‚¬ * . Ill .I: 22 :aE ; le 10 % 1 6 0.20 4 1 Â»U 34 1 r Z E A m E Â® c a E 1 $ 2 boj f 4 m 0. 0 0-~ G.) a, 6- U) 0 7 CO i 0 5 9 5 bb o L U, 0 0 2 es w cE 22 * i Â® 1 g ? El l j â€žt & i J In =-u =920% 9- k # 7 E .0.9 L A e X e rs UOUUÂ»uu: .0 A Â¤'OM 06ue40 @Bejuao.,ed freshwater wetland in the United St tes; recent sp~iq lo slaqulnu ght On Birds in Trouble Everglades National Park protects the largest represent on f s conser angered or threatened well to conservation fforts, r eac i gap pi idwest and Southeast have uffe 1 t pr i e ts to restore the greater Ev shown population declines th tae probably many wading birds Marshes respond qu species % are species eral wetlands and have maintained stable range- a mecca for wate bi s, a Florida and Swe restoration projec servation concern inc wid s over the past 40 years. ers and i e Marsh-nesting birds of Midwest prairies, such 1, Franklin's Guii, Clapper Rail, a Black Tern Federally listed as endangered: Snail Kite. Horned, Eared, and Clark's Greb Cinnarnon ars species, su ch as Pied-billed d to loss and degr adation of wet nds ern mars h speciali Grebe, L rginia Rail, and Common Moorhen can take advantage of small or ephem- rsh-nesting birds w aql loagal Xple.In.DOW lou KFUI 101 LOOZ , Â£002 8661 E66L 8861 8861 BL61 EL61 cies, including water marshes for ble or incre lations over asl~21~~,IlluslyJ;12~02:GaljlkÂ»-Clozl t erns ils, depend on Jojeolpul spi!8 4sieuu iq 46.reUI alp 'Blep .suogpIndod asatp IOJ '06612 1noqu IBUn JUIpa 316 12 SM C LE) Ilge'At - ol Uniwfp XISnOLIolOU Die Sp .leaA Elli. DAi-ION 0 2., 2 -w (D UD ,- 4 2 W (D 0 1 11 7 34 a # 3 6 E O 1 Eli. re .2 9 25 1 - A-1% 3 2 4 4 2 uj ~ E m. i 4 2 9 2 011 -0 -- A - iE . E t. . CD . 9? 4 ,-I/~ 1 f cp -ES i 2 7.M IMIC 2 2 -M M -2 --EX# E -9 CIO . %1 0 9 25 4 CO M .*'-1 % al .9 bo % 3 '5 I E .i.,0 W P 6 a.7 59 Ul U Â¥Q/. .*96 -'* j ~L. E CS E .0 CP L i 1 2 Cu Q.) (% 2 (C O ,, o e Â¢=Mcip M LE Q E F C (101 .O c O .M rs 64 0 > -0.- PEaaE S CL -M .r-f CD 8 z 2 C - ... a U rd 7 C â‚¬ 1- C & 502 04.0 A g .2 9 2 2 0-2 2-920 0 . R 00 +1 (S E 50 73 030% St 2&2 I~ 4 0 h. >40 2 1 32 U) u w CD LUE Ard I 4-1 3 C -0 . CD 0 0 O .0 CS E roo A -2 & -0 9 g) CO- 00 C G - 2% - 00 73Â·%3 2 73 00 30 - 0 U 0 C 0-~ 64 K 0 -- + C w h - O 0 - a) 6.- 1- 0 44 60 J 0- -9)>co -,--0 O,ga,coÂ¥=5 2 9.2 E m U E c -5 -% 0 0 E 3 -ad 1 4 0 % T 22 0 = 4 r.> E o.C E SCO 5 *9 4222 58~& w ,(b E tty it n. CD c CD o .= 2 0 w co .2 E m A- m -23 --E R. -% c.r< m .0 . MD -2- 3 4 es g W 9 -ID lo t = - LL O X --U-v fr W #Lu# * $ e 1 0 r- 0 f /2/% C} h - = U W= BAÂ©36 167 0 3.4 PE B 4 4 4 e pot N '11 -4 1-4 un (11) CD 3 .h LE MME -= ,2 :62 4 2 G .M b E m SCU)>= *m 4.6 2 99 2 At :Â¤ 0 = P rs Â¥ .173 = W t ~ M 0 8.Q :Ew u M ~ - 4 6 t = C 3 % 1 4221%56 â‚¬ a C Z m .M E 0 8 91 A C w r uj To â‚¬ 0 1 0 M 8 Lg m .5 0 - E - : 3 t..2 4 0 1 4 I 11 (6 lC -* , u E 8 1% Â·2 2 3 96=> - 3&00-gs a,1 =' 1 1 Z m 292 U Â® 2 N. 4 -13 UJ ..m t: 0 0 Â£ - 41 A W r--1 Uj ~ h4 ~C) 0 4/ Of) ~M . .2 ./.ek 0 9 ,% C , 'â‚¬ ~-~ it ~ #im ~Aer cu ~ 2 5% U) 0 0 2 7 Wk Â° 5,2 to= Â® 2 -#U 0* 24 v *AME .1= -= ' C k. 9 7 U K = 01 0 0 ee *â‚¬ M o SeRÂ°#9 #- U W to .64 e . F-O%8 824% 8.6 4 8 8 0,104 86uelo jues,ed .~ e U U c 2 CO -3-2 A - co d E mut*lt uiti . N E 3.6 0= O cl- 74 m :8 " i M - rn J * , 1 10.m* -2 .9 :Â·t= a) a) a) o CJ) 0 0 0) U) 4 9 0 0 C JO 73 >Z ji & :th, -C co 3 0- --p 2 0 a 3 1 4 -0 Q = U) U) E D .1.-7 Sco E E Â· i % M 15 2 vt, .0.27 '* : C CO X o m ca) c 0 .t.6 9 0 8 L 0 6 * 0- D (D Â· 5 CD (U - I n .. b8Â§&15 co OC) .% c> 62% .. .- y R g u) ..tz g P :% 2 -2 -8 kE 0 c f f -Â¥r . - 0 0122 -*-8 85-8 3% Qi 0 E -c i , . : ULgE 2%-600% gE m 00 0 0 0 I r DR 44/.- O 4%237 32222 82 5 O +U) . r} 0 C CD - 2 e {fu) CO (0 8 -2 1 -c _c > CO g Â· a W t:Â· ac U) ., -2= -,4 6. - 29, Â» 0 Â¥ NAA 1[2[2[ZID LIMOLIS OS[e DABq LI!1una ue 'Ou!1-lepues 'led!d i Op }Sed DtplaAO 9Z xq Paupa ouble Jo auo IINS 3,Ip se-J.In -pu' 2 31 ulledililes '06ZE UrlU.Il?IE Ul? Xq paln~0 amls '6131002 3.toqsimu leddelo levels that affect f ats continue to tems, and other be sloul pak Jo suoul?Indod [seoo }spE[ Â® 'SM.O.Ileds pups 00 u! X uo punoi a,IP '20 13UIÂ¥ 41-ION UIalse U.IalpION 3111 UI SplIqUaS 11}SIp 'Offul?lp hierable t Jo suoquIndod UOI}Upe.ISap p seoo u! spue -Sau-[pop DI}BUIE.Ip lul,punqu .l# SlullqVY uced nest pr Aojeoi ul 1]48 leiseoo Year Â£661 8861 Â£861 8Â£61 EL6[ 8961 includi g more than threatened. Fourteen of tw the past 40 years, to 1 UWAA 62 1{inS 'Sla Idpues 13 s paguandu,1-Allop,11 - Â©[3310 pUD S.Wail ..1.91 ;3.58IF#q"/- ~A rebirds, ssel Adnooo seeie Ielseoo 46now t a large proportion of our o Aq pesneo u eeoo bul U.13 extremely 1 coastal ref g Bulsno4 e Bu!05uo Jo esneoeq 66 '7 ~ .%... .r.....~..14.4.>.3?E.- 5.7 Â· Â·Â· 9Â· I -Lk:~ta J L.-: /,4..:F' UL Â· ..i:..5.... ..241:.C.*Zmip ' 2~FiÂ·-Ci-Â·I CD C Sup ' ... . C= 114?-e-=-'---i~ . 2 0% 5 E.4 ra Â· 8 49 0 06 8 ~'I>.*.3.i'*-494Â¢F 33'. -- C.Â·f BER 7 2 8% SE E . u.w CD - . 33* Â· .' Â· 4 1- 14 CO W LO H 0-4 0 Cp .i. .EL r 4. , 0 Â·Â· - ..1 . 7.;* 90 1â‚¬:1 '.4. 7/ r-0 Kru EMS! ES ._ 12#1 1 bo O C L) C 0 U .%.0 0 CO A GO 0 2-1 0 4-1 . e /0 co C - 4 .' u 9 21 58 St EI e 0 4 3 102 E 0 .-I.--I.-4 E-- C 8 0- A 0 5 PO .% E G Â£ U 4 - rs cru c .W-2 '~439 . 0%33 LE : 4 4 69% * C 4/8,/1. (13 +J - C Ul ..8 . C D 4.M C u -N-S,1-#l~~0 1-ER.,r- i '*t - / A H Â¤ u = UD G.) C ~ U A - .C 7 3 D OD ~ i~ 0 2 9 E .E B 2 3 2 ._91/0/31:9:OFEE,illi"NIT im I. jw 2 i M,0 â€ž LO Ct t .4 U d.il --Â§ â€ž3,0 m m U b 3 E boo .0 , CIr'J , -/"Tjj,Jg~ .24."f= *1/irl-..1/F' 1.4 2421,@HomENE t; 2 M .2 0 0 Â£ 61 U W $-1 . -111#414 r 1 1411'11 1 ~ =Ad#+ZOR<.6,5* :t'h HIA115>~ I[Nvf 4 1 a.) t E â‚¬ E=N <S C 0 [10 K bo i U 03 '44; , m 4 1 (n U .W 06 % 49 - Â® E .9 Â«* = 3 U ./9 Â«?: CO CE Â·3 2 d.h 1 54. .E E .M 4 p 18 20 - ,-1 fc = 4 % al r.0 + o A E Z 4 3 * U) . -0 cE 0 8 E 42 -2.92 -29 uj 4 cio W 2 8 Z = Ec 4 3 E â‚¬ 6 -6 -2 e - C %0 8 P 60 Â¢ ut C ... 8323 A CS CD tb; Et -0 -9 M 0 3 tâ‚¬g cli =14 rs i 21Â¤ C 3 2 H 4 -Â£ E pet *i8 Horsrs 0-1 CL 00 0 6 4 4 bt Z 844.9 E -up ym CO ON 8 -E E 0% e .2 0 u I ,3 â€žC C .. bo= cio 994 E W J = 0 = 50. 2 -9. 3.9 % f 1- 9 22 2 U) A OJ o 18 cE E . a % 45 4 a. 4 -0 8 2 2.5 A bt o., co cs -4_ _ 9 -1 11 4 1 1% f -% 1 u Oh W .0 3 A '-1 (6 1 2 2 3.0 Â¢ 4 0 50 t .2 0 4 2 9 Mts e * P.> 0 - lEe E g 9 4 Â·:2 24 0, C 0 X . EVE,46&41 8.8 0 8 6 13 0 ki~ .g E E *E 8 u .6 -5 4 k 8 6 E 9 4 3, a 1 2 0 M * 2 6 U cuo u 044-0'ZR 0Â»4 0 ce 1990, under 'LIZE.I million *21<3 JE A H.11>:Al>I An MOZINV.16 anlIV.1-43Â¥146 1-ISMVIFLInvs water control, boat traffic, and a changing lands. Resource Use rnent benefi ng people an wildlife. habitat mana onversion o m arsh to open water from dredg- damage from invasive species ee pa Town Pelican acres of coasta w Major Threats Global climate change causes sea level rise, Reasons for Hope es of many shorebird sp shore, with private or public ownershi.p an nterin 63{DUa-02 960102 6 ccessf PUPUI reat that occurred m 1 Coastal Activi ies Im hese recreational uses often shore i suffer from some threats increased storm surge events, changes in marsh Nearly half of the U.S. population lives and works for some b d In the Southeast rising sea levels 180 million e e visit the shore for recre- nesting on beaches and near- of birds and other wildlife. as 1Sla irds, including predation a habitat Â·.2./ shoe crab eggs for food. Overharvesting of horse- ict sprawling dev ent and create green- along n seashore â€¢ Incentives can be developed to create seaside Ipuoqualuturt luog papaloid aq ueD sa}Is }saN â€¢ 9 16@A124.IaAO JUaADI IUM Supqsg aIqeutelsns * Sulpnput 'Spliq 103 .InOS pOOJ luegodlut Jo benchmarks for "possible or probable year in Canada, Mexico, Central and 2 Pu~~~1%' :2r'eqp'tr~2 ssens 63.InSPOUI .IaLBO p SU! OuaJ Xq alueq,IrlisIP wed puads c[ IP}SPOD S.UORPU illo JO XUBIAI sILIBUIUIE}UOD aIOUI 10 OUO peg 6 9 041 u! @H U.IalsaAA IBUOUUU.Ia}U! 041 '20IlaUIV inu sgox Impnbe S.Iat/AP.Ill aouels{P-SUOI asalp JO UOUWAIa Bulle.16!ul Aiie seoo lie,o TJ;Â°qs 9 I pul?L[S{UI pUE 'SaUISUO pleoq}nO coastal areas, with resident populations expect- in the next century are expected to flood 30% of Red Knots and other shorebirds depend on horse- ighboring comm can cooperate to re- or state incentives can enc urage coa pue 'eoueqinjsip 'weludoleAep Aq .613IalinIN POIclÂ·IBIN pur SaimphI UOUI is believed to be a principal preserves such as the Cape Cod N as loons, grebes, ga ucks, local, state, or federal management. 01 IP}IA 6! >I.IOKJaN JA.[3SaZI Pliqololis 3134 .seliddns poo, BullpufAAp oe crabs during the past s reduced the ways and natural areas. ep.log .Ino puoAeg -sa Jo JIBLI }noqu U! sluaunpas *00Â£ 01 866I 'squ/0 004665104 climate have coastal habitat loss 0 f fish 10 Bale alp UIOI; JAO 04 uognnod puoiqi se HAM 612 'SII um products, kill untold numbers of 10 9ufulpap 01 pa)~U!I aq ueo pue spi!q I -uIOD su i{Dns Spitq JO suo{11?Indod It?JOI Passaidap sh-eating birds. @Bue40 aleul I o pue uo Unllod Development stributi nd changes in the food resources eral Coastal to increase by 25 million people by 2015. More ha Wildlife Re n grants have ieen di BRIAN L SUL!-1\'AN 23.-2 '. --2.kiE3*~ Â·jr: c 0 U 0 .2 - 1 0 21 f Ar - ~-Â·.b' & . 0 S . C .- I 0 . co=lau c Y Ed . $ e m M 0 01) Â·i . a) -52 Q- 5 - -c , I 03 bo Ec 4 3 'r . .SM,3 C e b -0 01 I 4 0 7= C 00 1 .2 2 4 . .. 6- L Z C C CO -g -2- % 3 3 -- + 3 2% 3 2 5 4 4 9 :* 1~ g 51 .-0.5 .. 29 2 6 ~A~ -p (0 0 2 tf Q) D 8 6 3 0 0 4 .. 9 0 026 5 . 4 - U ...1 . 6 92 .. rO=u) . - Hot a EE E - E Â·Â·ci .Q tb D reep.CE o 297 0 5 le - - -0 I .. e ti; TO & #E 3.6 -35 2 1 9 -2 1 1% E U U m.0 8 3 Â£ 2 1,1 .19@=- . 6 E 0 3 0 1 .- A 3 111 Llt#!42,4 u' ~i~ ~ - E 6 3% P f.-9 0 8 E bt ar ui Â· ,E M & 1 4 4 0 03 t W A A - h A d e 0 .0 U C CL) ~=Ef ~#~ #0 ~ - Â·Â· C 0 re m I = -2 * â‚¬ S 84 -- = =E ta , .U Ch - E-2 UD > TE 1 7 & 1 .. .3 *' Â·0- . : 1 +7 21% " 0 -* 4 2 E .131 1 1 1 ( E -~ 1 -1 ~ 1~ *f-7- i 11/ 0/ 0 2 M A Q X 44 Wk2Eg Aiofiejeo u! f ~ % .li '9 -2 E E 1=2 -2 -M G E-2 -E IM /8-* MErcut ,-Â· 22~0 2- (C N sepeds Jo efiejueoied . & 4 Â£ 2 O Â£ 2 -C b : t WL - I I. 0.. 144 - - - 2 Â£ 4 -2 3 i J 0 4/ _s Â£ ~ e S -2 2 4 9 3*mag 3*EN H 0 0-0.2 gul* ..-- - 6 y 45 1% E 2 -02 2 83 16 41% E -0 n ..i CD '- :. 1 . I U) . -2 kil 1- - r- A H 54= m 0 , = . 0 = 4 'ecu B = -t cO) f :a E 1, CO ,- L O 0 O L~ - 0 . 4 2 k & G L E -%&8 f g 3.6 3 I 0 Â· 8 4 82 4 62 ~.E 8Btl* 3& 9 2 *Â·- -, . . Q u - S 1 NVAillns *1 NVINg 11 1 --1.11 BLACK-FOOTED ALBATROSS BY BRIAN L. SULLIVA\ half are of Federally lis ant source of many natio increasingly b h spec es of high servation concern. -49aus# 112 6-483.Iqi GOD el!,IPI!AA pue sueeoo ino io 4 -13UInA SI }I 'sual-e SUISPI UI .BruioJITED -2 6 'S'f-1 U.Ia[6123 341 JJo saspio; pUE ZIe~~C[~I~~ 12(29 pue etui03!Iej U.IaqU'LOS U SDIUO 03 SUI sse-jopopieuliesq~6,~~0'~dq~~o pup 'sionpo.Id Una[O,I}ad SJUI?UIUIEJUOD 01 JIC[P .uollnlod pue 'Aid 'SUISE.IOJ DII palalunooua 60!161?Id UMOUMUn al, . #.1~~-:: Birds in Trou tion's marine waters, spending their conce feder- danger es at sea and returning to islands gered o Based on Al atross of data sets and expert e c a fisherie 02 Daddeo-7 2 01 S}123.Iqi Â·IO AZIS 'SeJnleiedwel ue@00 6uisu . icator siI~r Â°3 ti~23tt's ~0 32~ arine w lieved to be fficient data , SMODU2 munH '61 8 34 241 palo D Sul'{ Al}aBOD pecies in U.S. to determin ved monitoring is Aq peJelle senddns poo; pue ' least 81 bird species inhabit our and coasts to nest. Shear *,0. .... 