HomeMy WebLinkAbout007_FloodHazardReport8/23/2024
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Flood Hazard Evaluation Page 2
As-Built Condition (as of 3/27/2023)
In 2022 there was a significant amount of earthwork that took place within the railroad ROW to add
siding tracks and stubs for future spur lines. Some of this earthwork filled in the low-laying areas that
convey floodwater to the northwest. The Red Wing Drive crossing was removed as part of this work
and the existing 36” cast iron railroad culvert was extended approximately 40’ upstream to account for
the additional railroad tracks. Figure 3 shows the As-Built conditions topography and site features.
Track C Condition
At the request of the City of Bozeman, a phase for Track C was added to the modeling. This phase
involves only the crossing for the rail spur line (Track C) that is necessary to access Tract 2-B. This
crossing is anticipated to be constructed in late 2024 or early 2025 and is proposed as a 144”
equivalent CMPA culvert (171”x110”) with a 1’ embedment depth.
Intermediate Condition
The next phase of the project is to add two more crossings to Mandeville Creek. The two crossings
will be for Wheat Drive and Cultivar Street. These two crossings are anticipated to be constructed in
2025 and are proposed as precast concrete box culverts with a span of 18’ and rise of 6’ with
embedment depths of 1’.
This phase of the project also involves upsizing the existing 36” cast iron culvert at the main rail line.
The upsized culvert will need to be equal to the capacity of the upstream culvert (for Track C) and the
future upsized downstream culvert at Frontage Road. We anticipate the existing 36” cast iron culvert
will be replaced with a 144” equivalent CMPA culvert (171”x110”) with an embedment depth of 1’.
The construction of this culvert replacement is anticipated to take place in 2025. We have been
coordinating with BNSF about the design of this replacement culvert.
Additional rail spurs are proposed to be constructed to the west of Mandeville Creek as well. Figure 4
shows the intermediate condition topography and site features. The intermediate condition assumes
the existing culvert at Frontage Road is left as the 36” RCP/CMP. We do not recommend upsizing the
existing 36” cast iron culvert at the main rail line before upsizing the Frontage Road culvert because
the new overflow path that would be activated (see the Intermediate Condition described in the
Hydraulic Analysis section of this report). However, it is ultimately up to BNSF on what they want to
decide for replacing their culvert and the associated risks.
Final Condition
The final phase of the project involves replacing the existing 36” RCP/CMP culvert at Frontage Road.
We anticipate this replacement will be a precast concrete box culvert with a span of 12’, rise of 8’, and
embedment depth of 1.25’. The Frontage Road culvert is anticipated to be replaced in 2025. We have
been coordinating with Montana Department of Transportation about the design of this culvert
replacement. Figure 5 shows the final condition topography and site features. All timelines outlined
above are subject to change. As of now, all crossing improvements outlined above are being included
under a single general permit with the Army Corps of Engineers being a primary driver due to wetland
impacts.
8/23/2024
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Flood Hazard Evaluation Page 3
Hydrology Analysis
A hydrologic analysis was performed for the 2016 Flood Study. The same flow values were adopted
for this study which are 390-cfs for Mandeville Creek and 127-cfs the Farmer’s Canal. The 2016
Flood Study is included in this report as Attachment 1.
Hydraulic Analysis
The updated Flood Study was performed using The Army Corps of Engineer’s Hydrologic
Engineering Center’s River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) version 6.3.1 (USACE, 2022). Mandeville
Creek and the surrounding floodplain area was modeled using a steady-state 2D model consisting of a
cell mesh, inflow and outflow boundary conditions, and 2D connections for the hydraulic structures.
Elevation data for the model was obtained from survey data provided by Allied Engineering, Inc. and
LiDAR data obtained from the 2018 City of Bozeman mapping project. The data’s vertical datum is
NAVD88.
Figure 1 shows the model extents and geometry of the existing conditions. Manning’s n values were
obtained by referencing aerial imagery and from “Open-Channel Hydraulics” (Chow 1959). A
Manning’s n value of 0.045 was appointed to the main channels describing a winding channel with
some weeds and stones. The model was extended far enough downstream so the downstream
boundary conditions did not affect the hydraulics in the development area. However, a normal depth
boundary condition with a friction slope of 0.004 was used for the East Gallatin River outflow
location. Flow hydrograph boundary conditions with constant flow values were used for the inflow
locations where Mandeville Creek and the Farmer’s Canal enter the model area. A 12 hour initial
conditions time was used to ramp up the flows to increase model stability. A model simulation time of
12 hours was used for all plans and the models were checked to ensure a steady-state condition was
met. A Courant controlled time step was selected with a maximum and minimum courant values of
1.0 and 0.4 respectively with a base time step of 1 second.
