HomeMy WebLinkAboutBozemanStockyards JntPerAppl_03122021 March 12, 2021
Ms. Sage Joyce
Montana Regulatory Program Manager
Montana Regulatory Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
10 West 15 Street, Suite 2200
Helena, Montana 59626
Subject: Permit request for Bozeman Stockyards, East Gallatin Creek, Bozeman, Gallatin
County, MT
Ms. Joyce,
A 177-ft section of bank on the East Gallatin River has failed and the river is threatening a
pole barn in Bozeman, MT. This section of bank was first stabilized using bio-engineered
techniques by another firm in 2014. The bank failed in 2018 and has continued to erode in
the subsequent two springs.
The proposed work would occur in the same area as what was previously stabilized. The
new design is a more robust bio-engineered approach using oversized cobble in the toe of
the bank, rootwads, and a low floodplain bench. Based on the fact that the project was
previously authorized, we believe that the project should qualify for Nationwide Permit 3 –
Maintenance.
The project occurs within the City of Bozeman. As such, no impacts to any species listed
under the Endangered Species Act are anticipated. The habitat is unsuited to the Ute ladies-
tresses’ orchid and this species has not been identified anywhere near this location. A ‘No
Effect’ determination is appropriate for all listed species.
No impacts to historic structures will occur.
Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated. Our preferred construction window is this
summer. Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions or requests for additional
information.
Sincerely,
James Lovell
President
jlovell@confluenceinc.com
CONFLUENCE
c o n s u lt i n g i n co r p o r a t e d
406-585-9500
fax 406-582-9142
P.O. Box 1133
1115 N. 7th Ave, Suite 1 Bozeman, MT 59771-1133
www.confluenceinc.com
JOINT APPLICATION FOR PROPOSED WORK IN MONTANA’S STREAMS, WETLANDS, FLOODPLAINS,
AND OTHER WATER BODIES
Use this form to apply for one or all local, state, or federal permits listed below. The applicant is the responsible party for the project and the
point of contact unless otherwise designated. “Information for Applicant” includes agency contacts and instructions for completing this
application. To avoid delays, submit all required information, including a project site map and drawings. Incomplete applications will result in
the delay of the application process. Other laws may apply.
The applicant is responsible for obtaining all necessary permits and landowner permission before beginning work.
✓ PERMIT AGENCY FEE
✓ 310 Permit Local Conservation District No fee
SPA 124 Permit Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks No fee
✓ Floodplain Permit Local Floodplain Administrator Varies by city/county
($25 - $500+)
✓ Section 404 Permit, Section 10 Permit U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Varies ($0 - $100)
✓ 318 Authorization
401 Certification
Department of Environmental Quality $250 (318);
$400 - $20,000 (401)
Navigable Rivers Land Use License, Lease, or
Easement
Department of Natural Resources and
Conservation, Trust Lands Management Division $50, plus additional fee
A. APPLICANT INFORMATION
NAME OF APPLICANT (person responsible for project): Wake Up Inc. (Christine Huyser)
Has the landowner consented to this project? ☒ Yes ☐ No
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 23, Harrison, MT 59735
Physical Address: Click here to enter physical address.
Day Phone: (406) 586-9728 Evening Phone: Same E-Mail: christinehuyser@gmail.com
NAME OF LANDOWNER (if different from applicant): Same
Mailing Address: Same
Physical Address: Same
Day Phone: Same Evening Phone: Click here to enter or N/A. E-Mail: Click here to enter or N/A.
NAME OF CONTRACTOR/AGENT ): Jim Lovell (Confluence Consulting Inc.)
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1133, Bozeman, MT 59771-1133
Physical Address: 1115 N. 7th St., Suite 1, Bozeman, MT 59771-1133
Day Phone: 406-585-9500 Evening Phone: Click here to enter name or N/A. E-Mail:
jlovell@confluenceinc.com
B. PROJECT SITE INFORMATION
NAME OF STREAM or WATER BODY at project location East Gallatin River Nearest Town Bozeman
Address/Location: 930 E. Griffin Dr., Bozeman, MT 59715 Geocode (if available): 06-0799-06-1-01-50-0000
Choose.1/4 Choose. 1/4 Choose. 1/4, Section 06, Township 02 S, Range 06 E County Gallatin
Longitude -111.022244 Latitude 45.698668
AGENCY USE ONLY: Application # ___________ Date Received ____________
Date Accepted ____________/ Initials _____ Date Forwarded to DFWP ____________
Revised: 6/5/15 (310 form 270). Form may
be downloaded from: www.dnrc.mt.gov/
licenses-and-permits/stream-permitting
This space is for all Department of Transportation and SPA 124 permits (government projects).