0 . . SUZ;300 .tno Vi -- . -2.1~//1 14- 4. 1 -4 :44'45:1-'0%.,t -3//v-: #1/WL -/ . , f -1.*~k , LI- , Â·LI MA.....!1 4.. . 2 '2 '&Â· .aL..... Â· = r f , , -â€¢Ke> , .vi Â·1 .62/"*m. jo : M- 1 1 W . 1,4. 1 "*WE~""34 '4.4--9Â·'~.'-_ . 4, 6,43. 0:1 -0. Â· Â· ... ..UE - , 2 4.0 1 1 :S t,1 .94/, C -*.. -, 1t. -' U 6/â€¢ Â· Â· ,, - Ib ' C ..C.1,@*i. 1..1 4 . l. Jt.:. . i C~ ..s,7, Â·,4* , ~ 1/ . I n QU---,0 7, - , 0 - . ..... - fr'Vi '1 . 2 "114*31 //F 2.7- t.1.1 , i . - 4 1. 1 S .4,11~* 5 0 : 1 9 . 0 1. 1 1 -% E - I _ Li tftl" it: a14'Ou; CE, T Q CoL)-8 5 450 -A 2 Ec , "~ V bo 2 6 'Ug 9 411 f 1 .* c .* 0 0 C 4.- = A-0 U 1-1 a~Etu =E 4*. % 2-4 &6 BWEE i m. Clo 71 -0 2 1&4 <S -9-2 Sbt Z -- I. 4-1 . 0 fit 2 -5 E #C Qul E LE-2 CE .92 02 -03.20 0 4 -3..': 4,12 14.- 4. ~LB-- 7" ACCE V H m e 8.8 k Â® PE 0 1 =1 . a.--0 2 - o ,-. M % +Cou 3 i- ea E~ Ock /f 9, cs 21 0 2 4- li.. Â¢ 9: - rs C UD g O 1 Â· 3 2 C i E-~ m . 02 C ; 4 ' /1446 [,0 * y; NVMT[fls 1 NVIHg 1 = = =0 V d g E .5.2 0.-C-- ui 0 2 - 1 4 4 Lig 4 *E% A E Â¥ #bll F C Ul rS re ~ 991' 8 4 +INE E â‚¬ boA 43 22 .E E -0 2 842 E 0 E rs A 4 r'S 9 E m -- 54 0,Â¢ es M .,15 :E â€ž0 % 81 'Â·,2 i U) 4 0 - = Â¢ 2 M A.* "0 0 - m 60 A ~ kd = (S > 3.-0 E T w w A -s 3 4 f 0 =02 4.6 0 0 46:6.6 Al m - U 0.1 x u.- 4 0% twoâ€žO 2 E- 4 â€¢ Fisheries laws provide rm to ensure a : sustainable ocean envir and can includ â€¢ Coordinated, regionwide programs are needed qZ)-1202~q aZILUIUIUI O ocean health and help develop more effec ve jo sgoads v 'ssollvqly Paloof-:Pulg ALL . 04 suinw pul; 103/i 31Â£4 fo isoul . 4 paaiq 01 sput,~61 3101,U31 Seal ap lue igi *S,Ia}UIAA laULI eM UT OAJA.InS 1241 SaseasIp pue sisod -IOUI plIC[ U2300 UI 660.11Dqlv uusfurl KIquqold saurpap uoupindod laIa.unIN s,zlqllIN u. saITUI alenbs 1952Â£Â£ Jouotpajoid luaoal alu UeaJO 'aAOqu Pa}OU 612/141 341 01 UOR! JJIT UED:)O 131{10 pue SpI.q se IIJAi SU DIdood (91 pue ZE sofied aas) asu IJAOI was 41.loN alll S.1,3pliVOT '11,120UOJ) UOtlVlt ery policy ecosystem mana humans reduces and alters the duce bycatch o ie fisheries wor W ninte n te conserv tion and allocatio y bird species, espe- such set a standard erative man to collect assess, an d distribute data et assess the status of seabird populati t to their chicks. Ninety percent of Laysan food base are essential to measu auaq sueabo ino JO 41[004 041 3Aoidw! ue 'sopads aA{seAUT 'aoueqimstp luaUI jor Threats Solutions plastic debris in their stoma conservation actions. the Conserv pup 'uesAe-I 'peloop>loe#El Ximqu ,Iralp Bu!}2'age '9ur}IOUI IFPEIS pUP [UaUIUO.I UaUInUO]h[ Il?Uot}EN au!iuw inoi Buipnpul SpunoiS SUBSJ u 1!341 uo sajuaIIetp aje seabirds. may * Increased monitoring of ocean 'SSOJj 'Sassoill?qIP su 42>ns spliquas Nutpaal-20 ueaoo loJ saoinos poo; lue}lodun Bulpag all spills and chro releases from Albatrosses surveyed on the Haw ian Islands s,PIJOK 044 SSOLDP SUISEGIDIII anuquoo orts also cause sign ficant harm. atures have risen up to 4 t in the North Sea and are U.Ial{JIOU UI Spl{41?DS JUIOS Jo 63,InI!1?J SUIpaaig paseaDU! 0-1 wed u! Palnquile uaaq aAPLI sapnmel -!AUD J{Uea)0 01{1 UI Sajuelp IBE)!I/XE~ UIO.g :[Insal rds consume floating plastic an . Major oil spil ource Use esticides, herbicides, hea 1 ate Change S S t. r 1-1 - - # -6 *p: I ~ *C. 9' .'' 8 N ed * R 4. 4 0 Jil= ./ EA orgo E M 08 O -O ES .MÂ» E -9 m -2 -9 1 9 U -2 -% E Ch rd d L ':=4&,2.2,*!*, 4 0, (c f A C 41 0 UJ u.} r.=Â·Â· (-0 E bo R Ec - 9 12><39(S 4 * P - d BE . E qu %(C ...29*Â· ~:4.~a ,9 CY . M - C = (C -1.-1 u.) 5 2 4 bo (C U H A-4 -9 4-1 -U Q E E Â¢ E<â€ž39 U; O-0 r Â»34 e10" 1 1 9 /2 1 /1 1 1 E 1.2 3 0 /2 * 1 9 Â» a - - * - . i 0 1.2 0=1 4 9 4613 4 9 2% -5-Â« 2 - 4-~ Â·--1 . ,-I - its U P. m es + -0 C & re -70 iwil.7.-78 G f..i f +1 U e Â·- 0 19 , 1 A bo Cq 0 j, - 5,0 0, C C ~56 (C Â·- U 4,7 4 AHU[3 f 31/Vf ui 9 + m C 01.0 ec 294 bo C U U C 51. 05 i Z E 14 U 6 1 .m E 61 : .,Â·Â·.. & c 1 g J .M 0 V.-/H % 0%3 -1 % 0 # a N .=1 9. 15 73 .: 3 JV 4= 4 % I 4.4 4 3 2-5 a 1 5 4=0 N ./ 1 BE k jb* 4 Et '4 2 10 9 * 2 W â‚¬ 4-1 4 0 +; O . R -2 2 4 m '-6 -=C E a 0 4 80 k 81 3 Mz a M bo Â·'CS 2Â£1 Â¢ 0.29 I as r Â·E N CLY k m - = Clj M (101 Â¢ . g & &6 E.:E tl 1 2 1.8 1~ '.2 -5 ~ C u es 2 0 .R; r. .b Â·g 1 42 = ,.C ,6 b ,1.9 76 80 8 C .# <f ~i .E.2 -2 =* 6 -1 31 Ot C :IM3 MH3aNVA DINa O 4 / a = a 1Â¢*42 JACK JEFFREY 1223 3 1 Â£42 E .1 9 0 - Ul Id t 10 M d 2 1 13 4 O 1 -0.91 A Â¤ d 6 Â¢ 5 84 2 E rc ' 21.i , rc q; 14 E .2 % O r = 12 7 R. * e '3 = 5 2 *.6 re U .& E = E . 1 .M k 5 Z M N R. B 9 a DEMNâ‚¬ = dE j 3 3 44 011 1 6 4 2 2 = 4 Mu $ 0 ho ..=Ir--1 ~ E -ap ~g 2 0 M Ie E ~ E 3, 1 %03 -7 1 f #3 3=42% d E k 2 - = B f 2* 4 f a, M 0 E Rt #t 01, : .U) U *.s 417 2 .6 a 0 & 8 1 2 6 0 8 6 2 r- 4 #CD E Ey C , 1 3 i -2 : & f Â·Â·Â·j 2 4 8 1 Â® p e E Â·= 2 c A W w 2 3 11 3 9 4 2 .4 2 E 4.3 Z 2 0 0 - 4-1 0 0 3 f d \1 U 0 t=ro== â‚¬ u] 1=: 01) 6.0 6 .- 3 , 1 m.:1 .5 C 4* M.Ctd=&pc bo W 4.4 0 2 %93 5 2--1 2 9 1-39 1 9 = n he= t co 3 1 t Cul .1 . 5%02 m .. r.,*At 34 A * 2 bo.g * c c c r a 4 0 <-i _ U .E g k..4~ ISO 5 14 & 3%34%13 EMâ‚¬.9 :LE< A v =>,-]Ect â€ž3 'i, 3 NE /4 , 2% Â·E % 0% a 2 N 90 0 1 "[3 4 0.) F t, # 0 E M 14 q.) ... ..L "B Â·/~ ,5 '-p: 2 3 -IE 3 r.- r- â‚¬ .E ?4 4Â£ :Z .:1 4-1 = 0.6 0 0 9 9 8 Â¤ 35 C D v, - P g Z kz :2 ,Im p <r' E E .h: 4 W Â·- - L . Ot C 3 d E C r -0 49 â‚¬ 8 4 E 9 010 r=If ;-1 -0 9 N '18 â‚¬ 5 4 0 N 3! NES -O 9 1 85 -> - , .-,=43 C .' - - 1% 3 2 2 3: 0 2 3 0038 Â£ 2 0 5 4.6 m m 43 TE k n o nfo 4 2 3% .3 1 2 = 63 11 in 1 97, Spotlight on the Birds of the Hawaiian Islands after becoming confused by bright shearwaters often die of exha cars, or are killed by predators. Reasons for Hope dramatic in the Hakalau Forest UOREZIUOIODDI paPTIToo aM?LI 'sapads paualea.Iq} e '5161121\;i as lai. 91 1 L reetier and hods is urgently needed el 'Â° JO OSED.IDUI MUI SUISPUP 6Z6I u s.lied 000'5 Pa}BUIC LIP! lei atens one of the m st in food Refuge, where n in Nearly all native Hawaiian forest birds are declin- disease-carryi mosquitoes, predators, feral cat- from 6,600 ted States. ing, their populations devastated by no den crow nbeard is overwhe d Hawaiian honeycreepers. }Ball[} 313AaS aDEJ '13.Ilad Ul?112*le}-1 pa.IONUepua ue ' apads paonp 0.4 . 134-10 PUB 6120 IFI 2,200 in 2008 may be ses can wreak islands, including the f Kauai have also no.IS uaaq JAuq 10 63.Imoruls pur sautI X:!Inn S,HaMaN 000' Â£ XIateullxoidde Â» it '>01 ./K'/1/1 96 tle and pig 31 more a fed 11 listed as since 197 o nd v 'n ndillnN 'eolri 1}11D N 101UlluM 3.loD-005' L 391 fo s 04 1111331400 11 1111Â·codw? ilsola S,z?DO2RH 47 1 k lO 'vool SU 40115 93.ll 3Â£211 mans arrive ed or endange 4 /43#vuzzxalddz 'llowvzmol Uvul/tlj daal- ohe and Maui Parrotbill. I z_ _ 1 9 ,. 4 bo 4 U h u~ co U 4.4 723 00) 8 2 'EN'dge-YJ/1../......11'll.........9/lill' 39 .% 3 % 40 2 4 .. rd ~ '23 1 9 . 4 O C Â·n E ,.8 9 23 E /0 93 ro 0 .0 4 1 C . 3 0.1 ..0, CS .r-, U 8 4 11 00 2 (t 33 m . 1 *IE..6 92. -Illi g Â£ A C cd .CNE . . Ii..../.il./-/4 1- . CS U - -5 4 . . im z NE Ki Â·a ~/af : 1 Â·11 1 11 ~ Ef 2 :44 d 21 8 34 m E= 4 5.Eg ... ... pi-r=li 0 +1 4 =UO Ki C .2 2 'MC (10 QI) 3E8 O Â¢ un -O to + u: 0 - B :9 -4 -4 0 1 f. a Ce . 4 1 .% M-O 41 2 41-*i 0lia A.E.2 14% mi 241 1 9 4 . 0 94 Z A C 4 EL bu re - f .5 8 7 &-1 4 0 4 .0 (S . Â¢ 0 C CO 0 .0 .- - 0 2 2 4 9 o m a o 3 W bori E H 0 - . . . teÂ¢UAO+ACCM 0 4 11 39 Z 8 21 8 $ e - '11 1, a , f ..,A. - 4, E- 5.-- 2 -5 4 co Â¤ C U) U :2 -O H 0 C m e ed e (0 CL) d, 1.,;lili.1 1 4 . Â£ p E 1 Â·Â·S .1 4 N kb E M k . Z ,; y 1.111.. ... 11 4.-5 Â£ ul Quj-g.,Ea) ectfu EÂ£;'518*.% 144 0 + a.â€¢ a 01) 2 c # 3 5-9 ,-8 m ,-1 4 F LE 88 A W 0 01 5 00 ..0 0111) 0 2 4 MO (4% 50 E v g c U . Cd CD â‚¬6 A 6 M Â·E 4 - .- 3 -1. O U A C -' 51< .C S< 4 cs .0 / C i Z CR CO -6-, 4-J U â‚¬ b Â¤ 1 Gâ€¢g 0 3 M 8 1 0 9 4 2 f.1 3 0 4 4 2 2 2 9 2 -â‚¬ 2% 3 2% m U & ME 8 % < 3 3 ke E @ E k N f E ES 7 4 F :2 4. e * e 1321:~Alf ){Dvf --9 1/1 U U AboRI g. E 2 6. 2 Â¢ 2 0. A = E 3. E * M 502 9 3 'U 8 3 CO ,- U ..Cl e r-- -H ,-6-! 1 4:1 81 h.! Â·r-[0 I O + A & E k CD U cZ W G. 00 .14 81% -0 0 3 t "P E u.j C 13 2 N ~k 0 81 CA ect ..0 ..1-1 A .R 2 re A (U t E C = A -6- ME 4 b rd ;h W 0 A bo N A 8 4 .9% C & m .- 0 4 = t M 2 4 *C ce - ad C VE 3% 98.E EmEE 8 9 E .8 G.) UD N .5 9 -5-8 *o a ..8 -1 8 N E ~ ~ ~ CIO e U 16 c =s M j *41 -2 6- E 1 2 - -M m. r X : 6, . 7 eE4 4/348 M 4 > m .91) E 9 3 i ., =1 -o 2 1 31 eft=E~A.O W~ ro E 4 . ...1 [00 8 C . M 28 e U) 01' CIO CD 0 t . C O t .!201 %~83 4 133 ile 2 2 rs To M E 8 -A VA introduced threaten 3.Iq-JAI[deD Jo aspaIa-kI Afualm are gloga Pasno s! IJAOI 1336 SUPS!Â·I 'LIONIppl? sapmultl? 12 -ue ul?D TIOJV XEAA eulluo eloIAI PI.TOM UIO.g BUTIaad q pr@I ialunoo 3!p s>PILID ssolluqI '0I se Xue UIV 'SPUBLIEFF U.Za41.ZON 'UI trampling and grazing tened bi ds. G 1 . 1 0 pa JnpO,410 fo BulztlE 341 q pul} sluuld poonpoijut f.q uoy[,pu,Zap areas for the I IDAODal pU 30Ua?SIXa u 0 341 ainsua western Ha 'paJOIdxa latpinJ 912 yolv XE u PI nq ela II O u Jo sarnsea 3014 BUIS a;Insal â€¢ Restoration and protection of mid-elevation forest is essential for the recovery of endan- goes, so re extremely vulnerable to ' h as 'Aldapola'au, Hawaii onslaught of ne preda ors, kepas, and Hawai i Creeper. 3 ./ Overlooked Saving Hawaii's Birds to exclude feral u introdu sease-carrying mosquito d, such as for Hawaiia dnISIOAIA.Ins pue ssaions DAIA.InS 01 6301!nbsoul arquua s ainielad owned tree ferns collect wat H Ageu Jo sdno:[9 ne Bull lace on benefits for n habitat quality and above the uito li ne at about 5 000 feet ce n mbers of no tes; nonnative pre a federal law sho be x ploW jo sisaiof aaiit]Ll 31~1 LU S3041 31ION,HOMY p31321Â£2]plla 31[1 nd Birds: Vulnerable and ds evolved on remote archipela- radation Hawaiian birds include habi- to shrink as increasing 103 salts Buipaa.Iq luelloduI! ale u pupISI A UN pUP 'spUBISI 04!Oed al Id OIl X Wl,14174 01 3lqV.laulna aiv 340~0404V 'AFullt pal).ld;Sal itaa 611 UI 01 dpil ll.un sivuluium lul tolluoo 01 811,0113:1 ~sluoE pitu 'sE!d 'ailloo 'spueISI ue!!emeH U.Ia}SOMLB.ION B UOI[PUIJOJUI 10; 1310'Spi!484#0019;SMAAM lISIA 'sau.,loap uom?Vidod gitanal 1o azil.iqws ing concern. The -&101 044 uo splIC[206 10; XII 'spueISI U!91!A 'S'fl 341 '000 01.Iand JO spljq uo sive plants, wildlife intr di ost native birds are ow 1 Most of Ha mosquitoes. * ~44';/ O CD O CJCDeÂ·!C>CDCDCIDCD 8 K LD C. CD CD 3/Raa.ge**REMERRE 0000 #32; 0 CD IICI 0 1- - 0 0 0 0 03 CD CD C. CD A-' 11 91Â· CEo CD CD ./ CD 0 0 0 C. .3 0 0 1 v- 4 Rf K N Lri cd CD- N V-" m t-- 7- " 01 r- t-Â·- C % M C â€ž- C. 91 04 C D CO . CD -0 CU CD 0 0 -2 & CO CO CD 1 B m f C. 0 E u C C aJ D I. CO _1 _1 0 0 % - 2 2 12 . e CO CU 0 0 CD 11 % 0 82Â§ L. C\]CCO~ % 1 - D 1 CD 7, 4 tÂ· r L . a Z CD - SNAIL KITE BY MARTJAN LAMMERTINK h. C O.- & E 4 2 11% 4 EA ~~ ~ A~Q 4 ~ lot ta 0 t U} CD 1-K W 1 8 Ce 'u .t: O.1 2 8 fy g *C g ~ A':6 5 ~ 2 E 94 3 , E .0 2 4 â‚¬ &11 - 0 =5 ce <.M E*. .(C 1- > Â·Â·ap -223% i .9 I. 2 -0 4 . , a Â£111 1 50 93 E vocmÂ©gÂ¢Eg g r.-1 re AL u .9 4 4 43 3 D. u A E 000'9 Ouilenlonld slseoo L86L 3 (lse@41]ON) wel eleasol qnG 'sapads p.t!q PZ aln JO 000'93 fulse@308(1 UMOU)1Un Slse]03 'siseoo 366L 1 1@leJJnIAI PalqjeIN 009'8 fiu!