Existing Conditions
The existing conditions were modeled using the 2D methodology to compare to the 1D model from
the 2016 Flood Study. Figure 2 shows a comparison of the 1D and 2D flood hazard boundaries and
WSEs for the existing condition. As depicted in Figure 2, the flood hazard boundary and WSEs of the
1D and 2D model are similar. The 2D model flood hazard boundary will be used as the existing
condition flood hazard boundary for the remainder of this study.
Where the 1D model ended, the 2D model was extended further downstream to the confluence with
the East Gallatin River as well as further to the northwest and eventually to the East Gallatin River.
The overflow path that flows along the southern side of the railroad ROW to the northwest from the
main track railroad crossing of Mandeville Creek is shown in the 2D model. Approximately 438-cfs
of the total 517-cfs is being directed along this overflow path because the culverts at Frontage Road,
the main railroad track, and Red Wing Drive are undersized.
8/23/2024
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Flood Hazard Evaluation Page 4
As-Built Condition (as of 3/27/2023)
A plan was created with an updated geometry and terrain to reflect the As-Built conditions and the
flood hazard boundary was remapped. The resulting flood hazard boundary was the same from the
upstream end of the model to within approximately 400-ft of the railroad ROW. In this case, the
grading associated with the railroad siding tracks requires backwater to build up more head to overtop
to the northwest. This increased WSE causes backwater to extend further upstream and laterally in the
adjacent floodplain. The overflow path to the northwest is maintained in this configuration with
approximately 423-cfs being directed that way. Figure 3 shows a comparison between the existing
condition and the as-built condition flood hazard boundary.
Track C Condition
A plan was created using the proposed Track C crossing overlaid onto the as-built condition terrain.
This was requested by the City of Bozeman to show the flood conditions will only the Track C rail
extension in place. Figure 3.5 shows a comparison between Track C and the existing condition flood
hazard boundary. The flood hazard boundary for the Track C condition is nearly identical to the as-
built condition. This is because the culvert proposed for Track C is capable of passing the 517-cfs flow
from the 100-year event. The existing 36” culvert at the main rail line still causes roughly the same
backwater scenario seen in the as-built condition. Figure 3.5B shows a comparison at a larger scale
between the Track C condition and the as-built condition flood hazard boundary.
Intermediate Condition
The modeling for this phase of the project was completed using the anticipated culvert sizing and
grading discussed in the Project Phasing section. The new crossings upstream of the main rail line in
this intermediate condition have minimal impact to the flood hazard extents because each culvert is
sized to handle the 517-cfs. However, there is a small backwater area at the Cultivar Street crossing
where the flood hazard extent increases due to a localized increase in the WSE. This backwater area
extends approximately 400’ upstream of the proposed Cultivar Street crossing. The areas are
considered to be ineffective flow areas not providing conveyance. The areas will be impacted by the
approved (but not yet constructed) shared use trail. The areas are noted Figure 5 and are considered to
be filled as part of future development. Because the areas are considered to be ineffective flow areas,
impacts to the BFEs are not anticipated. Figure 4 shows a comparison between the existing conditions
flood hazard boundary and this intermediate condition. Figure 4A shows a comparison at a larger
scale between existing flood hazard boundary and the intermediate condition.
It is important to note that upsizing the main rail line culvert before the Frontage Road culvert creates
a new overflow path on north side of the railroad tracks. In previous iterations the northwest overflow
path remains on the south side of the railroad tracks until crossing under N 19th Ave and I-90. In this
scenario, a large amount of backwater would form just upstream of the existing Frontage Road culvert
and would overtop Frontage Road near the intersection with Reeves Road. This new overflow path
has the potential to flood existing structures before the flood water reaches the East Gallatin River.
Final Condition
The final condition will allow the full flow from the 100-year event to reach the East Gallatin River
without backwatering upstream of the railroad or the Frontage Road crossing and without activating
8/23/2024
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Flood Hazard Evaluation Page 5
the northwest overflow path. In this configuration, the flood hazard boundary along Mandeville Creek
is very similar to the existing condition with the exception of the area immediately upstream of the
Cultivar Lane crossing as discussed in the intermediate condition section above. Figure 5 and Figure
5A shows the flood hazard boundary for the final condition.