Project Name _________________________________________________
Control Number ________________________________ Contract letting date ________________________________________________
MEPA/NEPA Compliance Yes No If yes, #14 of this application does not apply.
ATTACH A PROJECT SITE MAP OR A SKETCH that includes: 1) the water body where the project will take
place, roads, tributaries, landmarks; 2) a circled “X” representing the exact project location. IF NOT CLEARLY
STATED ON THE MAP OR SKETCH, PROVIDE WRITTEN DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE.
The state owns the beds of certain state navigable waterways. Is this a state navigable waterway? Yes or No.
If yes, send copy of this application to appropriate DNRC land office – see Information for Applicant.
C. PROJECT INFORMATION
1. TYPE OF PROJECT (check all that apply)
☐ Bridge/Culvert/Ford Construction ☐ Fish Habitat ☐ Mining
☐ Bridge/Culvert/Ford Removal ☐ Recreation (docks, marinas, etc.) ☐ Dredging
☐ Road Construction/Maintenance ☐ New Residential Structure ☐ Core Drill
☒ Bank Stabilization/Alteration ☐ Manufactured Home ☒ Placement of Fill
☐ Flood Protection ☐ Improvement to Existing Structure ☐ Diversion Dam
☐ Channel Alteration ☐ Commercial Structure ☐ Utilities
☐ Irrigation Structure ☐ Wetland Alteration ☐ Pond
☐ Water Well/Cistern ☐ Temporary Construction Access ☒ Debris Removal
☐ Excavation/Pit ☐ Other _____________________________________________
☒ No
5. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE of the proposed project?
The purpose of the project is to create and vegetate a bankfull bench with riparian vegetation between an
eroding streambank and an existing pole barn structure on the East Gallatin River that will help to protect the
pole barn structure from bank erosion at the toe of the bank for up to the 100-yr flow event and create
additional room for the future alignment of a City trail. Please see the 310 Evaluation Matrix in Attachment A.
6. PROVIDE A BRIEF DESCRIPTION of the proposed project.
The East Gallatin River is causing erosion of a streambank and threatening the loss of a pole barn. This
streambank was stabilized in 2014 using relatively soft bio-engineering techniques that failed in May 2018.
The current proposed solution is to stabilize the streambank by excavating material from a gravel bar partially
blocking the left side of the channel to create a floodplain bench with a rock toe, reinforced with footer logs
and rootwads to prevent bank erosion. The floodplain bench will be revegetated with native willow
transplants or nursery stock, sod mats (to the extent possible), and seed on top of native topsoil. Plan sheets
are provided in Attachment B.
7. WHAT IS THE CURRENT CONDITION of the proposed project site? Describe the existing bank condition,
bank slope, height, nearby structures, and wetlands.
The site is a raw, eroding bank with some pasture grasses on the top of the bank. Some cobble and broken
concrete has been dumped at the toe of the bank to try and slow the rate of bank erosion. The 6.5 ft tall,
nearly vertical bank, extends for roughly 177 feet along the east bank of the East Gallatin River, 1500 feet
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION DATE. Include a project timeline. Start date 6/15/20214.
(If yes, an annual plan of operation must be attached to this application – see “Information for Applicant”)
IS THIS APPLICATION FOR an annual maintenance permit? ☐ Yes ☒ No3.
See plans provided in Attachment B.
• an arrow indicating north buildings, utilities, roads, or bridges
• drainage facilities • location of existing or proposed structures, such as
• location of storage or stockpile materials • dimensions and location of fill or excavation sites
• dimensions of the project (height, width, depth in feet) • an elevation view
• a plan view (looking at the project from above) • a cross section or profile view
. PLAN OR DRAWING of the proposed project MUST be attached. This plan or drawing must include:2
Yes (If yes, describe the completed work.)