$883080 UN\OUMUn ls@JOI U18198M 066[ 1 (welluoN) IMO pallods 006 L f S~ UMOUMUn UMOU>~Un 198103 UJ@ls@M Â£66[ 1 (ueo!xeIN) 1/AO pellods -#-4..Ah* ..91 Laysan Duck E 1973 Islands Low of 7; -500 at listing Significant recent increase Steller's Eider T 1997 Arctic, Coasts Unknown (stagingl Hawaiian Goo E 1973 Islands L of 30 Gradual increase Northern Bobwhite (Masked) E 1973 Grasslands Extirpated late 1 800s Never fully established 0~ Short-tailed Albatross E 1973 Ocean Believed extinct before 1950 Significant Increase ~ Brown Pelican (Gulf Coast, California) E 1973 Coasts Less than 1,000 in CA, almost Steady increase Wood Stork E 1984 Wetlands, Coasts -5,000 at listing Steady increase dangered California Condor E 1973 Aridlands 22 in 1987 Gradual increase Snail Kite (Evergla des) E 1973 Marsh 65 Increase with fluctuations Bald Eagle (Sonoran Desert) T 1973 Wetlands, Coasts 21 in 1975 Steady increase gered Species Act to protect and recover Crested Caracara (Florida) T 1987 Subtropical Forest 100 Initial increase: since stable Bicels paulell]83 A18>1!1 UN\OIDIUA slseoj ELS L 3 ~e!u.10;!leo)'!ew JaddeD pop PV 341 ase@Jout Apealls wajellv 086 L u! 909 slgeoo EL6[ 3 (Pelool-145!1) 1!ew Jaddeio su O!lenlon U 41!AA 89 8830 U I UMOU)1 A Slseoo 9861 3 (sa>lel le@UE)) JaAOId Bu!did sapads Ze.IaAas .(MOIÂ·InD olu!>IsH pue ted States Congress passed the Hawaiian Hawk (-10) E 1973 Islands -2,000 Stable and the ecos stems upon Aplomado Falcon (Northern E 1986 Grasslands, Aridlands Extirpated in the 1950s Slow increase alqels pallelliaj Ale)Ill ws] BIN EL6[ 3 (elunx) 1!ew Jaddelo ase@Joul lenpea 000'L- spueisi ELBL 3 1000 ue!!eMEH aulifiaia uu aIBEE[ PIeg 041 JO S)IDE @Se@JOU! 146116 0* spue'18/A EL61 3 (iddississ!1A1) aue]011!lipues aseajou! lenpea 1*6 L u! 9 L slgeog 'SpuellaM ELBL 3 ellen Guidool]M e s st UOI}11% Jo-luIUU~s~d ttltagkioH 8998]OU! lenpeig UMOU)1Ull Slse00 8661 1 (lseoo o'J!Jed 'U.lals@AA) 30AOId halls OU XEUI SDI 8988]OU! lenpejo ULMOU)IUn spuellaM 'slseor 9861 1 (suield leeig '3!lue'w) .10Aold Ou!(I!d A/le H luoi; soloads 01) PIIA'l aqi U! 16!xa 1 0 aseajou! ienpea spueisi EL61 3 (ue!!eMEH) 4!TS Poloeu-Moeld UPUIn4 41!Al PI]Juoi paluapaiaIdun jOUNX@ AI@>In luepunqe XI leo'Jols!H O!101Â¥ ELS[ 3 Maljnil Olll!>Is3 IOJ) anIPA DIwIOUOOD ME 81qels AiqeqoJd Bleiduloou! siauns inq 000'g spuell@M 986[ 3 (30!JBwl) u]81 1seel 'Sa{/Ipid IBJUAUIJUOJ-PIUI 'Pp aseajou! Apeels siseoJ ELS L 3 Ce!uio 80 Ulal meal 1}Uno) ITIL[ 62)(al 'pruiomeD Mu'Se@]080 UN\ s]SBOO L861 1 (epuo:1) u]81 aleasoy '(1631\Al{NON 0!J!01 Greater Prairie-Chicken (Attwater's) E 1973 Grasslands 1 million in early 20th Century Decreasing N â€ž 4 . Spectacled Eider T 1993 Arctic, Coasts 3,400; hard to survey extirpated along Gulf Coast Hawaiian Duck E 1973 Islands <500 in 1949 Newell's Shearwater T 1975 Ocean, Islands Unknown creasing 60961 elli U! Â£9 spueiii EL61 3 Cue!!BMeH) Ual.IOOIAI UOUIL.110) ->lietual pue '000'09 uel[1 aLOUI Hawaiian Petrel E 1973 Ocean, Islands Unknown 362310U 0 JAPW 0Â£ 'Sal p atil UI pa}STI SUOR UI04 0600[) Upt?UED poOM PaII!q-XIOAI '.IalqiuM S'Ueuapug 'DIqu-ls paUIPUIa.I aAB4 9I 'SUI-Jsf[ aOUTS poseall punxa XIclissod aIr â‚¬I pue 'posealoap akew FI . 1 3 8 3 5 1 1 P.* 7 Â¢3 6 2 5,0 9 L u .2 4 64 UD â€žC 1% s L CD 21 bO (1,) U "a r-4 4/1 ~2 0-1 A > 3 4 % cr C. BFZ u .32 8 3 -C â‚¬ 2 4 E I =2- -9 254 NA: 3 5 032 0*Â·N A 4'E ME â€ž{gl (0 -E C ..H 0 69 0 2 Â» U .9 DANÂ» C\) A . E.. W E 8 8 E 9 2 -2 * 9- E & E 00 m e- lg Â» 14@ 21 1 fl,.=~ "9 8 -21 EN .0 a #0 9 -sq . HED . M Ag M -2 CP CS 0. S M.k % a 0= 2 E N E= u 813 Et 3 2 ~ &6 1 6 R ~4 2 m= bo 1 -A ALI-4 l 9 2 E 8 2 0 = f 2 0 3 1 60 0 . O 9 01, +' R A Z Ul f 2 D * C i u Â·i -Â» 04 E & -1 1-4 U) W 0 2 u A c El F +514 C 6 1 â‚¬ 2 ~ 01; E *t 2 mr--m ,-20 -2 50 m N w 6 9 8 75 1 2 & 2 C .m u - v., 2 â‚¬ Cd C.1 - ~ 4 '2 12 U := 4 4 2 u 4* ~UOd riG ..0 0 - AJ B ,= e ..E - t: u ~ w < CO .5 4 2 8 E 9 E Â£ 0 E M PEME MER 1 a ~ E E 2 j 0 0 0 0 82889Â°08 *0 0000 000 00 ./1 8 *8 2 U~ -8- 9 0- 2 N h CI 0 ./ ~gE) 4, N CD>N * 04 r m 0. ~Â»147 ~~ff C 1PW~tr ...4 C -7 9 2 C 0 me-9991 =1*=,1 0 0 -M -hz 1-0 rooc C CD O .COOCVM 0 C\1 ZLICOID DLOa.DI' Fr & C 0 CO 0 V C 0-0-XLYCNE C CD D 91& L.LI LU 2447 % O m~~* lecia*Enop KE .0 J ro 0 2= .6 :3 - -0 2.10 7 0 8 2 - - @â‚¬ 9 co R E ?i; 3 - CO > = CO CD 2 E 2 - 2%23535Â¤30331*3433 49% i E lai- 1 2 .Me g * 2 g: 252 - M=CÂ£]CDLL Z 9 I ~ In the continental United States,, lations of more species that were listed ea ly-on have 1973 Bird Conservancv. r (Southwestem) E 1995 Eastern Forest 700; surveys incomplete Apparent increase conservation ef- S-[ ala creased than those listed more recently, ac- pecies lan uish idate list ow- an's Warbler E 1973 Eastern Forest Probably extinct before listing Likely extinct ies Act protecti olden-cheeked Warbler E 1990 Aridlands Unknown Likely decreasing 21.000 tive conservatio ures involvi 's Warbler E 1973 Eastern Forest Steady increase 3,000 men ies, 11O110Overnmell 49 Â·Ut}1010~ 3.tagoi 966[ '0 loulix@ A'01!1 spueisi EL6[ 3 m satoads .tof *daox) alu elqels Alay!1 spueisi EL61 3 epl?upl 341 Jo 31221 UPIinaIy :Pals!.IOP 31.p JO S@OP.I 340.It? PUB UBDI,IalLIV pup 'as loul]xe Ai@>I!1 Dullsil @Joleq tounxe Alqeqoid spueisi EL6 L 3 'a[SPE[ PIEG :SUE[snap Iewed 'uo:)Ipi auliBalad s066 L JO 9086 L lougxe Ale l!1 spuelsi EL61 3 1 apnpUL 93*17 9096 1 0 loullxe Alal!-1 buils!1 8]omq lounxe spueisi EL61 3 (i eneN) eole!)Iv Jelee]9 of resources E 2000 Islands Decreasing mounted. Fund ! and federal fu 0Â·spi!404110 Oullenlon#Ale)lil 'UMOU)lun spueisi EL6[ 3 d species from declining ia Gnatcatcher (Coastal) T 1993 Aridlands Unknown Decreasing; habitat loss (in U. S.3 5 an birds must be most cost ffe tive so .IM I 1-1 341 U! pa suo julndod i .UPO{Iad umoig 000't L eqms 000'*L- Spuelsi EL6 L 3 (! le/ABH) eda>v E 1986 Aridlands Steady increase 6,000 E 1987 Aridlands Some increases noted 12,000 Unknown lifornia Towhee (Inyo) T 1987 Aridlands Steady increase 750 0 001'E 011!see]080 smeoo ELS[ 3 (8|qes adeo) Mo.lieds ep 000'LL- Bullenlonld spueisi EL61 3 :XON 001'Z 6u!Se810830 spueisi EL61 3 00Â£,9 au!1080 spueisi Sm[ 3 Jed8@JO E 1973 Islands Likely extinct late 1 980s R d-cockaded W 1973 Eastern Forest 10,000 Steady increase E 1973 Islands 350 Likely extinct early 1990s E 1973 Islands Unknown Gradual small increase aseajoap 140!ls Jo aliens spueisseig 986 L 3 (ep!]013) Mo]Jeds Jaddo 5086 L elel '0 lou!1)(a Ala>I!1 spueisi EL6[ 3 Eastern Forest Unknown Unknown [San Clemente) E 1977 Aridlands Gradual increase T 1987 Eastern Forest 11,000 Decreasing Hawaiian Crow (Ala13) E 1973 Islands 96, including captive flock Extinct in the wild (allcapt ird (Nihoa) E 1973 Islands 400 Fluctuating E 1973 Islands Ten or fewer Likely extinct 1980s 066 L '0 lou!1)(8 Ala)1!1 UMOU>~Un spueisi EL61 3 0!liener DOOZ U! lou!]xe Alaill Spuelsl GL61 3 Biqels Alal!1 UMOUDIUA spueip!Â·'V LL6L 1 (8108U.1810 Ues) Moneds spueisi EL6 L 3 11!q 1011 008'E- spueisi ELBL 3 040)1840)IV r '13 W N .2 U) '3 8 . N1.F r--1 1 C Q C .4 0 A W k 50 C 0 4 1 6 9 4 6 c 0 :.6 1 ro E -9 â€ž23 r.i_~ 221 3 4/SCUNCE 203,6 6* - 0 1 4 8 -vt 2 . "u CS N c=8 'E w LA = 0 4 C (3 0 4-, 0 CO a g .N -2 22 2 1 N F .6 2 M & 0 p 5 5 0 P 3 U) CD 4-1 4 # 4 C C rs 6.- ra 7Â¤ (,3 0 3 k m H U g W -* 0 9 -E 1 -2 e 9 -3 M * 4 6 2 â€ž14 4 8 U (0 5 0 -= 0 LEE E- m B M 8- ~~ 21â‚¬ ~1 ~ E W M A a guu d g E % 2 3 -23 Cd U dEE %*RE M '56 4 *CE '8 K. m h MI -9 20 2 m -6 219% 9 Ec .r e g 3 5 i o 0 1 . Â£ 4% Â·.3 4 c CU k U) i .M E = E E -M E * 3 u * 63 # v A Q r'c: 4 - ./-, CD CD (0 re m u.am C â€ž0 -49 1 4 3Et =t 9 9 % 2% Ekp M Ul C -4 4 -2 2 + U H bo CD CO CD 6 de a E 2-' â€ž@ Z M E E ~ ~ 2 ~ â€žg , .MI 2 2 Â»{ ~ UD 5 9 7 1 < % 4. 4 8 4 -= 2. E- -92 -0 2 U M C BS 3 1 + 5 co v c A ,0 Â£ u 2 4 3 .8 5 4 0.3 8 0 3 2 -3 m 1 8- 2 -0 4 -M M IN 2 -M- E ; L -5 4 ... E M W 2 I. A 0200Â¢ - ... K = = - Im= FEENMEEâ‚¬923% E O Efo CD & 0 bo a.) 6 0- 4 ZE 4% WEE# 80 c gibog m E .5 = r.2 ..8 :'4 %2 % ~ 2 1 Ly 1 0 Â¤ - 28004 bo : T ~ E A UJ (,6 w e co k r.~ u E bo E 31*2 $ b 3 :2 1 E M 9*EÂ«1227*MÂ»E 0.) qj ts bo 0 +-' 01) 0 Â·:11 4 .92 2 -0 (n g ~ D~ Â·c ~0' 4Â° B* 8 4 2 68.Â¢mj e . 4. e . m 12/511 %/c 3 & M 4 .9 0 1 .E - - re w 4-1 ra a M 8 -1 E- 3 1 -% 6 2 -5- 2 - :N -2 -2 -= 2 2 2 4 21% U 0 -3 60 3 4 N C V -0 Â¤ (10 -g a) '9 *Eg 3- -1 i 2 a -2 1 Â£ 8 3 1 2 -% 3 E -k -% 4 -M -9 1 -* m - m a. 8 .0 % 2 W.4-= E 1 L Z â‚¬ U >, Z E m (C â‚¬0 . L N Â¢ A 0,1 .4 A U X -4 E- m e 50 11 4â€ž0 4 0 ERIC EPSTEIN 0 + 3 4 4 4 73 r -9 2 L , .1 1 C c.) 50 0 6 0 4 i ....' , 5 h j tâ€¢ f â€ž20 0 Â¢Â·5'4/' * e 2, ? 4*@*i e 9.1 11 : .V % 9.0 50 0 18 5 . .5- 1 M 'C 4, 43 Â¤ 60 , 4 S U a. 4 , i 4 3 4 14 =32 9 â‚¬ 2 r '.F .1 9 5 0 0.1 M =5 d ft' I U CD 641 O , 1/' I - ... *'L . 4 60-0 /9 - .... * 13 .5 Q e * Â¢11 2 +J 0 ../. 4 I. ' .40 4 2.1 iI 7 1- 1, 0 f 1 0 -9 . â‚¬= E p C. Â¥.. (16 DE 2 U] 0 4 . 44 11'\ 2 0 0. \4/\ Â£ i , 4.1 ,Â¥ . 468 E CD U 4 3 \ .1,0 1 2. - ... 'J . A'. .- t - - I ~FL 94% 1 . /...t'. 4,1 " It @SPOIDUI LIED JU SPH Poo; Ino MO/9 07 pUBI asn The accelerated pace of urban, suburban, and c mmercial development in e United States threatens the integrity of everv major at from con- Successful bird conservation requires giv g birds a tinued drainin wetlands and destruction of coa t loss and esidential and Commercial Development pallaJJB EXa I 800 UI 'S LIPA UIP.~OJ -ssaoons s aU led 'UOI}On UUAO.1.0 34 O UE UIOD I J saoud 4 OUUUIOD s Bendire's and ) FI @Al@60 r I 'UJUD.UÂ¥ 411ON U! 93102 UIPI SU HIFul '01111 041 UI .SIOnJOI q pue pooJ 10; puptu such as second-home devel ment P equal or greatej Â·ip.redoaf uy le}IC[PE[ pupISSE,IS Il?JIA Sumnd ' p MOUal a q Jou I[IM. 10 such a Wood Thrush, Kei, uck 7 reats to irds in addition allenges that birds Unlik er production and livestock grazing, urbani Seas ave crea d numerous fragmentation rests, aridlands, and grassland o n, and severe weather. anent loss of natural habitats. Increased beach d r IA,1 612312 633>[ 04 slauu-eJ Xed IU! 134 p XEUI lea Pliq uo!Inq a lo pup sguIPHnq 111}InDI1213 01 SpUPISSE .IN JO FS AUOD J 'Spilq 01 Slz,31* 193281 341 3.[13 Ssol !}PI 111 JO SUOII asing num au p aq 01 suI o puv lmal s uvqinqns reatest threat 0 - habitat loss. Addres the conservati n can ensure a Here, we summarize the m populations. Based on decades of research, conservationists have identified safe future for birds eople too. r.lf-'t:* - *#49.1/Zi, 0 ' 0.~.â„¢.2. I. , 0 A F 39 - A~ . E *;*t 0.1 64 = bo 1.-1 60 â€žC 412242 8 4- bo m 4 9 13 3%â‚¬ I 2%45 07 2 S 44-J e ' . . 4- 31 6 9 -: # 1 -554&* 7 w *ENE tcke -2 3 6 0 su o I. . 0 - -MEâ‚¬94 41*iggl % *4gw- bo rE m -8 2 4 73 3 1 009, fc C = a 50 2 73 2 .50 8 U 2 9 3.2 AM â‚¬ a re .u U 2 . 2 to . 6 2 con D. 5 .- -39 Â¤ E W o. Â·0 bo .2 -f C= -2 --E -2 ~ --2 -- E 60 2 U 4 Â©4 gk z s N -b N 4% w e= -92 -Â»' 50Â· g w '0 to . 6 KE) 9 ~ A - as 4 t 8 1 43 . 0 f . &11% 4 U ca E . ..0 C M - A.0 aja Ef N h co + CIO ro a e 9 2 2 .1 â€žE A .C -- . O H (11 gEE IE E 0 Ut C 0 0 W Â® 0 8 =M bo 18 .. E 5-2 U,4 C X U"2 e C 1- U: rg -- bo u Emts . m E E :2 1% N E C Â® F T O 3 1 E Â· 6 0 o 7 2 = a. ai f = 311 - 3 b (C re U) Â» rj C amE 06~ 29 1 mac -:1 111{ g E -5 92 9 4 .. -4-Ikc A CCS 50 Z = 00 > C -A 8 8-1 N%tp .. 21308zt@9811~~~ . 4 0 M 4 .2 +1 -5 0 f: 2 . BE@21.*2,8 .emi- mE:;:, . + O -0 2 . I 904 U j -4-' 010) 6 0 U t.6~ 911 M E % i E ~M cÂ» 2:- 2 -" M 1 11 -3 e E 1 1 A w 0 2 M%Â¤ ?*84 - E k A 4 44 # 8 0 4 cul = 4 .6 -C (0 2 d 0 60 4 * r : ~ 16 4 50 4 0 L . 1 1 1 1 4 *.-2 2 1 -B -~ c W a M 60'J U Q.) M "0 -8 41 t, *#'4 - I F .9 c U) 9 2 8 m m g E % 4 4 4% E % 4 .M E 99 Jac . Q.j = -W Â»7 -4 CS = 3 2 M Â£ CO A .4 g w "0 bo + ..0 .6 > 2 ~ ea @ 2 2 -2- E-, 2 -2 8 1 3 D= 2 .5 5 Â£ %68& 1 2 Â·:6 24 2953 8 E 09?2 3 50 o .Mmu~ O 29941 I .4 -5 4-1 bo U M CO u .5 6 3 E .0 .C 0 C . 