It should be noted that the elevation data used for this updated flood hazard study has been updated
since the original flood hazard evaluation took place in 2016. The most recent (year 2018) City of
Bozeman LiDAR was used for the current study along with finished design grading for the proposed
conditions. Table 1 shows a comparison of water surface elevations at key locations during the 100-
year event for the various conditions previously outlined.
Table 1. 100-year Event Water Surface Elevations Comparisons (Units = Feet, Datum = NAVD 88)
Location*
Existing
Condition
(2016 Flood
Study)
As-Built
Condition (as of
3/27/3023)
Track C
Condition
Intermediate
Condition
Final
Condition
Cultivar Lane 4701.9 4701.9 4701.9 4706.2 4706.2
Wheat Drive 4675.0 4675.1 4675.2 4677.1 4677.0
Track C 4670.5 4673.8 4674.0 4673.2 4671.3
Railroad Main
Track 4670.5 4673.8 4674.0 4671.8 4668.7
*The WSE for these were taken just upstream of the indicated location
Downstream Considerations
The section of Mandeville Creek from Frontage Road to the East Gallatin has likely not seen flows
above 100-cfs in the history of its current configuration. The existing undersized 36” culverts at the
main railroad and Frontage Road currently restrict flows to approximately 94-cfs before remaining
flow overtops and follows the northwest overflow path mentioned earlier. Large rain events in June of
2022 and June of 2024 have resulted in localized flooding just upstream of the main railroad within
the North Park Development. It’s unclear if the northwest overflow path was activated in these events.
The localized flooding occurs because the larger upstream culverts are capable of passing more flow
into the site than what the smaller culverts are able to convey from the site. The upstream culverts at
Baxter Lane and Interstate 90 include a 60” equivalent CMPA and a 48” equivalent CMPA for
Mandeville Creek and Farmers Canal respectively. Figure 7 shows the existing configuration and
culvert sizes. The combined capacity of these culverts is approximately 220-cfs before overtopping.
The overtopping path at Interstate 90 has not been modeled as part of this evaluation. The full flow
rate from the 100-year event is assumed to enter Mandeville Creek within the North Park
Development. However, it does appear the overtopping path for the Interstate 90 culverts would likely
stay along the west side of Interstate 90 up to the North 19th Avenue interchange.
By upsizing the culverts at the main railroad and Frontage Road the downstream section of
Mandeville Creek would be subjected to higher possible flow rates than the existing condition. The
replacement culverts would be designed to pass the entire 517-cfs from the 100-year event. The
culverts at Interstate 90 would likely need to be upsized for flow rates beyond approximately 220-cfs
to reach the downstream section of Mandeville Creek.
8/23/2024
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Flood Hazard Evaluation Page 6
The possibility of increased flows to the downstream portion of Mandeville Creek necessitates a more
detailed evaluation of impacts to the adjacent properties and structures. Mitigation strategies for the
offsite properties just downstream of Frontage Road may be necessary. Exhibit 1 shows a plan and
profile of the Mandeville Creek outfall to the East Gallatin River. The overall creek grade is displayed
based on the 2018 city of Bozeman LiDAR. The LiDAR data likely represents only the water surface
elevation rather than the actual channel bottom. The actual channel bottom has not been
conventionally surveyed for the full length. Mandeville Creek has an average profile grade of
approximately 1% from the downstream end of the Frontage Road culvert to the confluence with the
East Gallatin River. Some shorter sections of channel appear to have average grades closer to 3%. The
existing channel likely formed naturally prior to being restricted by the undersized railroad and
Frontage Road crossings. It’s unknown when the railroad and Frontage Road culverts were installed.
Historic maps from the railroad seem to indicate that a bridge was once used for the Mandeville Creek
crossing.
Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 show cross sections along Mandeville Creek and compare the 100-year event as-
built condition water surface elevation to the final condition water surface elevation. The cross
sections within these exhibits also compare the 100-year event water surface elevations to the
surrounding topography and estimated finished floor elevations of adjacent structures. The finished
floor elevations were estimated from the 2018 City of Bozeman LiDAR contours and dwelling
information from Montana Cadastral.
The existing structure at 27589 Frontage Road sits approximately 50-ft east of Mandeville Creek.