Finish date 10/31/2021 Is any portion of the work already completed? ☐
upstream of its confluence with Bozeman Creek. Since 2018 the bank has continued to erode its bank and is
now threatening a pole barn, with less than 6 feet between the pole barn and the top of the bank. Emergent
wetlands occur as fringe along the banks upstream and downstream of the eroding bank, but no wetlands
occur along the eroding bank itself. Photographs of the site are included in Attachment C and in the attached
wetland delineation report provided in Attachment D.
8. PROJECT DIMENSIONS. How many linear feet of bank will be impacted? How far will the proposed
project encroach into and extend away from the water body?
Approximately 177 feet of bank, 0.06 ac of stream channel, and 20 sq. ft of wetland would be permanently
impacted. An additional 0.08 ac of stream channel would be temporarily impacted. The bank would be built
out into the creek to build a floodplain bench that will put some distance between the streambank and the
pole barn, with the bench being a maximum width of 18 feet in its center. The new bank length is 155 feet. A
temporary coffer dam would be installed using native gravel and/or cement blocks to help protect the stream
from construction generated turbidity and allow the work area to be dewatered as needed. Plan sheets are
provided in Attachment B.
9. VEGETATION. Describe the vegetation present on site. How much vegetation will be disturbed or covered
with fill material during project installation? (Agencies require that only vegetation necessary to do the work be
removed.) Describe the revegetation plan for all disturbed areas of the project site in detail.
The top of the bank is dominated by pasture grasses, predominantly smooth brome (Bromus inermis) (see
photos in Attachment B). The project proposes to extend the bank into the stream channel away from the top
of bank and the pole barn, and so will minimally impact existing vegetation. The project will be revegetated
using transplanted/nursery willows and native riparian shrubs from a nursery, as well as with a native riparian
seed mix.
10. MATERIALS. Describe the materials proposed to be used. Note: This may be modified during the permitting process. It is
recommended you do not purchase material until all permits are issued.
Cubic yards/Linear feet Size and Type Source
18 ea. (~30 ft x 1.5 ft dia.) Rootwads (conifer and cottonwood) Big Sky, Cardwell
12 ea. (~30 ft x 1.5 ft dia.) Footer logs (conifer and cottonwood) Big Sky, Cardwell
13 ea. Mature willow transplants/Nursery willows On-site, local nursery
22 ea. Riparian shrubs (dogwood, wild rose, etc.)
40 cy Oversized cobble (D50 = 11 in.) Provided by contractor
164 cy Gravel On-site/Provided by
contractor
70 cy Topsoil On-site, Provided by
contractor
11. EQUIPMENT. List all equipment that will be used for construction of the project. How will the equipment
be used on the bank and/or in the water? Note: Make sure equipment is clean and free of weeds, weed seeds, and excess
grease before using it in the water waterway. To prevent the spread of aquatic invasive species, to the extent practical, remove mud
and aquatic plants from heavy machinery and other equipment before moving between waters and work sites, especially in waters
known to be infested with aquatic invasive species. Drain water from machinery and let dry before moving to another location.
It is expected that the majority of the work will be performed using an excavator with a hydraulic thumb and
dump trucks. Additional machinery may include a skidsteer and/or ATV.
12. DESCRIBE PLANNED EFFORTS TO MINIMIZE PROJECT IMPACTS. Consider the impacts of the
proposed project, even if temporary. What efforts will be taken to:
• Minimize erosion, sedimentation, or turbidity?
The project will be constructed during lower flows and a coffer dam will be used to isolate the work area from
the creek to reduce sediment inputs to the creek. Turbidity will be monitored up and downstream of the
project to monitor net increases in turbidity caused by the project and all permit requirements for turbidity
adhered to. The site will also be seeded to minimize long-term sediment inputs to the creek.
• Minimize stream channel alterations?
Stream channel alterations have been minimized to the extent practicable to be able to stabilize the
streambank. The top of the new streambank will be at a lower elevation and so will allow more frequent
access to the floodplain. Please see the 310 Evaluation Matrix provided in Attachment A.
• Minimize effects to stream flow or water quality caused by materials used or removal of ground cover?