0 0 .0 + C . E ..9 - 9 5 2. 3 E 50 6 E '1 2 bo P v- C D--4 U~ =0 2 t C 40 4 0 -2 01 E E i .9 9 4 38 E 4 k 1 i i â‚¬ a CA U -0 E * 1 0 f <1 0 0 0 - Cn -W+'ric-W 0 - 13 f u A 0 00)50 0 = 0 BE + 2 8 Â·5 2 E M =Â· b E E 9 Â® M.& 8 Y 0 9 6-2- ~E ~g bo 0 0.5 2 U k A bo .22 C e a . 2.6 TE . 0 Z H [D 'bt 1./...tihil W.L. 3 bo = 2) u -C aj c > D. m 11 16 CO e C O rd 01 9 E 21 m A = U *0 Â£ = E F E E M E 2 m G u 1 r 0-9 E CS A ./1/u'lizuze-IM.Nul 4 2 Â¤ 60 H 2 g Ms 18 jm El -% Al J~ 1 ,i 3 IN .10 CO U G 0 imijill U m > 0. C t 0-1 W C E 1 Wera~ 28 ./Wgimb'.U 9 1 34=* A3 % 45 fa ga~6 1115 3 14#% 04 4 Y#i 337 33 LacI 13 SBAA nos SuoIP SPAIP 'IPpapIES saIBBE 341 Jo asnejag usual bree areas near drilling rigs or wind turb o the arctic. Many es such Invasive species are tho introduc JO suo UI SE[ SSE.I #BaLID .SIDAOI as Greater Sage-Grouse by fragmenting large blocks ee plantations, and fire suppression. T 912 HinS U.IODUOJ JO Gatiads .IOJ On A St{ BU!10AAOI ' ;21!qpq 4sn.IqaSes J O SaiDE aAEq SUIOJSXSODa 163103 'S'fl ants and animals. Gulls that prey on other birds are of streamside habita field development alters natural environments in ways of mature trees, sna s, and 7 en be om as cheatgrass to spread. urrelet as products and 1 fiel practices such as dis ha rging ve grazing has d subs d dumps at drilling facilities in Alaska. Surface water re exclus ns of energy fields car bird~and disrupt nestin seshoe crabs has been att structures. Stu rge on horseshoe crab Id JAISEAUI ale Xalp 3,Ialpt 2012 ID 6122) IE.[34 PUB OBSO 'soiunId 103 PaII!>~ 813193 9 'SaSOOSUOU[ p'lIP '690 u! sa 10It M 104 jeliqel{ 10 waste i o uncovered pits. Collisions wi w ind turbines, off here most bird -S/BAA SnO.Ia U Ols} 31 4 n eo,noseu le,n *eN I PInowed 'spitq Sunsa pUPISI t[Bax sioidpi pup 'poo; I OJ Sp IC[aloqs q 39 SU{lapual Xq Sp:[I lIli osIP Sluerd aAISEA . Saltcedar has a so 1.In I JO pun019 3111 uo OUI X 1.p OUTS DIC[BIOU . . . 00. 0 -I dzur aISUIS }sawals 'ised aqi up lopEJ lue:)9!UNTS p uaaq sel[ spitq Jo Sum PI I Uouu@}U! 041 'Adonuds OBES pue 'laqselqi OBPS 'asno,ID-0926 1312310 prOI'SUOSIOI Xq papa;Je uaaq ndan d pue eA'Senul leqi Sp.Hq Jo aulpap afj oi salnquÂ·luoi s!41 'suclap Jo Suo} iapun America incl di habitat loss, reduction in quality, direct mortality, ener ment such as oil and gas fields, wind farms, and geothermal lures are asso ted with spills during trans- Energy development has significant negative ects on birds in North such breed. Roads used for construe- powerlines cause significan Construction a d opera xtensive habitat distu ce, degradation, and loss. For aip asn Joinosal 01 pal eIa.I Sam ovid ap!Sluealls Xqipau pat/nq 12 S}SaIOJ Ula}61?a JO %12312 291121 PaA nstruction, operation, and associated infrastructure of ment habitat. Oil and gas development in the West 1241 sao.}mbsouI s*40!Ie UOW)21}XO Out?qp SUIPaS ?200 IPJAai 01 6 lutelunOUI 6161?Iq }12111 ~1.qUIUI IWOD la SnOIDUInU 'IDA BUI }Sal[224 spirq 103 lope; KIppap *slaIq.IUM 1123Illial su qons 'slsa/OJ 10!.Ialu! UI pomq sA0462p 16314 11)31(q 341 111 1.1.8.Sol Diqumwsnstql *l lun Rq pap\,331, lullqmt 1 bO e . 60 3 U Fro 9 # 4. CS 4 k' c 0 . 4 1.H 0) .O 0 0 "E D 1 4 G 50 0 N f= E A u Â¤ ~ 2 -92 .0 Kb L *-2 N O 9 bib A â€žM 0 0 9 2 44.49 2 -0 â€žC 0 0 co bo H P co 0 M CIm i 8 L; 28 m 0 er? E C M b O 5 0.1 50 ..U M -E +_, rw 92 .9 P + D.4 â€žC ~Ij 'C CL, 1 s 3 1% A u = m Q. 4 E kl~ -M : * 8.4 UJ boÂ·Q) ZEKEd p 68 ~ Â·E 3%~ z &9'i@ Lr~j '-9 e 5&1 effmt il W f f { 1 *4 .0 01) ./ 0 0 [0 *p-7 4 2 ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ 60 k s Â·E : o 4-, 76 3 ~ ~ 32 60 E -9 E -8 44 4 5 (0 -1/ A L 3.8 Q .E Zj E 6 % 4 0 Â·~ bb 8 '33 *-' Â·6 1 E g q 2 8 * 3 % 3 4 1 Et E E .3 ,C 60 '0 2) m * .S e & Â·6 1 .t 60 â‚¬ 3 C 0-) r- .â€ž-4 4 2 0 1 & 2 BES@%401.%5(4.68<E'EN)ZE'211%4 u -5 . A i 1 1~41 4 C 0 4 t 91 5 3 4 E E g r, -W #4 .* .'.EEC 8 570*E â‚¬ 82*zo ~ w- O 21 W O 0 >.ALE ESL 2.6 E)* f 3 # 8 1 4 4 .% Z K j E E .M p IDE g E w 2 20 13 4 (0 1 = 4 N O d (U 3 9 5 9 6 i S-.CL)/ E 8 2 8% 6 4 E 0 E 3 2 â‚¬ E d <42 re A Â·-4 4.1 -72 4 Ecom H E tb 4 bo. o m 32 1 . Â· 2 -0 ... (10 cr: rd -Mi A col ,_, es k 0 0 f kE g g .2 oN , m- 1 -S U - 8 k C = bo 32 h A 0 Â·b Z~ 13 R '.0 1% E E -Nk .32 to 3 + 3 6.1 a 2.3 0 3 E m i .0. =800 Â¤44.xrc.*13 ec 18 13 -4-1 Â·C C 4=.=}*C~ 16 A * A. 2 i >M &6 8t 1 m * 4 A E % 1 .1 8 CO 9 & E -5 1 4 4 5 Â·@ .3 3 /3 9 1 Â·m -% f Â·a ?~ ~~~ f i E.PR -9 3 -0HWJJ Â·5 Â·% % M ~ R, E 2 -5 & 2 1 4 â‚¬ us N 2 g 50 31 O - c m b J t E e > r 3 0, rl 00; S bo.r .0 4 g E~ F R m 21'* r.-illll at -2 -2 1--E -19-4-Â·1 -s-,-M -0--M 1 2-2 -R- M -2.-*- -15 -13 E LIE -= 9 M =39 1 A-.- 6 ./ E M .6 ZE *T :22 E 3 1 1 & 13 6 2 1 0 9 a.' .6 a E 0 9 E Â« ~4 4 -O &6 4 U W L -m z 't U '.O + 6-w v "O *= U U - 2 4 % 5 2 4 W & 2 2/41 NAA 1MRD UD 43 4 b .0 Â£-8* 4.% 6% A 3 @f % S .6 ut*r CS - CU r-(Uu~~B - CS 0 .. + 4 , 4 4 (10) rd -0 C E E M * 62 A E~ . gz E .8 L E & 4 1 3 8.2 8 c to 4 4 / - 73 . CD t.=. 2 1 9 2 4 t m 0 0 ' 50 C 111 Alillillillill 92 = E ~ 0 - 2 0 4 2 % 4 C Â·- 4 4 - M bo i ~ .C E 3.m & LE U 0 4 -.3 ets 4%â‚¬g 4-4 +7 0 Od E Ar~ ~ ' 4 4 1 -2 E â€ž 1 .-m -2 2 92.6% :3 OlD 0 - 4.6 T 2 11 -1 - tÂ® 0 $60Â·%8% *4*f 2~ %4, E = E E 0-W 50 - * 50 T 2 0 ,- - .2 k ma=* 0 A 4 6 E 4 . - - I. -6 8 0-9 010 5 Org liE 0. 2 m Â¤ m E PE M 360 ..C=t CIO 0111) 0 fi@ 03 3 0 M ..% P 2 4 2 M O < -6 . u; 2 ~ *E % 2 8 0.1 5 50. ec =,--1 0 4 I Q) t o 4%= eLF Â·E Z 83 R 42 .5 b ~ 2 N .S N =Z -m~:Â·E Al 2 % cri E 5 2 @ 81 2 0 2 4.6 10 uj e A *EM %4 = 2,0 ENW.Â©EL O :33 4 .Z .5 3 3 2 8 zl 2 E ~ 7 -% 7 2 .8 Â·ld z g E .> S.Â¤2 -2 C,- -0 1 3 c ca = .E E E .c M to .9 m E# 2.0 1 *31% 31 39 8.0 w C "0 24 Z .6 O 6 9 22 2 e U N Â£ 8 0 3 M W O 92 4 0 2 U u. e D-1 bo E - 81 13 8 U] = 4 22 - *I ill E D. . m "0 0 9 = O 20 -g E 50 w .#W I = W p E 8 1 0 C '13 -0 C u) 688~Â·92 -O U *% U AJ H -2 --M -1= ~ i K CR Em oure 114 &) 5 -3 0 u -2 2 D..1-C 4.~ ..C .M P 3 im3 8 3 > es 8-42 % 2 .3 1 5 8 p E E 3 E â‚¬ 2 - %,01% E .~ 3 g ~i 4 %@ 1-4.16 t 40 bio O bo 1 50 - CK.E.2 21 3 +0 d - c.%6% M 4 -a e â‚¬ 1 m: -6 2 ~0 =2 â‚¬0 -2 -2 1Â« -g v c QU c c /0 * Â£ e 22 0 c c X KN â€ž2 82Â·r 3 9.5 E , M C Z & 2 8 % g .E d Â¢ 8.-~ .6 0 4 3 F 4 CCOACLU.OCCS has contri ted significantly to the decline and extinction of m -7- The U.S. has warme ali aver- iseases suc becauc ut alleviatin -Unl ORD,I pasn 3121{Al BOL[JUIÂ¥ U S LIS.I } 0 UIO.I:~ Gia 3323.InS UO pue SlsaIOJ U! UO odap X.Inola];~ SlaSUJAPOS 1041 130'LIOD SnOLIDS B osIE st s adaaioXauoq Haad[ se Mons GIED!1Ualp Maulnq p XIaBIWI pUB -ads pnct -(ln2UI Jo uownpoidai pu pue sluBId ui alwIniurLDE }241 s}ueup UOE) 612 SUISialUD 312 6}UPpIEJOI- action 1!Agonpoid paollpal '301.I-epun UIS123.IDU! UIO.q 63663.Ils pup uo .Was 12 pue purI uo Spitq Ola UDIIplp 1 T UI UPIAB aUIOq- AAEL[ 'SNUTUOSIod Xuelu 0/UO 'S 2 Sup<OIp St? 1-pn House Sparro ressively sever areas and altere warm by i s more than 2,500 inc to 1994. Red- 12}SPOO 'SlaDEI already has influenced th UOS JO SUO spitq a DE; Bui .Dads asaq duIT spuepam U! SUOUBLIJUDOUOD Suale uqua-qsy Xqualea spoo; u! wooaq IP Ame ican times hard to detec al Audubon Sociel significant P D e Jo %OZ UE DIXol XIIIâ‚¬!4 glisad 41 JO Xlreff Introduced diseases are a major threat to some bird species. Avi I 'spitqoloqs IA~*[alu~ the Kauai irds on e mainlan metals such as lead and aq nuquoi lnq 'S Uaaq JAUq cluding Peregrine Falc m nA #DINED UO Spage )!Xol aA Xeli SOSSED,In aUIPS applies app roxima e h pounds of pestici UI P I Palsafful 'SPIN lumq OSIE luntuaIOS plIE 'XlnJIDUI 'peaq DDT caused t breakag Â·suewnq pue spi!quo spago umou>Iun 41!a 'amPI significant bird morta d some have esta Many bird spec 615 C Â·-. 0, m k rid 2 6 01) S E .... 34Â¤ - 0 0 + 9 5 i kirg 9 0 03 44/ 31 9 E g q) (f) A 3 2 k A (3 = ... 0 NEJAM H A o OD 4-J W m M N .fl Â·8 u w 4 4 6 Â·E CD f g E-N 16 6.403=~E f r.cl U >1 -3 --2 (-6 - G 8 6 Els 4 N f UJ W 0 93 U.J 1.81%4.8 -5 u 1 . 29.0 4 ,.0 M s WE ENEMENE 4 C rd 43 UDE Ge C r. (5 K ..M -% 0 16 / L. . ./ .râ‚¬ .6 IE Z Ul + m U O (5 AA F E p u A - 1 % L ZE 92 1% R E 16 09 -Csk<LI bo 0 2 0 p. â€ž92 -2 6. c 3 Â·-5 - 0 C U 5 4 3 2 1 -E ~ -w 52 --4 -El -2 3 2 -@ rs UD 1.- 0 4 c u .0 CL) ot -5 w 2 :8 22 - M~> Â»Â·-" a ~ 4 0"2 E =Ul E-, 9 E 0 * DE bo E NER- E bo :3 0 .5 2% 023*â‚¬ 3 23 f La w E LE C (O 2 0 0 2 -2 M -* g -2 "5 0 0 - 0 4 # 4 4 8 C E-1 4-1 4 = . & 1 .11 11 0 1, 0 CO 01. ..0 u ..2.12 E O k. 41 4 . 001 1 %131 9 0, 0 0 1 50 E C C -me 2 0- re 2 2 .b M A 1 2 :11 Â¢ 2 1 E E 8 8 mi a) O ...1 -C:3 O 0 -2 -Â¤ M . 1 2 -08 -00 00Â¤c ..3 41% r u 3 N v. .E B :% .3 8 2 1 E E 2 4 2 80 2 x EE i E g B. 01 4 1 Â® a P. g = e C = r-,r --X r. 0 01 r UAt Ki Â£ m /00 0 --3 - &/ I LO m N N 01-34, 00 14 01 . 99..4/-4 m 1 03 0 '0 -/1 N M 93 bur q 1 r.. 92 4 10 944.; 1 <: f# pi k S IM 0 0 U m col C) LO U M \\ 1 m N I-:0 D 22' 7 ..C=; 04 - 2 0 Â¢E 2. .. pUB ueq.In paz]USO Dal aM sts.11 Healthy bird populations depend on maintenance quality and quantity of hab ats. These n three or more hab dered tate of the Birds: Focus on Habitats vide resources that a or hu an surv al and quality of life. sources to determine the conservation status and population trends of 498 bird species that occur regularly within the health these ha tats, and thus provide an Ecosystel ls. poluaDDE e pue swodal spltg 041 J 11.RIEaq I.elua UOMA 3 JO 3.InSUOUI }Upliodlu To develop this first State of the Birds report for the United States, our team of experts drew upon a variety of bird popu crive uS initial in each bird andbirds we treated se p3123.D OAA '6421 Isa JO:I U.'alsaM . burban landscapes as occupying a secondary A12 1Saq 341 UO paSPC[ SIOJEDIput UOR the continental U.S., Hawaii, and U.S. oceans. f environmental susta- i lands, a c, forests, gr Birds that are restricted to a pwodiut ue BUUUBSal 2 896 I asoq) am .au[I IOJEJIPUT OISUIS 1noqe sl!01@p leuo!1!Ppe Joi 81!sqaAA ino 1!9!A noi U.!10-1! spue ipp]\1 4 34} sluasaIdaI lole)!pul 810 spilq@41#oajejs breeding were define characteristic o pu f PI{Al Jo #daouoo 041 defined habitats foll wi of seven prim t sensitive to e p q Jo dnois e lo; aouep le'!C[PlI 1salod UJalse3 WON 841 Aq pele@JO SUO!68] uoileA.Jasuoo PJ!( 01 18431 sjaqwnN 'DJO'Spi!484#00181S MAM 8@S @Allelliu I uoueAJaSUou pi!8 ueo!]311!V slue]Dold Bu!]01!UOUJ ls@303 188108 1sajod leoldoilqns se siolempul uoileindod P]!Cl PU!43q eolle!)S el pue uo!18AJesuoo p]!cl mocle uo!1ell]Jolu! se ilw SpueSSedg Coasts 11:.AN!Â· i!Â·S~Â·~r,112.-11,ME 0 ._I + - -D . 0 f - P-, m .. lilli= (/0 . CD 2/ 1 02 4 L-*D~j#~di/'-- -E B 93 -EZ /0 g 219 '. 13:.11 #2% 2% 9 3 9.0 + = 61 e * 41, r U. 8 2 2 : : a .0 + e *- 19 F D> 2 6 0 - CD g-2 2*f .6- 0 _C m ca I 0 I. . 5 1 #5 5 1 ,/I'lli#*pervB//Ill' I . EECE 9 5 0 m filf wa :7,11 4 . /"Â£-P.----- ' CO . CD = I . m a> e % 0 - .C ) gz CE 44@32 cl .CohÂ© L._ 5, O 52 0 > - 0 -4 00 . 2 jiTTE 0%1 . vo h ..41 - . m co g. /1 9 j U L C= I . le %0 m % -9 -O @E*3 O :Â·Nf - I.'III*J; - . 0 5 4.6 e 1 . I r ecu + 3 2 25 2 0 =074.71 - mE =.9 NE n 7 .9 .= e O -E = E e â‚¬ - - 2.- -0 C/5 .r M . CD I ' -TY"/- 1* HE OCZ . - EE :% aM :CE .3 0 2 M_ Il.* . 4-1 -%35 %!f L 6 cD '1Â¢11 lili lilli 1 . E 2% C/j g:E og - 2 11 -2 1~ g I E - 11404#IL 11 1 , 2 4 = g Â£ I. 9 i Z 3 2 2 2 CO a co .MI co - . E â‚¬ 2 T B= E E m 1.- L 0 ''' '' -Â· ..2 G n mc- 0 - - U) I ... 11 @ 6.- = E & CO il .g: a=~ - e D ~,Ii L - I~ e -O 4 U_ ED -0 -m â‚¬ R .69 2 0 a, c I p 2 8 ~ â€¢ 3 6 'R: U ./ m M 4 0 4 - - - a Â¤ = -- m -E ME .m 12% 9 = CE a -* E- . 