According to Montana Cadastral, the structure has a daylight basement. The basement finished floor
elevation is estimated to be roughly 4659-ft from the City LiDAR data. The adjacent water surface
elevation from the 100-year event of the final condition is estimated to be 4657.87-ft, this is
approximately 1.87-ft higher than the as-built condition. The water surface elevation from the 100-
year event is less than 2-feet below the estimated basement finished floor elevation. Because of the
relative elevations, the existing structure at 27589 Frontage Road is at risk under the final condition of
this updated flood hazard study. If the adjacent existing stream bank was to erode and allow the
channel to migrate it could result in damage to the structure. The existing structure is located on an
outside bend of the creek which raises the likelihood of erosion/channel migration. The existing bank
should be evaluated in more detail to determine if mitigation is recommended. A mitigation strategy
could involve armoring the existing channel/banks. Any work on the stream bed or banks would
require stream permitting. The method of stabilization would need to be evaluated and coordinated
with the conservation district and other reviewing entities. Before any of these mitigation strategies
could take place, the landowner would need to be amenable. We have had preliminary conversations
with the landowner at 27589 Frontage Road and they are open to the possibility of upsizing the
culverts and mitigation.
The existing structures on the property at 27489 Frontage Road generally sit a couple feet higher in
elevation and further from the creek than the residence at 27589 Frontage Road. The structures consist
of a detached garage and single-family home with a basement based on Montana Cadastral. The
basement finished floor elevation was estimated to be 4658-ft from the City LiDAR data. The finished
floor elevation of the basement would need to be verified by a survey. This estimated finished floor
elevation is approximately 1.2-ft above the final condition 100-year water surface elevation. The
structure is approximately 60-ft horizontally from the edge of the flood hazard in this location. Ground
8/23/2024
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Flood Hazard Evaluation Page 7
elevations around the structure are about 2-feet higher than the opposite side of the creek which do
reduce the risk of flooding. However, recommended floor elevations are a minimum of 2-feet above
estimated flood elevations. No other structures exist within 100-ft of the Mandeville Creek outfall.
While the risks for the property on the west side of the creek seem relatively smaller, we still
recommend further evaluation to better determine risks and recommend any mitigation strategies.
There are three notable locations where the final condition flood hazard from the 100-year event for
Mandeville Creek extend beyond the existing condition flood hazard extents. These three areas also
extend beyond the effective boundary for the East Gallatin River. Figure 5B and Figure 5C show the
final condition flood hazard boundary for Mandeville Creek compared to the effective FEMA flood
hazard zones for the East Gallatin River. Two areas are just upstream of the confluence with the East
Gallatin River, on the east and west sides of Mandeville Creek where a lower bench is visible from the
topography. The third area is across the East Gallatin River on a local high point surrounded by
floodway.
An additional Figure 6 represents a delineation of the effective East Gallatin River base flood
elevations with 2018 LiDAR from the COB. The effective flood plain boundary utilized
photogrammetry from 2001 which we anticipate may not represent the true ground topography as
accurately as the 2018 LiDAR. In general, LiDAR does a better job providing a “bare earth” surface
whereas photogrammetry may be more impacted by vegetation. Figure 6 shows that the areas
impacted by the Mandeville Creek flood hazard boundary may also already be affected by the East
Gallatin River. The areas are generally relatively low benches located adjacent to the East Gallatin
River and Mandeville Creek. These areas are already at risk of flooding but may have an increased
risk with increased flows associated with upsizing the existing Mandeville Creek Crossings. Prior to
any development in these areas, more detailed delineations and studies should be completed whether
the Mandeville Creek culverts are upsized or not.
In summary, two structures directly downstream of the Frontage Road and adjacent to Mandeville
Creek may be at increased risk of flood damage. The cross sections described above provide good
representations of estimated flood elevations, adjacent grades, and estimated floor elevations. The
homes and adjacent grades are above the estimated flood elevations; however, if stream banks were to
erode or migrate, the east structure in particular may be at risk of damage. Because basement
elevations are within 2-feet of the estimated flood elevations, and in particular the location of the
home on the east side of the creek on an outside bend, additional work should be completed to better
understand the risks and mitigation alternatives. Additional ground survey of the channel may provide
more accurate elevations as the flood hazard model for this stretch is based on 2018 LiDAR from the
COB.