Streamflow will temporarily be diverted toward the left side of the channel (facing downstream) during
construction to prevent erosion and excess turbidity. The flow pattern will be restored to current conditions
when construction has been completed. Turbidity will be minimized by constructing the project during low
flows and use of a coffer dam to isolate the project area from the creek. Please see the 310 Evaluation Matrix
provided in Attachment A.
• Minimize effects on fish and aquatic habitat?
Replacing the existing vertical, eroding banks with rootwads and brush layering in the project area will have a
dramatic beneficial effect on fish and aquatic habitat (see EMRRP technical note provided in Attachment D).
Also, please refer to the 310 Evaluation Matrix provided in Attachment A for a more complete review.
• Minimize risks of flooding or erosion problems upstream and downstream?
Please see the 310 Evaluation Matrix provided in Attachment A.
The project will not alter the base flood elevation and will have no effect on flooding and minimal effect on
erosion up and downstream of the project. The project will greatly reduce sediment inputs to the creek from
eroding streambanks.
• Minimize vegetation disturbance, protect existing vegetation, and control weeds?
The project is limited to just the area needed to conduct the bank repair work. The new floodplain bench will
promote establishment of riparian vegetation such as willows and other mesic species.
13. WHAT ARE THE NATURAL RESOURCE BENEFITS of the proposed project?
The project will have the following natural resource benefits:
1. Enhancement of onsite aquatic habitat by installing rootwads that will provide hiding cover for mature
and juvenile fish.
2. Reduction of sediment inputs caused by severe bank erosion will enhancement downstream aquatic
habitat, reducing the smothering of aquatic organisms and redds.
3. Onsite energy dissipation provided by the roughness created by rootwads in the bank.
14. LIST ALTERNATIVES to the proposed project. Why was the proposed alternative selected?
Please see the detailed alternatives analysis provided in the 310 Evaluation Matrix provided in Attachment A.
The previously restored bank used a softer bioengineering approach which ended up failing. A ‘harder’
approach, such as riprap, would accomplish the goal of the project to halt the bank erosion, but does not take
into account natural resource benefits to fish and other aquatic organisms and could potentially transfer
energy downstream to the opposing bank, potentially increasing erosion. The proposed approach attempts to
balance these goals by creating aquatic and riparian habitat, but also including a more substantial bio-
engineered approach that incorporates some oversized cobble at the toe of the new bank, as well as bio-
degradable materials such as rootwads and planted willows in the mid to high bank areas (see cross-section on
Sheet 4 in Attachment B).
D. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR SECTION 404, SECTION 10, AND FLOODPLAIN PERMITS ONLY.
If applying for a Section 404 or Section 10 permit, fill out questions 1-3. If applying for a floodplain permit, fill out
questions 3-6. (Additional information is required for floodplain permits – See “Information for Applicant.”)
1. Will the project involve placement of dredged (excavated) and/or fill material below the ordinary high water
mark, in a wetland, or other waters of the US? If yes, what is the surface area to be filled? How many cubic
yards of fill material will be used? Note: Wetland delineations are required if wetlands are affected.
Creation of the floodplain bench will occur below the ordinary high water mark. An estimated 0.06 acres and
155 feet of stream channel would be filled with 18 rootwads and 12 footer logs, 164 cy of gravel, 70 cy topsoil,
40 cy oversized cobble (D50 = 11 in. dia.), as well as 35 planted shrubs (e.g., willows, dogwood, etc.). Wetland
impacts are estimated to be 20 sq. ft (0.0005 ac). An additional 0.08 ac of stream channel would be
temporarily impacted for the temporary placement of a coffer dam during construction. The coffer dam will
be temporary, and constructed from native gravel and/or cement blocks. The blocks removed and the gravel
re-graded onsite to pre-construction contours prior to finishing the project.
2. Description of avoidance, mitigation, and compensation (see Information for Applicant). Attach additional
sheets if necessary.
This project will avoid unnecessary impacts to adjacent wetlands by clearly identifying travel routes and by
working when water levels are low.
3. List the names and address of landowners adjacent to the project site. This includes properties adjacent to
and across from the project site. (Some floodplain communities require certified adjoining landowner lists).
Please refer to the parcel map included with the table below.