4 . 0 . - 4 .2 .4 6141 ?11'YAL'+li# k j :2 ~ IE Â£ -1 .~ 4 9 - Â·Â· .r M g â€¢ ./ 1 '-PR 4&3 ~ - 80*)&22 ~ ~ . = 22 CD Â£ 2 U) 2 0 c .. .. ... -=0.--C i t_Z 40',1'*iÂ· i . ,#i 001* a 2222 &12 3 1 2 2= i. C ... . - - 9 0 0 1 2 E & 2 k O CD 1 6 -0 2. A :98%3!c - iM -E *.M -2 -2 / 1 ?4 -12 -2 4.1 15Â©g 2 Â¤ 0 4 0 0 rs (10 -N W .0 Ul CO .0 ux Po CJ 8 A U. 3 9 m 5 50 0 p M 00 9 -- -0 -0 0 0 0 0 4 8 0 64 m & ES=Â»3 - i 1 0 1-1 0 2 6 E (11 &340Â¤ E A E C *t 8 92 E E m - Mt 0 0 4 3EEt . HE-UY 64Â¢0 0 0 0 ru 2 -- 04 *; m 00 N 2 1 5 3 1 1 -2 -0- c e A vi M B * 1 3 - '-5 Q. 2 -2 M e -9 f d E E 0. 1 0 E 2 .5 â‚¬ 1 3 , a -2 0 -% i -* .1 , 6 5 14 3 4 6 4 -2 -0 t & ~-mi CO .E -2 = C. u 44 u a Zi im 1 %0 -2 11:6 .E :16 Â¤ LO 0 5 2 W E E H? 4 2.8. . E ..2 4 3 2 00 : 13 & i 1 o Â·Â° s. 4 0 # ~ ~ ,-2 9 = +.> c.~ a' .2 .5 -= c W 0, 43 3 D,. O Ul G cu e A â‚¬ g 1 -5- - m 1 11 4* 0 Ht=A 220828 2 5* 3 9 0 3 & M 2 b - 1 4 4 63 4 3 2 re 2 9 48 u Mu Cd U .- Cug O-OLO 0 2 0.-4 .5 0 4 o m -i j 06 -2 -9 *-Mul t; 24.2 0 MEN 93 - 0*cn %592 t; a f - 2 g e q 42 1 1 4 1. GM B.- M .2 ..*m 2 9 C U Â£ 63 P t .num I (IS B 64 -- Ul {5 U') t; N ~ [09 U ui 2 9.* En -6-, U) CS 4 8 9 ZE' R U = 9 4 - Clo 0 D a, 4 0, m c E./ 8 1 B E 2 16 2 0 3. 9 Â·E a.) 1 6 1 :%8.4.8.9 Â® + cn S E.E Â·M â‚¬ 7 -2 E -22 1# iff = m 3 00 = b b @28#EZE Et c Â§2 F. s 9 4 1 03 2 W f E Â¤ CO 4- 0 I - 1 "cs *0 2 u h 5 U 1- 1.~11 '|| OH M C,/\8)10!H 3 4 !3>I 'I 0!Jle 3 40 f 510!MUB:18810 9 Dave Kr sa Pitkin, erry Ri Paluapeoaddurl ue 45no.Â®Uoda.I s!41 5u!198-lo u! peel eqi >lool 80!Ajas emPHAA pue lils!:1 .Sn 841 10; 110#a Su!101!UO UI *laN 'sapads z)!ueajo p leluallu.le/\06UOU pue 'Se!OUafe a;Ilp'!M alels 'Bo!/ues al!1 '!Al pue l's!=1.S'n elli Bu!AloAul dillsiellued Â·sliodoi spi!Â£[ 341 JO alets oinlnJ .Io; IlmUOSSa a.Ip Sle}!qull pul? sapads (13.VI\I) BARe!11.Ul uoileAJBSUOO PJIEI UBO!JaulÂ¥ 41101\1 0 341;0 8@Ululluooqns e se suoilezil,126.10 Aaills 'nlls oyoAIIA 'eonig 8!Juo 'uouo >100341 sel040!N 'olpew elli -aId NoM sapads Imopal puall 'KIIBUId ' Jun p.I{Â£[ Sl?UNSI/1.Â¤ IlaAA 18 5061 'slle/v\ #ar 'e O BileM 8 5.10 8~) 'Ue llIJBAI!9 A'!U13 '40!eA DOOS 'SBUIAH-e!16essal euelo -01049 BUUS U-042)112 XIqI?lou 15 lu 'sdnOIS pkI P 01 OUI Xpoo lenES 'W DnpUOD Kal.Ins 121!quH pue uoBBIndod Sulpaaig IMMA J Jol aldoe flu!AA SU{Sn 'SXJAInS 1 13 10 1 Sol 2 S.}InSDI ULI tors 0 pelsentin data for many species, as well as a period of environmental consciousness for these indicators, reflecting the 40-year span of reliable bird-monitoring Because reliable long-term trend Wiccurlcla~lsaeb~e~ UNC,Ntrodn of t. Our last line st tion idangered p cies Act of 1973, which 1 ists 67 bird species as erican Bird Conservan vation rtnerships. elevated levels of risk based o or declining trends. Proac- g these species from becoming Shor an, Waterbirds for the Americas, and the North B}1?p pUD.I} UI.Ial-ZU S-fl isly s!41 UI SUIpaa.IE[ UpollaUIV ach habita a separate indi Jo uotle.ISMU! ls.I!:1 alp sluasa da.I Nodu s 8 1 pue XaA.InS IED po.Ials! npnÂ¥ IeuotleN P Xq padoIDAap sanbput[ rds of Conservation C o pnq Xq polldwoo uoI rimary focus of Partners in Flight, the U.S. 2.IJAOD 1 JO 12012 ITAA UE{peup 3 pul? aorAias 33!IPITAA pUB 45 fl 04 Xq papIA D B 'Sn UlaqUOU alil ssoloe sls!90 'on Initiative. . Our analysis ls hi e lack Species of Conservation C -S'fl 041 uj uoutooloid le}!c[134 pue cators for a ., we used trends fro either endang We also rec 10 -8961 Outs sapa Vt *:3ft-' Â»ft < ,/.:)..:. "EY t S.-*.-MEr-1.- L . C 11. . I 41- 4/ L. -t 10 2 9 9 45 -,~4 -- ' #411 - 0 |~ - i,- ~ 4~|1- 544 ie - e - - :re- I I Iff?16 rg . e e Â· 960 1 . e I #'Ii'Â·I /4. 11 - a. 1 4 -El-1 4. A t'*:1.4 6- Â¥ 94 ' I ---ts - Nt. & 1. 3 r 41 . Â·'1.' kl â€¢' f. ~1 -1 I - ; ..3- e . .9. 5,1157:..9 1 - - . e :1-: 9 9 -4. 4.Â· ......;uÂ· f - 1.111,1 ...i,-1,1 . .. 1 @L 't 4 - 4,1 1 1=11 1 e , 1 1,/:11,3'FA~. . 11% * Pi i . , ' " ........7 A- .94.El . . e e Â£ 5- â€¢ , , 4-~ ., i , 4 1 1 11.1 5 1 1.1 1 .4 1 1 1, 111 -1 -1-1 11 . 11 1. - â€¢ 1 11 L ..1,1,4 61:- 1 J . fill p.4,1-- . 1 14 4 li 9Jkli'' . 1 - 1 1 4-1 * . 4, . 11Â§11.. ' .1 .. :-6I .''fiLYAKE 0 -1 . lit. e 60 4%14 11 r'11,1 111 -- Reas ' ,&:I -1 . . 1 . . . ./ d - 'em-Wd@41.G - - . - t~/Dil'. I . , 4,20Â·4*//hal* 1 - unlEPAr- - I. I 5. - ./ -1 -- 1 7./CfN1, . ,; 6;1% '~pli e,f.4. P J 1~1 1 19,4 '04 r . 4011 I .t 2 BUT & 9 30 j E it ~.7 6- I m.- S.UM; .G . I.-I- - I â€¢)1,1 8 9 t .. i 2>1 7.'C - I. 6# . 5 9 re- 4 - 41 â‚¬ 4 2. t 4 74 >' 41 6 ...Pt k ' /27 42 7 ' 4, r UC 4 4 ,/1 2 Â· liE; ' t. .4, = P 4 11 2 4 44* 43 2 41, 1.1,1 , 1 .0.,9 *41 ,â€¢E "Â· i.â€¢ 24 -1. ,#f f +e N 3 F 4 1. ' i J ./ ' f 901%* . I Â£ 45* 1 *Mili//5 'A 43 2 4 - I VZ . ~bARTEN,310 1 d . 4 ./4 9, Â¥ O >-1 .6 m 0 40 < o mil , 4% 491'Â© 40 Ck + V O M I & U O 7 r *Â· >4 Â£; - 1,a - '.6 661 . (10) ,: 4 # Mitii f 1 -4 A O F 7 6.. . E- 0 0- Et]93 Al.f i '11'1 ..g , 3=< 4 + .' Â· W I. ~. 1- i. i.4.- < u. f. 4. 31' 2 1,1.= 1 . 1 ..Â· t....4:' 4 t 1 . r/.2 O >- , *t EU 3 4 ,<1"/ 4 3 4 1 m z y..1:. ~139421:132 , 1- . ; 24 7 7 +1-7 4 4~ Â·â€¢ . , 42 t..}'.A * --pr- 4 1 4 r. 6 0m -1 -** ..9 * 6 11 1 j %2'h. #, , ., â€¢.r. . 1 U.1 Z ,; 1, 14 ... 4 1 20 ft< 0 ir 29 ' <#fi f al--1 4,4 1:4*A#,Ai: 12% 2.44 - 1 Y 9.- 12*6 illilillillib/ 4/illillilia 4/960//Illie %2 4/,2 3*&(*91 '311'2(,ftu\..;t,~St,U..â‚¬..OM '0#!121u!~uasaÂ·Id ainleu *$***40.) uoqnplly March 17, 2009 Subject: Revisions to Chapter 7 EVDC (Wildlife), draft 4 To: Estes Valley Planning Commission I have comments on two aspects of the wildlife code revision. The first deals with a somewhat larger view of the code, its purpose, and the process which we are following. The second set of comments is directed at the specific language of the current draft. I had the privilege to attend last weeks joint study session between our Planning Commission and the Board of Trustees. I was surprised to hear more than one Trustee state that the wildlife code is one of the means our local government uses to protect open space. Their comments were made in reference to the current 30' vs. 50' stream setback discussion now before this Commission. Those comments seem to add significant importance to the discussion. I also heard Trustee Homeier's statement that the basic question is: how many cows do we want to have, that will determine how much range is needed. I don't necessarily agree with the analogy but both sets of comments provide a segue to my first topic. In order to make a sound and comprehensive change to our wildlife and habitat protection code, I believe we need to examine the process we are following. I think the starting point needs to be a definition of our goals and a clear statement of our objectives. The next step would be to construct a plan to attain those goals, part of which would be a code revision. As an example, I view the discussion of wildlife & habitat within the valley as only one part of the whole issue. The other component is open space. We need to complete an Open Space Study to move forward. The result can include an Open Space map which when overlaid onto the existing habitat map will graphically identify and prioritize the areas most important in the Valley. With this knowledge we can then craft code which will help move us toward our goals. Perhaps the most beneficial aspect of a more complete and forward looking approach is the opportunity to establish a process (including code) that ensures no landowner suffers loss, no developer gets surprised at the last moment after thousands of dollars have been spent, and that the citizens of Estes have some idea of how future development in the valley will proceed.. It is important that no one is made to be a loser in this process and I believe if we plan ahead, we can ensure that will be the case. Therefore, I urge you to take a moment and look at the broader view of what we are trying to accomplish, then proceed in a comprehensive manner not just isolated code change by isolated code change. My second set of comments is directed toward the current draft of the Wildlife & Habitat Protection code. Again comments from the Trustees at the joint session seem to make an appropriate opening. Trustee Blackhurst repeatedly said "if it ain't broke don't fix it" and Trustee Homeier's cow analogy (which I think was his way of saying it is important to sift through a complex issue to find the basics) apply here. The existing code was determined to be "broke" by Staff and the Town Attorney in three ways. 1) The current code places responsibilities on CDOW for decision making which may belong to the Planning Commission. 2) It was interpreted to be non-enforceable because it does not contain explicit language for denial, and 3) although it requires a Wildlife Conservation Plan for certain unique cases, there is no requirement that the Plan be effective in mitigating the "significant adverse impacts" of a development, There is no language for denial in this revision. It was stated at a previous meeting that inany sections of the EVDC do not have language for denial because that authority is given in Section 3.1,8 & 9. I have read those sections of code and cannot find any clear language providing grounds for denial. However, if it is clearly there, and I just missed it, why wasn't it clear and available for use at the Wapiti Crossing hearing with our existing code? The proposed code revision calls for an assessment and mitigation plan for designated special areas as does the existing code and, as with the existing code, it does not require the plan to be effective, only that it be provided,to staff. This is another problem not corrected in the revision. The revised code goes on to state ih Section 7.8.H: "Review Standards and Criteria for Sites Containing Critical Habitat. All applications shall be planned and designed to ensure that significant adverse impacts are avoided. If that is not feasible that significant adverse impacts shall be mitigated to the maximum extent feasible." The first sentence states the requirement; the second sentence removes the requirement. Our words must be straightforward and clear in their meaning or we will again have code which is misleading and non-enforceable. Lack of enforceability, no provision for denial and lack of clear requirements are the ( fundamental reasons the code is being revised. We can discuss criteria and we can discuss setbacks, but the basic question remains; does the new code correct the existing problems. If the answer is no, the new code will still be "broke" .... and the answer ia no. In summary, at this time we have an opportunity to address the complete issue of open space and wildlife habitat, and to move forward. Perhaps a good starting point would be to define our goals and I think the "purpose" statement of our current code says it best: "To maintain and enhance the diversity of wildlife species and habitat that occur in the Estes Valley, and to plan and design land uses to be harmonious with wildlife habitat and the ipecies that depend on this habitat for the economic, recreational and environmental benefit of the residents of and visitors to the Estes Valley." Please, let us not be piece meal in our approach to these topics. They are complex in presentation but not in their basic premise. With a systematic, forward looking approach we can ensure-the quality of life in the valley without harming individuals. Sincerely, Fred R. Mares ( 895 Elk Meadow Court ren Thompson crom: Bob Michener [rbmichener@gmail.com] i ant: Monday, March 16,2009 11:42 AM TO: Karen Thompson - Subject: Study Paper submission to Wildlife habitat protection for Estes Valley Developmental code (Please send copies to all Commissioners) PRESERVING HABITATS 'Why Preserve Habitats 1) Eco-tourism is the new competition for the tourist dollars. Recreational areas that can offer the widest opportunity of Nature experiences will have an increasing advantage over competing areas. 