8/23/2024
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Flood Hazard Evaluation Page 8
Attachments:
1. Figure 1 – 2D Model Set Up – Existing Conditions
2. Figure 2 – Existing Conditions – 1D/2D Comparison
3. Figure 3 – As-Built/Existing Conditions Comparison
4. Figure 3.5 – Track C Condition Comparison
5. Figure 3.5B – Track C Condition Comparison Overall
6. Figure 4 – Intermediate/Existing Conditions Comparison
7. Figure 4A – Intermediate/Existing Condition Comparison Overall
8. Figure 5 – Final/Existing Conditions Comparison
9. Figure 5A – Final/Existing Conditions Comparison Overall
10. Figure 5B – Final Condition Comparison to FEMA Flood Hazard Zones
11. Figure 5C – Final Condition Comparison to FEMA Flood Hazard Zones
12. Figure 6 – East Gallatin Effective Boundary vs 2018 COB LiDAR Delineation
13. Figure 7 – Vicinity Map & Existing Conditions
14. Exhibit 1 – Mandeville Creek Plan & Profile
15. Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 – Mandeville Creek Cross Sections
REFERENCES
Allied Engineering Services Inc. (2016). Flood Hazard Evaluation for Mandeville Creek. Bozeman,
Montana.
Chow, V. T. (1959). Open-Channel Hydraulics. Caldwell: The Blackburn Press.
US Army Corps of Engineers. (2022). River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) V6.3.1. Davis, California.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (2021). Flood Insurance Study: Gallatin County, Montana
and Incorporated Areas. Volume 1 of 4.
P:\2014\14-167 North Park\05 Design\H & H\2023 Flood Study\Report Update 2024\Working Doc\North Park Flood Hazard Evaluation.docx
FIGURE: 1DRAWN BY: TWCDATE: 5/17/2023PROJECT: 14-167³0 540 1,080 1,620Feet
NORTH PARK2D MODEL SET UP - EX. CONDITIONSBOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Figure 1 - Model Set Up.mxd1 inch = 900 feet
Mandeville Creek
Legend
2D Model Area
Boundary Condition Lines (Inflow/Outflow Locations)
2D Connections (Hydraulic Structure Locations)
2D Existing Conditions - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
East Gallatin River
466846924666470846984676470046954690471547104680 472046704730472547004685466546604665474547404730472546754670466546554650 47254720
470547004680
4655
464547304720466546704660 47354735473047304725472547154695
4675 4670466546604655 4655473046604680.44709.84707.84706.24702.947004697.54694.64691.54686.74683.54715.74672.44669.84675.5FIGURE: 2DRAWN BY: TWCDATE: 5/17/2023PROJECT: 14-167³0 240 480 720Feet
NORTH PARKEX. CONDITIONS - 1D/2D COMPARISON
BOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Figure 1 - Existing Conditions.mxd1 inch = 400 feet
Mandeville Creek
Legend
1D Cross Sections
2016 Flood Study 1D - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
2D WSE Contours (2-ft Contour Interval)
2023 Flood Study 2D - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Northwest Overflow Path
Frontage Road
Main Railroad Track
Red Wing Drive
471547104690468547054700469546604655474547404735473047254670466546654660472047154675467046554650 472546704715
46954680 467046554650 47354730472547304730473047254725468046704665466546604660 46554730FIGURE: 3DRAWN BY: TWCDATE: 5/17/2023PROJECT: 14-167³0 240 480 720Feet
NORTH PARKAS-BUILT/EX. COND. COMPARISON
BOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Figure 3 - As-Built Conditions.mxd1 inch = 400 feet
Mandeville Creek
Legend
Siding Tracks
Existing Conditions - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
As-Built (3/27/2023) - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Northwest Overflow Path
Frontage Road
Main Railroad Track
Red Wing Drive crossing removed and railroad culvert extended
4715471046904685470547004695467046654660465547454740473547304725472047154675467046554650 472546654715
46954680 4660472046704670467046554645 47304735473547254725473047304730472046954680467046654665466546604660465046554730FIGURE: 3.5DRAWN BY: EJFDATE: 7/16/2024PROJECT: 14-167³0 240 480 720Feet
NORTH PARKTRACK C CONDITION COMPARISON
BOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Figure 3.5 - Track C Condition.mxd1 inch = 400 feet
Mandeville Creek
Legend
Siding Tracks with Track C
Existing Conditions - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Track C Condition - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Northwest Overflow Path
Frontage Road
Main Railroad Track
Red Wing Drive crossing removed and railroad culvert extended
Track C with CMPA Culvert
FIGURE: 3.5BDRAWN BY: EJFDATE: 7/16/2024PROJECT: 14-167³0 540 1,080 1,620Feet
NORTH PARKTRACK C COND. COMPARISON OVERALLBOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Figure 3.5B - Track C Condition Comparison Overall.mxd1 inch = 900 feet
Mandeville Creek
Legend
Siding Tracks with Track C
Boundary Condition Lines (Inflow/Outflow Locations)
2D Model Area