Adjacent Parcel No.
(see map on next page)
Landowner Name and Address
1
The City of Bozeman
121 N. Rouse Ave
Bozeman, MT 59715-3740
2
Wake Up Inc.
P.O. Box 23
Harrison, MT 59735-0023
• 3 • 2511N LLC & UND
• P.O. Box 13
Adjacent Parcel No.
(see map on next page)
Landowner Name and Address
• Bozeman, MT 59771-0013
4
Michael Schlegel
2210 Lea Ave
Bozeman, MT 59715-2264
5
Burlington Northern Railroad Co.
Property Tax Dept
Fort Worth, TX 76161-0089
6
Montana Rail Link
MAIL TO: Washington Corp
Missoula, MT 59808-6630
4. List all applicable local, state, and federal permits and indicate whether they were issued, waived, denied, or
pending. Note: All required local, state, and federal permits, or proof of waiver must be issued prior to the
issuance of a floodplain permit.
310 Permit Pending
404/401 Permit Pending
Floodplain Permit Pending
318 Turbidity Waiver Pending
Sketch Plan Review City of Bozeman
5. Floodplain Map Number 30031C0809D
6. Does this project comply with local planning or zoning regulations? ☒ Yes ☐ No
1
1
1
2 2
2
2 3
4
5
6 1
ATTACHMENT A – 310 EVALUATION MATRIX
Joint Permit Application
Bozeman Stockyards
Bozeman, Montana
310 Permit Evaluation Matrix Date:3/12/2021
Stream/Project Name: East Gallatin River/Bozeman Stockyards Bank Stabilization Evaluator:Confluence Team
Project Alternatives
FACTOR I M S I M S I M S RATIONALE
(i) the effects on soil erosion and sedimentation, considering the methods
available to complete the project and the nature and economics of the various
alternatives;
x x x
Alt. 1 would likely have the least impact on erosion and
sedimentation because the material used would be readily
erodible, whereas the materials used in Alternatives 2 and 3
would be more resistant to erosion and ongoing
sedimentation to the East Gallatin River. Because Alt. 3 has
more complexity in the bank, it will cause more turbulence
and dissipate energy within the project limits, not transferring
the energy like Alt. 2 could to the downstream opposing bank.
(ii)a. whether there are modifications or alternative solutions that are reasonably
practical that would reduce the disturbance to the stream and its environment ...
[rank: reduces disturbance the most = 1, reduces disturbance the least = 3]
Alt. 1 would continue to allow bank erosion and so would
continue to have the highest level of erosion and contribute
the most amount of sediment to the East Gallatin River. Alt. 2
would be locally more stable but could have impacts
downstream, whereas Alt. 3 would dissipate energy at the
bank and provide time for the willows' root systems to
become fully established.
Project Purpose: The purpose of the project is to create and vegetate a bankfull bench with riparian vegetation between an eroding streambank and an existing pole barn
structure on the East Gallatin River that will help to protect the pole barn structure from bank erosion at the toe of the bank for up to the 100-yr flow event and create
additional room for the future alignment of a City trail.
1 3 2
Alt. 1 - Soft bioengineering approach - build out bench using native gravels from a nearby in-channel deposit and plant with willow clumps and live fascines.
Alt. 2 - Hard engineering approach - build out bench using native gravels from a nearby in-channel deposit. Install Class 3 riprap along the bank line to
prevent bank erosion. Plant top of bench with willows and riparian vegetation.
Alt. 3 - Preferred approach - Install footer logs and rootwads along the lower 3-ft or more of new bankline. Install oversized cobble below footer logs 0.5-ft
to depth of scour and behind wood structure. Build out bench using native gravels from a nearby in-channel deposit. Install willow clumps and riparian
INSTRUCTIONS: Determine whether the proposed project is a reasonable means of accomplishing the purpose of the proposed project. To determine if the
project is reasonable, the following must be considered: (rate as Insignificant, Moderate, or Significant)
Alt. 1 - Soft Alt. 2 - Hard Alt. 3 - Pref.
Page 1 of 3
FACTOR I M S I M S I M S RATIONALE
Alt. 1 - Soft Alt. 2 - Hard Alt. 3 - Pref.