2) The increasing competition for decreasing available land leads to diminishing and eliminating natural habitats. It is difficult and expensive to re-constitute destroyed habitats and sensitive animals. Exhisting habitats and remaining animals should be given increased priority in land use. SOME HABITAT CHARACTERISTICS AND SPECIE OCCURRENCE Forest Habitats Bird nesting, foraging (warblers jays, hawks, owls, grouse Prey species cover, foraging (hawks) Open sage hillsides, valley floors with erratic streams B ird nesting, forage Prey species cover, foraging (rabbits, ground squirrels, turkey, marmots, chipmunks Predator species foraging (weasel, fox, mountain lion, bobcat, crows, ravens Riparian stream bottoms Bird nesting, foraging (warblers, jays, magpies, crows, ravens Willow foraging (elk, beaver Rocky Cliffs Bird nesting (hawks, eagles Tundra (summer, fall) Elk foraging Prey species (ptarmigan, marmots, cony) Predators (hawks, eagle, foxes 1 Karen Thompson i Â·rom: Dave & Chiqui Schultz [chiqui39@bellsouth.net] ,ent: Saturday, March 1462009 9:37 AM TO: Karen Thompson Subject: Wildlife and Habitat Code Revisions Karen, Would you please present the following to the Planning Commission and make it part of the public record in regard to . 1, these proposed code revisions. To: Estes Valley Planning Commission Rick Spowart of the Colorado Division of Wildlife has indicated to me and the the Association for Responsible Development (and I am certain he will confirm to you) that when he receives development applications for review from the Estes Park Community Development Department, he virtually never has sufficient time to perform this review before the development application is approved or denied by the Village. Therefore, I suggest that section F2 be amended to state that Staff shall, not less than ninety (90) days prior to any public hearing or ruling on the application, refer the submitted application and Wildlife and Habitat Impact Assessment to the Colorado Division of Wildlife. Further, section H states, "All applications shall be planned and designed to ensure that significant adverse impacts are avoided. If that is not feasible that (sic) significant adverse impacts shall be mitigated to the maximum extent feasible." This language completely guts the Code of any ability to protect critical habitat. Sincerely, David M. Schultz c 800 Kiowa Trail Estes Park, CO 80517 577-1103 bi~ MAR 1 6 2009 |lul 1 1 < ' 0 f r I nl 2-007 3 .. , &. N.\ 1 , I I .1 .i * 1 . I . 4 \ 4 . . + + .4. . F 0 X e.. 5 + 1 . al % . f ' 3 and 4% \ fre 4 1 - . Kits 'A . (9 10,1 a.il - 1 4 8 not S ho ion ) 4 . . ....iwi:*In,4,..: t Lw ./ 1 . 409'42'* .t ' A '64 % 1 ;..NA 41Â¥ ita, 2142. 4<~*,Uf,Nbl~t~ -K. , .API"/Ili ' 1 1 1. t.r .. .t 0 4 + A ./ ... . 4 . + L e 0 0- ron : t... . fi 1.1 . +. + t ' 1. ./ * 500 \ 7 , r 1 1 plac Grefor * 4 / 1 1 \ 4 VII \ :0 A ve n Lk-6 40 4 2 %24:) . I i. 1 1 t.* e .'. I I , 44 C.. 4<# r E ste s Hu. 14 3. \/ I. : 4 2 1 4 1, t,) 4 - $ h i.. 4 - ~ 4.k.):'AH 4 >.t, , NX K.( 1 , ~ M.4 4- 8 1 0 <CLO 0 1 2 8 4,4,3 I / 223 1 = 4. 4.- 4 , . '' 2..A e r.. 1 I . d 3. . .1 ... 7 . .. 4Â¢ 4 < :> ,* 0 â€¢t . â€¢ 6 1 I . . I ..,1 + ..1 + + N 1 1- 4 + tt .7 4 1 * + r ./ . * w. + :4::Fil,+OI9$71, FoX in -2007 + â‚¬ 4.44. t . 0. ./ . 1 -.....il. ott 17 + *.4/+ + . Iliii 4 - it + .*.~.'U-- C ./. I . 5 h N +- 1 ef f +A c 4 + .... 1 3 d en . a + I L t. + 500 -23 + . .- / M 4--CL (.7 0 e g o t ..7. le-i- 0 it~* t A v e., rt ~.4 e , ly .. * 14 : 2 f + .246 to n e c o d e O 1â€ž$ 9 ..E l 11 1 .#... A. P 1 0-- A i q 41 24 L n 46 r . ' As <--r-V c j 1 CU- A , 0 6 1 n c - - CL<1 0 34.... t I .. I -6- -4 Elle .- -I 7 t--I - I - 0,2 - - --1, 4 - -9 up<* 7 . - *. f- -04 - - -1 - 0 - . 3 - -- 4- SL-7Â«--St ..2 -:%$5*7* -0- x -r .t =t_ti - - a--2 -4--- -5 eyr,a~ - .- I - - : - -- - A. tr Â£ 1Â» 1,t:1* 27 =2 4~24 - * I~$ I '.. I ' RAK - 4 -.t %*' 414' fluD * 4 tK, . 0 V /0 7 -uk . - # Â·Â»t . . 1 -1 -4- 1 ...â€ž -â‚¬12: - UÂ¢ - ~~ -* 1 - - 44+ -* 1:St- 3 1463 4.- 32 9,2 - -1 . 4 - - -42 A' Li- ' . 1 - - -1--â‚¬ 111 - Ok-1.- - 9 0 I cir-,1 e herd of elk Â«- 1- -Per r a r I 0 /j r>n o v C 'n 3 c P -f- CO n b//1 Â«--c- G r eal 0 1 1 r t. -1 r CL CEO -1 S - 15 0, o /9/1 ZI-Â·CÂ· Gr e... f~ o r P~ 1/6 , 1 n twi n l-er 2007 4 f t=.r - _-1 Z~ :/1*6~*~*~ 2--00 7 -in . Â· -- - R- .. 0 -1 1 12-1 4. 4 5 4 jECK al- 5 00 C ' MÂ« 0% C ny<-e, 4 0 r -11 , 1 -1- P j. ~ 4 - I rl- &4 71 1 ,?C 2 -1- i h 1 ...It. . *49 0 .. .4 -1 - rj .-/. , - '- 6 6- 40 r â‚¬1 , .41' ' ..4 I -V /3 e l.:0 11 1 1 fence k & ate 1 . -1 1 1= 162 1 . . 4 + t liliÂ¥ 1 1 0 14-, 11 V . I '31 6 I + *;' 3,92=7311Â£7-~ /0 94-a-(1 â‚¬1-1-ct '4 T b . . f .1- 1 4? . 12& . 1- ' â€¢$ A' . t 1 1 -- - 1 14- 1 11,91.-r 1-.1-1,5 / 0,â€¢ 4. 04 1 '~ ~_ Lk,16~..1,2,*.' 1~LI , .: .a', 4.4 4: Aw -- 1 '1 i l./ PÂ» f 0 4 â‚¬1 C n " *- 11 .1- : 4% A Â« - f ri a. i :..41 1 ..2, - 6-0 0 Al a_c_ G r-ir~* 4- ff v . 1-1.99 a.+4Â¥*41 ////f< 4 6 7/('0"*--*' . 04. 99 - 1 . Â¢09:Â¥.4.4.4 - f b â‚¬ for CL -AB.&7' L Â· r f Â¢ 1/ ,< h â‚¬., 4-1.J . --47'"*I 1 11 1, r / / 1 -4 -ence_ 9 de- 0 . / 1 ' , ~r,7:Q-~ZLILâ‚¬La 4,9 1 L I- , ... 4 it t'.Â¢R. 9 -,1 / 1 ....49 J - / 5 .0... 4:$11"~4 J.7~973 4..4.4. 1 p -1- 04 6-Ck A . 1<1.77/7,Wil.7/ 131* Ile'. 54.0,8~f~J:01/ :i,u -. 0-r . th 2 .91 h e e d (5 r 1 . '1 01 0-Â« 6 C eq or /1 ve ifl: *, M. di/* Af f . 1 , Â¢ â€¢ 6 :, r I. flitit K I 4 00 Mac ty- reler Avt .1 im, E S ~f-e-5 A-ult co 64 3-T â‚¬ F 10 . 4%*amyÂ» '1 0 . 1 + Fl â‚¬, C.g 3- â‚¬, . Â· -Â· 2 61 affe- ct â‚¬ ri leÂ· I .)>Â«x X 0 7132/ & CJ F I . A Â£ 5 j 72t- e n * r 2008 r Â· 1 f. ./ + 9 11<4, C~ L. 5 11 1 1* , gated ind ..4 J , f ..44. i . N . - ......P--t -- - t. , 4 'lv, 13 1Â· 1 C *.5 0 7 3 14. 6 - 21.0,Â¥ - , 6 I . -1111 I 03: e. n r rEL n Câ‚¬- 2 -111 1 N 1.-0 & r 4-00 pictc. 6,red),3 1 1' f f* *-21 'r -*'2~r~ 14\ V â‚¬ f +Il .; . - F , a" 1 1 4,1. 0. 1, i 1 1--4 r) 7 .O 1 f 1 , & 102"fl 1 4 1 Iii '.1 i " 1 - d e Af i r.,7 4 4... A C , e. p-t 4- r v 4 t #14 19 i 1-a_-1- 43-ect.~ .. f , - Â·. , A./ 2 TRIK 1 21 3 1 0 b I o anci el 4 c 1 1- ... f --â€ž. , O Lij- 5 j cl E O i . *=al â€ž/ - -U y - ~ ro A ~ ir ..r.5-0 0 qu i Grolve ..111. -i ., 1 * ~' 67 54' kes Â£ a r. 44 0-0 D / , # I . ..,7 . . â€ž I . ..... . ...4. U . 0 0 0 9 -- .4 + .. 0 , R *>44 Â·,9..: ,-.: . ... I , 4 a Â·ff â‚¬ r -1- e n c f .. L n te . k d : . J r . 401. ... .. -. Af~:LED; 072 JZ*:..14*55&4.1 .'4;11.4 ..2 4 a.. b i - -Cct- 41 r - e CK.- Â·â€¢-842:1*~.I I - $ 1 1' 1 1 , : i -*3 g I 6 , 4 ' 1*4: 0 .7 . . . 2/k O h . I . di- --- . 2 Â£ 9, 12 p . dev A bâ‚¬ ..gE I . ----fil Â·4 4 02_1- 5 * D o A- s J ..4 1 1,/. 1 I ~-O 1 *1Â« G i ct<-, - *. 6.1 k fl u Â¢:3 ' -..51,~:.:*1 1.- 4 6-2 Y - I A- + 4 1 I:>â€¢t 122 e - I .t. 3 L--O 1 â€¢ a ' ... Â· 10 ' .. ... .- f Vt r . 2 ./ .6.-- Â· 4*f-Â·+ â‚¬ 9- te nce A I . . 41 ' I .. , a :: 1 1 -4 :, t. Â·. OF-* X '41*, . t lili . Â¥.4 U pj V â‚¬ . 2,Â»512 + . ~ i 4 , cs '3 41 /t-O %- MY la e. A--r r,c n C....â‚¬ r O a. A r-6 i f-,L f- a. re 61.- Page 1 < TO: Community Development Department, Town of Estes Park c/o Karen Thompson 7 11 Administrative Assistant (Community Development) APR 1 5 2009 ~ Town of Estes Park -~LKÂ©LE # V LE 91 Estes Park, CO 80517 I f 2-- DATE: 4/15/2009 RE: Resident Comment on Regulation of "Detached Accessory Dwellings" Dear Sir or Madame: Having heard about ongoing discussions in the Town of Estes and Larimer Country concerning zoning rules for "Detached Accessory Dwellings," my wife and I would like to add a comment about the importance of your deliberations for our own plans. In 1956 my parents bought an old, un-insulated, woodframe cabin originally built about 1920 and located at 1274 Chasm Drive, just off Devil's Gulch Road. The cabin is situated on a lot that is substantial and set well off from neighboring properties, but the lot size is just short of an acre, so we're subject to zoning regulations for small lots. My family spent every summer in residence, and now my wife and I have inherited the property. We spend most weekends there, which brings me to our present dilemma... Several years ago my wife and I renovated the cabin. We wanted to preserve the original structure because of its historical and sentimental value, even though we were advised that this course of action would be much more expensive than simply tearing down the flimsy old frame and building a larger, more modern cabin. As it turned out, extensive internal restructuring of the roof and walls was required, plus we added insulation, indoor plumbing, and a new, large septic system. But now the renovated cabin is still quite small-less than 900 square feet. This means it becomes a busy, noisy space if more than 3 people are present (especially if the grandchildren visit!). That's a problem for me, because I'm a professional writer working on several book projects.. We'd planned to remedy these problems by renovating the nearby garage. It's a dilapidated, wooden-frame shell mounted on ugly rocks with a dirt floor. It's so dirty we can't park our cars in it, and in its present condition the garage is an eyesore for our neighbors. Ideally, we'd like to tear down the existing garage and build in its place a small, tastefully-designed, one-story building that serves the following functions: (1) a quiet office/studio where I can write; (2) a workroom for my wife who likes to do woodworking; (3) a small bedroom where we can put up overflow guests for the night; and, r--N 1 + 1 Page 2 (4) a storage area since there is no storage iii the main cabin. We'd prefer to have some limited indoor plumbing for the convenience of people working there-a toilet and sink combo near the guest room, and a utility sink for the workroom. (The existing septic system has more than enough capacity to accept the additional water flow.) Another amenity that we'd like to include, if permitted, would be a tiny kitchenette for use by guests-a small fridge, a microwave, and perhaps an electric cooking coil. We definitely do NOT plan to rent this detached dwelling to non-family nor to use it for any commercial purposes; it is intended solely for use as an accessory unit supplementing the limited space in the main cabin. As lawyers, my wife and I appreciate the difficulties of managing future growth by making rules that are clear, equitable, aesthetic, and economically sound. We thought it might help you in your deliberations if you had some input from local people sharing their hopes and plans. Needless to say, we will accommodate our plans to the new rules, but we do hope that your deliberations will take into account that there are many people like us who have modest plans for changes that will improve the beauty as well as the utility of their property. Thanking you in advance for your consideration, I am Sincerely Yours, â‚¬3 Philip Nicholson C 04 g Estes Valley Planning Commission Tuesday, March 17, 2009 Comments Mark D. Elrod 675 Summerset Court Estes Park, CO 1. There is currently a request for a variance before the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment to install a wind turbine which would be at a height of 9 feet 6 inches above that allowed by our Development Code. 2. The Commission is aware that the purpose and intent of our Development Code at section 1.3 (K) is to "provide adequate building setbacks and height limitations". 3. The Commission is aware that the Development Code Table 4-2 provides a maximum building height of 30 feet. 4. The Commission is aware that the Development Code section 5.1(T) (2) (a) (1) addresses microcell antenna tower height at 30 feet or less. 5. The Commission is aware that the Development Code does not address wind generators or height. 6. The Commission is aware that the Larimer County Land Use Code section 4.3.7 (N) addresses small wind energy facility. 7. The Commission is aware that the Development Code section 3.6(c)(3)states that no variance shall be granted if the submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the Applicant's property are of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations. 8. Since the issue of wind generators has not been studied, nor Development Code provisions created, this Commission I would think should be asking the Community Development Department why the subjects of wind generators and height needs are being processed through the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment instead of Development Code provisions being developed by this Planning Commission. It seems to me to smack of "what you can't do directly, you do indirectly" for code creation. 9. Considerations should include, but not limited to: limitation on property size; limitation on units per lot; tower height restrictions; attached to structure roof height restrictions; system height restrictions overall; setbacks; maximum capacity or size; foundation for footings; engineering analysis; national electrical code compliance; compliance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations if any; design safety; notice to utility or interconnection agreements; notice to neighbor requirements; abandonment; public hearing requirements; environmental issues plant and wildlife; designated view shields; pre-construction studies of site for wind analysis; shadow flicker; sound level analysis; maintenance; inspections; blade clearance issues (ground, parking area, driveways, sidewalks, utilities; storage tanks); wind speed ratings; interference with electro-magnetic signals; display of signs or illumination; and working with the Colorado Governor's Energy Office. Thank you, Mark D. Elrod 2 0â‚¬ E Feb 05 09 04;04p Sherry L. Rawlings 970&454-2044 p.1 l ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT V. * 4 APPUCATION Submilial Date: CP< Aecord OwnerlsiÂ·. -LA.j/(.4 1/ IA}k/n ka<gy L.. A.- 14-2)ja C. ' 13&,eet At#*SdLot /Ul COC,19 76Â¥ 0,46'if ,C>Â£/VE :Legal Description Lot: 4' Block / Tract: - Subdwuorr. COUA/7-0 9 CLUE 2*572'715 Â¥4 30/G - parcel ID # 26-3/4/- Â£94'- 0'0'0 Section Township -- Range S..-Â·Â·.-42 'Â· -Â·'N=t-'.1*,TS-ir**@EADâ‚¬ 7- I Â· - ,; _jÂ·-.SjtÂ¢.]0.f.Orq-t:~i.'f~0...~. .Â· ..'.Â»2:DMÂ·:.6IA*Â·Â¢j*4.:***u,-~u_zziegj-4. -Â·. ..+ ' .~..:*.117#*ti?33*i*%â‚¬*28,4 Lot Size ..1 94. Acke< Zoning Â£Â¢ 5,06,uv,AL - Existing Land Use 26/43â‚¬Â»7,4 L Proposed Land Use ... NO CH#.,Ff 1 Existing Water Service :clâ‚¬Gn r Well r Other {Specify) Proposed Water Service !- Town r Well r- Other (Specify) 00 C./4*Ge Existing Santary Sewer Service t'i>'FPSD - UTSD f- Septic Proposed Sanitary Sewer Senrice 7 EPSD , UTSD - ' Septic Existing Gas Service Â·L/*cel r Other C None 2; 1 Site Access (if not on pubUC street) Are there wetlands on the site? ; ' Yes -1-1% -t .-VEriance.. u . . 41 Specilic variance desired (statedevelopment code section #):Eu{> C-lb.ts, 4-2, ric,*14.tonuF5'/3,7- 6;,Â·~wÂ· )46./*Al- VAR,ao.rG (Foo- 03 IND -rUE.ame Name of Primary Contact Person '2klot . FEL,<wo, 41 A - -5 4__le!!ng.Address~11 LGE&Â£&f ~/&FG'jc0 _I-7 Â· L :4/-Application Tee (see attached fee Schedule) i ~tatement of intent<must comply with standards set forth in Section 3.6.C of the Estes Valley Development Code) ' :17'~ copy (folded) of site plan (drawn ata scale of 1" = 209 - Â¥ ~fi~3mduced copy or the site plan (11" X 17") f - Names & mailing addresses of neighboring property owners (see attached handout) - Thesite plan shall indude information In Estes Valley Development Code Appendix B.VII.5 (attached) The applicant will be required to provide addltional copies of the site plan after staff review (see the attached Board of Adjustment variance application schedule). Cople#REEMi95;Mt'ME------- Ill # 1 #1= (Lo J:9 11 I\/7 le Community Deve~~~~te~p~dR~~~~~xe;1~77-0312~(Rept~. Apv1eD~~~6402651 ~~~~~s~~net'c~~ICQv~~~~ f 2 22 Feb 05 09 04:04p Sherry L. Rawlings 970:454-2044 p.4 411.8!12970 44 1-44 13 Gem- 53 U:LU=411]U:Â· 1129 Tenth Street*Greeley CO 80631*970.590.4389*www.GenesisEnergyUSA,com - 1 January 28,2009 :L.0/ To: City of Estes Park Board of Adjustment From: Zack Fonseca ~ft FEB~ L Re: Height Variance for 1[ 11 Country Club Drive The purpose and information letter is to comply with Estes Valley Development Code 3.6 C *The proposed wind turbine at illt Country Club Drive was designed touse a minimum of a 33' tower orhigher to generate sufficient energy to operate within design specs. The PE stamped specs for the 33' tower reflects the shortest available tower from the manufacturer. The American Wind Energy Association recommends a minimum of 30 feet hub height above the nearest competing object within 300 ft *adius, to reduce thc height ofthe wind turbine any further would render it non-effective. *The variance request is to keep the minimum manufactured pole of33 feet, with hub height of 34 feet andtop ofblade height of 39ft 6inches. The 9'6" requested is substantiat since the unit will not attain the proper sustained wind speeds and be effective without the additional height, *The characteristics of the neighborhood will not be negatively impactedby the turbine's placement since it does not directly impact the views of the immediate neighbors. The height of the tutbine at 39R 6inches would fall in line of sight with the dwellings existing moftine. De impact to traffic on Hwy 7 is also negligible since the unit is sighted 50 feet east of the highwayminimizing its view from N and S bound tramc. The tree line west ofHwy 7 also is of equal height to the top oftheturbine not detracting from 1he natural beauty ofthe area. *This variance would have no impact on delivery of public water or sewer. *The property owner has lived at this location for several years and the height restriction was not relevant till tile owners desire to purchase the wind turbine this year. *The only alternative ifthÂ© height variance is not issued is to modify the 33' monopole tower, voiding the professional engineer (PE) stamp and manufacturer's warranty and rendering the turbine significantly less effective in power output making the return on investment stretch out for several years. *Since the 33' tower is the smatiest tower made and authorized by South West Wind Power we are using the shortest possible tower that is effective and asking for the minimal variance to make the unit effective. EsfidEEFonstda-- President Genesis Energy Inck 970.590,4389 Genesis Energy Inc*1129 Tenth Street Greeley, CO 80631*970.590.4389*www,GenesisEnergyUSA.com Pg. 1 i#D~LE)~iAY:JU#~APigNAILE.Eltli~#**31**11tt1e 40(8 CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS Â§ 1.1 TITLE The regulations of this Land Development Code shall be officially known and cited as the "Land Development Code of the Estes Valley, induding the Town of Estes Park, Colorado," although it may be referred to hereafter as the 'Estes Valley Development Code," EVDC" or "this Code." Â§ 1.2 AUTHORITY This Code is authorized by the Colorado Constitution and the applicable laws and statutes of the State of Colorado. -9 Â§71:3-PURPOSE-AND~INTENT-D The regulations of this Code are intended to implement the 1996 Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and more specifically are intended to: A Provide for coordinated, harmonious development of the Estes Valley and the Town of Estes Park, which will, in accordance with present and future needs, best promote health, safety, order, convenience, prosperity and general welfare, as well as efficiency and economy in the process of development; B. Protect residents from fire, floodwaters, geologic hazards and other dangers; C. Preserve and protect existing trees and vegetation, agricultural lands, floodplains, riparian corridors, wildlife habitat and other sensitive environmental areas from adverse impacts of development; D. Facilitate the economic provision of adequate public facilities such as transportation, water supply, sewage disposal, drainage, electricity, public schools, parks and other public services and requirements; E. Coordinate transportation and land use planning to provide a safe and efficient transportation system in the Estes Valley; F. Work to improve the aesthetics and design of all primary gateways to the Town of Estes Park, including but not limited to Highways 7,34 and 36; G. Encourage innovative residential development so that growing demand for housing may be met by greater variety in lype, design and layout of dwellings, and by conservation and more efficient use of open areas ancillary to such dwellings; H. Encourage nonresidential development that preserves and protects the character of the community, including its natural and cultural landscape, and that minimizes objectionable noise, glare, odor, traffic and other impacts of such development, especially when adjacent to residential uses or to the historic downtown core; 1. Preserve and protect the architecture, history and small-town character of Estes Park's historic downtown; J. Strengthen and improve the downtown Estes Park as the primary government, cultural, office, financial, tourist, specialty shopping and pedestrian district of the Estes Valley; -7 K.