(ii)b. whether there are modifications or alternative solutions that are
reasonably practical that would ... better accomplish the purpose of the
proposed project; [rank: least preferred=1, Preferred = 3]
Alt. 1 would likely fail because the proposed material is what
was used previously and that failed. Alt. 2 would accomplish
the purpose, but uses riprap and does not provide as much
aquatic habitat as Alt. 3. Riprap is generally recommended to
be avoided because it is so immovable and can sometimes
cause increased bank erosion downstream from where it is
placed.
(iii) whether the proposed project will create harmful flooding or erosion
problems upstream or downstream;x x x
Engineer's hydraulic analyses of Alt. 3 indicates that the
average partical size mobilized during a bankfull (2-year), and
5-year flood event would be 3.1 and 3.75 inches, respectively,
an increase of roughly 0.1 inches compared to existing
conditions. A HEC-RAS analysis of floodplain elevations
indicates that the project would cause no-rise during the 10-
year flood event, and no rise during the 100-yr event. Because
of an increased roughness value from the rootwads in Alt. 3,
flow will be slowed and energy dissipated at the bank. The
smoother plan form of Alts. 1 & 2 could lead to increased
erosion at the project bank (Alt. 1), or transfer the erosive
energy downstream to the opposing bank under Alt. 2.
Because of onsite energy dissipation under Alt. 3, no impacts
to the downstream left banks are anticipated. In addition, the
downstream left bank is well-vegetated and the proposed
floodplain bench will help to alleviate more forceful flows at
higher discharges.
(iv) the effects on stream channel alteration;x x x
The project would have a moderate effect on stream sinuosity.
177 feet of bank would be restored to its previous alignment
to a new length of 155 feet, or 22 feet less than it is currently.
For context, this proposed change in bank length of 22 feet is
less than half of a bankfull width (~51 ft). Sinuosity would
decrease from the existing 1.066 to a proposed value of 1.06.
Note that the proposed sinuosity of 1.06 is lower than existing
conditions, but higher that the effective sinuosity used in the
floodplain model for this area of 1.05.
(v) the effects on streamflow, turbidity, and water quality caused by materials
used or by removal of ground cover; and x x x
No effect on streamflow. Temporary turbidity during
construction. Alternatives 2 and 3 would have the most
beneficial impact on longer term water quality by reducing
bank erosion and sediment delivery to the stream.
1 2 3
Page 2 of 3
FACTOR I M S I M S I M S RATIONALE
Alt. 1 - Soft Alt. 2 - Hard Alt. 3 - Pref.
(vi) the effect on fish and aquatic habitat.x x x
Alternative 3 would have the most beneficial impact on fish
and aquatic habitat because the rootwads provide habitat
complexity, hydraulic diversity, and substrate sorting. These
factors provide cover and substrate for aquatic organisms that
the other two alternatives do not provide to the same degree.
Count of factors i, iii, iv, v, & vi.3 2 0 2 3 0 4 1 0
NOTES:
Based on this analysis no significant effects were identified for any of the Alternatives.
Alternative 3 - Pref. Alternative ranks as the least impactful because it has 4 factors rated as 'Insignificant' and one factor rated as 'Moderate'.
Alternative 1 - Soft Bioengineering has 3 ratings of 'Insignificant' and 2 ratings of 'Moderate'.
Alternative 2 - Hard Engineering is the most invasive with 2 ratings of 'Insignificant' and 3 ratings of 'Moderate'.
Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT B – SITE PLANS
Joint Permit Application
Bozeman Stockyards
Bozeman, Montana
ATTACHMENT C – PHOTOGRAPHS
Joint Permit Application
Bozeman Stockyards
Bozeman, Montana
Photo 1. Facing downstream at eroding streambank and pole barn. (March 2020)
Photo 2. Facing upstream at eroding streambank and pole barn. (March 2020)
ATTACHMENT D – WETLAND AND NON-
WETLAND WATERS OF THE U.S. DELINEATION
REPORT
Joint Permit Application
Bozeman Stockyards
Bozeman, Montana
ATTACHMENT E – Technical Note: Rootwad
Composites for Streambank Erosion Control
and Fish Habitat Enhancement
Joint Permit Application
Bozeman Stockyards
Bozeman, Montana