-ZP.Beitle-adequatebuildingsetbacks'andlheightlimitations;D L. Encourage orderly and efficient distribution of the Estes Valley's population through land use regulations; 54% Zoning Districts Â§ 4.3 Residential Zoning Districts Table 4-2 Base Density and Dimensional Standards Residential Zoning Districts Minimum Lot Minimum Building/Structure Min. Zoning Standards {11 [5] Property Line Setbacks [2] 14] Max. Building District (Ord. 25-07 Â§1) E91 (Ord. 25-07Â§1) Building - Max. Net r Width (ft) Density Area Width Side Rear Height (units/acre) (sq ft) (ft) Front (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) [10] RE-1 1/10 Ac. 10 Ac. 200 50 50 50 30 20 RE 1/2.5 Ac. 2.5 Ac. 200 50 50 50 30 20 E-1 1 1 Ac. [3] 100 25 25 25 30 20 25- E 2 34 Ac. [3] 75 10 15 afterials; 30 20 15-other streets 25- arterials; R 4 14 Ac. 60 10 15 30 20 15-other streets R-1 8 5,000 50 15 10 15 30 20 Single-family 25- = 18,000; arterials; R-2 4 60 10 10 30 20 Duplex = 15-other 27,000 streets 40,000, Residential 5,400 sq. 60; Uses: ft./unit RM Max = 8 and [4] [8] (Ord. Greater arterials; Lots 25- (Ord. Min = 3 25-07 Â§1) than 10 [6] 10 30 20 F] 18-01 Senior 15-other #14) Institutional Senior 100,000 streets Institutional sq. ft.: Living Uses: Max = 24 Living Uses: 200 1/6 Ac. Notes to Table 4-2: [1] (a) See Chapter 4, Â§4.3.D, which allows a reduction in minimum lot size (area) for single-family residential subdivisions that are required to set aside private open areas per Chapter 4, Â§4.3.D.1. (b) See Chapter 11, Â§11.3, which allows a reduction in minimum lot size (area) for clustered lots in open space developments. (c) See Chapter 11,Â§11.4, which allows a reduction in minimum lot size (area) for attainable housing. (d) See Chapter 7, Â§7.1, which requires an increase in minimum lot size (area) for development on steep slopes. (Ord. 2-02 Â§1) [2] See Chapter 7, Â§7.6, for required setbacks from stream/river corridors and wetlands. (Ord. 2-02 #5; Ord. 11 -02 Â§1) [3] If private wells or septic systems are used, the minimum lot area shall be 2 acres. See also the regulations set forth in Â§7.12, "Adequate Public Facilities." [4] Townhome developments shall be developed on parceIs no smaller than 40,000 square feet; however, each individual townhome unit may be constructed on a minimum 2,000 square foot lot at a maximum density of 8 dwelling units per acre. [5] All development, except development of one single-family dwelling on a single lot, shall also be subject to a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of.30 and a maximum lot coverage of 50%. (Ord. 25-07 Â§1) [6] Zero side yard setbacks (known as "zero lot line development") are allowed for townhome developments. [7] Minimum building width requirements shall Â£191 apply to mobile homes located in a mobile home park. [8] Single-family and duplex developments shall have minimum lot areas of 18,000 s.f and 27,000 s.f, respectively. (Ord 18-01 #14) [9] All structures shall be set back from public or private roads that serve more than four adjacent or off-site dwellings or lots. The setback shall be measured from the edge of public or private roads, the edge of the dedicated right-of-way or recorded easement or the property line, whichever produces a greater setback. The setback shall be the same as the applicable minimum building/structure setback. (Ord. 11-02 Â§1; Ord. 25-07 Â§1) [10] See Chapter 1, Â§1.9.E, which allows an increase in the maximum height of buildings on slopes. (Ord. 18-02 #3) Supp. 8 4-7 6.49 f 5. 1 S. Warehousing and Storage; Wholesale Sales and Distribution. All warehousing and storage uses and wholesale sales and distribution uses shall be permitted subject to the following standards: 1. All wholesaling, distribution and storage of materials and equipment, except vehicles used for transporting the warehoused products, shall be conducted within a totally enclosed building. 2. Vehicles used for transporting the warehoused products shall be screened from view from all neighboring properties and from internal and external streets with a minimum six-foot solid masonry or wood fencing and landscaping, berms and landscaping or other approved comparable screening. -2 :TJ.Wireless-Telecommunication-s.Fabilities. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be subject to the following standards: 1. General. a. All telecommunications facilities shall comply with the standards of this Code, all applicable standards of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 and all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration. b. Building permits for a facility shall not be issued until the facility is approved through the development plan or special review process. 2. Microcell Antenna Towers. a. Microcell antenna towers shall be permitted by right in the zoning districts shown in Tables 4-1 and 4-4, provided that the following conditions are met: -p (1) The tower is thirty (30) feet in height or less; and (2) The tower is placed two hundred (200) feet or less from the right-of-way line of U.S. Highway 34 or 36 or Colorado Highway 7; and the tower is placed on a lot on which is located any of the following uses: (a) Schools; (b) Hospitals; or (c) Police or fire station; or (3) The tower is placed at a public utility substation or within a high-tension power line easement. b. Microcell antenna towers that are higher than thirty (30) feet and/or do not satisfy the locational criteria set forth in paragraph a above shall only be permitted by special review. 3. Compliance with the Larimer County Wireless Facilities Siting Regulations. A\\ telecommunications facilities shall comply with the purpose and standards set forth in the Larimer County Land Use Code, Â§16, "Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) Facilities," including but not limited to the following provisions contained therein: a. Â§16.1.2.B, "Preferred CMRS Facilities"; b. Â§16.1.2.C, "Facilities on Residential Properties"; c. Â§16.1.2.D, "Facilities at Historic Sites and Visually Sensitive Areas," except that for historic sites located within the Town of Estes Park, the Board of Trustees shall be the entity with sole authority to allow siting of facilities on a historic site or -:FeCS fum 4(3#**ycouNTY *&*REI@EboDEr review application and reviewed simulta- intersection as determined by the Urban neously with the mining special review Area Street Standards or the Rural Area application. Road Standards. 6. Outdoor storage areas must be located F. Oil and gas drilling production. Any opera- outside any parking, traffic circulation, tion intended to discover, develop, recover and/or right of way or landscaping area that process oil and/or gas, excluding refineries. serves the site. 1. An access permit must be obtained from I. Recycling A facility where used material is the county engineering department prior separated, processed and stored prior to shipment to the commencement of any oil and gas to others who will use the materials to make new drilling and production operation. products. G. Hazardous materials storage and/or pro- J. Junkyard. A facility for the display, storage, cessing. A facility for the storage, treatment, dis- collection, processing, purchase, sale, salvage or posal, incineration or otherwise handling of any disposal of used or scrap materials, equipment, substance or material that, by reason of its toxic, appliances, junk vehicles or other personal prop- corrosive, caustic, abrasive or otherwise injurious erty, whether of value or valueless. Junkyards do properties, may be detrimental or deleterious to not include the storage of vehicles or equipment the health of any person coming into contact with used for agricultural purposes on a farm or ranch. such material or substance. This use category K. Landfill. A site used primarily for the dis- includes the collecting, storing and/or blending of posal by dumping, burial and other means of hazardous waste to be used as a fuel source or garbage, sewage, junk, trash, refuse, discarded alternate fuel (see subsection 8.20). machinery, vehicles or parts thereoÂ£ H. Outdoor storage. A principal use where goods L. Sawmill. A facility where logs or partially such as recreational vehicles, boats and other processed cants are sawn, split, shaved, stripped, large items, are stored outside of a building. chipped or otherwise processed to produce wood Outdoor storage uses that cannot meet the follow- products, not including the processing of timber ing requirements require approval through the for use on the same lot by the owner or resident of minor special review process. the lot. 1. Outdoor storage as a principal use must M. Powerplant. A facility designed, constructed be effectively screened from adjacent prop- and operated to generate electric power by steam, erties located outside the area that is wind, solar, water or other means. zoned C-Commercial or I or I-1 Industrial. N:7Small'Wind'knergy,fafil#y. A facility which <- See section 8.5, landscaping. is used for the production ofelectrical energy from energy supplied by the wind including any trans- 2, All outdoor storage areas must maintain mission lines, and developed for the purposes of adequate emergency access lanes around supplying or distributing electrical energy to a and through the outdoor storage areas, customer or customers, and in which there are no 3. An outdoor storage use, as a principal more than three wind generator towers and the use, may include one single family dwell- hub height of the wind towers does not exceed 80 ing that is occupied by the owner or oper- feet. ator of the storage use. 1. A small wind energy facility must meet the following criteria in addition to the 4. Outdoor storage uses must be maintained section 4.5 minor special review criteria: in an orderly manner with no junk, trash or debris. a. A small wind energy facility must be sited and designed to minimize ad- 5. Outdoor storage areas must be outside verse visual impacts on neighboring the sight triangle at any driveway or properties. Supp. No. 12 LUC4:60 E . Eete ZONING 4.3.8 2. A small wind energy facility must meet tion access must be regraded and the following standards: revegetated to minimize environmen- tal impacts. a. A small wind energy facility must be setback from property lines, public k. A small wind energy facility applica- rights-of-way and access easements tion must include an agreement that at least two times the hub height of addresses decommissioning and aban- the generator. donment of the facility. The agree- ment must at a minimum provide for b. A small wind energy facility must be reuse or dismantlement of the facil- located on a lot or parcel of at least ity at the owner's expense. one acre. CItes. No. 04292003R00G, 4-29-2003; Res. No. 09262006R024, Exh. A, Item 3, 9-26-2006; Res. c. The wind generator turbines and towers must be painted or coated a No. 04102007R008, Exh. A, 4-10-2007; Res. No. 08212007R004, Exh. A, 8-21-2007; Res. No. non-reflective white, grey or other 01292008R003, Exh. A, 1-29-2008; Res. No. neutral color. 06032008R003, Exh. A, 6-3-2008) d. A small wind energy facility must not be artificially illuminated unless 4.3.8. Transportation uses. required by the FAA. A. 7>Â·ansportation depot. Land and buildings e. A small wind energy facility must used as a relay station for the transfer of a load of not be used to display advertising. freight from one vehicle to another or from one party to another. Longterm or accessory storage is f. Electrical controls must be wireless not allowed in a transportation depot. or underground and power lines must be underground except where the B. Bus terminal. A facility for the parking and electrical collector wiring is brought storage of busses and the loading and unloading together for connection to the trans- of passengers. mission or distribution network, ad- jacent . to that network. Proposed transmission facilities must be iden- tified and included as part of the small wind energy facility project. g. Noise emanating from the small wind energy facility must be in compli- ance with Larimer County Code Chapter 30, Article V. Noise. h. The operator of the small wind en- ergy facility must minimize or miti- gate any interference with electro- magnetic communications, such as radio, telephone or television signals caused by the facility. i. Towers for wind generators must be constructed of a tubular design and include anti-climb features. j. A small wind energy facility must be designed to minimize access and as- sociated site disturbance. Construe- Supp. No. 12 LUC4:60.1