As-Built (3/27/2023) - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Track C Condition - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
East Gallatin River
Track C
471547104705469046854670466547454740473546754670
47304725467046654665466046554650
4725
4720
4700468046754715
46954680465546604645 472047054680
46704655 47354730472547304730473047254725471546954670467046654665
46604660 46554730FIGURE: 4DRAWN BY: TWCDATE: 5/23/2023PROJECT: 14-167³0 240 480 720Feet
NORTH PARKINTERMEDIATE COND. COMPARISON
BOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Figure 4 - Intermediate Condition.mxd1 inch = 400 feet
Legend
Intermediate Condition Features
Existing Conditions - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Intermeditate Condition - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Mandeville Creek
Exisintg FrontageRoad culvert
Main Railroad Track
Red Wing Drive crossingremoved and railroad culvertreplaced with box culvert
Cultivar LaneWheat Drive
Additional railroad tracks
Track C with box culvert
Northwest overflowpath is eliminated
New flow path createdon north side of railroad ROW
FIGURE: 4ADRAWN BY: EJFDATE: 7/16/2024PROJECT: 14-167³0 540 1,080 1,620Feet
NORTH PARKINTERMEDIATE COND. COMP. OVERALLBOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Figure 4A - Intermediate Condition Comparison Overall.mxd1 inch = 900 feet
Mandeville Creek
Legend
Final Condition Features
Boundary Condition Lines (Inflow/Outflow Locations)
2D Model Area
2D Existing Conditions - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Intermediate Condition - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
East Gallatin River
471547104705469046854670466547454740473546754670
47304725467046654665466046554650
4725
4720
4700467546804715
46954680465546604645 47204680
46704655 47354730472547304730473047254725471546954690467046654665
46604660 46554730FIGURE: 5DRAWN BY: TWCDATE: 6/20/2023PROJECT: 14-167³0 240 480 720Feet
NORTH PARKFINAL/EX. COND. COMPARISON
BOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Figure 5 - Final Condition.mxd1 inch = 400 feet
Mandeville Creek
Legend
Final Condition Features
Shared Use Trail
Existing Conditions - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Final Condition - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Frontage Road culvertreplaced with box culvert
Main Railroad Track
Red Wing Drive crossingremoved and railroad culvertreplaced with box culvert
Cultivar Lane
Wheat Drive
Additional railroad tracks
Northwest overflowpath is eliminated
Track C with box culvert
Area of ineffective flowand shallow flooding,anticipated impact from approvedshared use trail location
Area of ineffective flowand shallow flooding
Shared use trail
FIGURE: 5ADRAWN BY: EJFDATE: 7/17/2024PROJECT: 14-167³0 540 1,080 1,620Feet
NORTH PARKFINAL COND. COMPARISON OVERALLBOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Figure 5A - Final Condition Comparison Overall.mxd1 inch = 900 feet
Mandeville Creek
Legend
Final Condition Features
Boundary Condition Lines (Inflow/Outflow Locations)
2D Model Area
2D Existing Conditions - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Final Condition - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
East Gallatin River
4660465546454640
468046754680467046754670467546704650464546654670464546504655 46554655468546854680468546754665466546654670467046804650
FIGURE: 5BDRAWN BY: EJFDATE: 7/31/2024PROJECT: 14-167³0 120 240 360Feet
NORTH PARKFINAL COND. COMPARISON TO FEMA
BOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Figure 5B - Final Condition Comparison to FEMA Zones.mxd1 inch = 200 feet
MandevilleCreekFrontage Road culvertreplaced with box culvert
Main Railroad Track
Red Wing Drive crossingremoved and railroad culvertreplaced with CMPA culvert
Wheat Drive
Additional railroad tracks
Northwest overflowpath is eliminated
Track C with CMPA culvert
Shared use trail
Legend
Final Condition Features
Shared Use Trail
Existing Conditions - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Final Condition - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Flood Hazard Zones
0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard
Regulatory Floodway
1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard
46654655
467546654670466546604650467046704670466546704655465046504650FIGURE: 5CDRAWN BY: EJFDATE: 7/31/2024PROJECT: 14-167³0 40 80 120Feet
NORTH PARKFINAL COND. COMPARISON TO FEMA
BOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Figure 5C - Final Condition Comparison to FEMA Zones.mxd1 inch = 80 feet
MandevilleCreek
Frontage Road culvertreplaced with box culvert
Main Railroad Track
Legend
Final Condition Features
Shared Use Trail
Existing Conditions - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Final Condition - 1% AC Flood Hazard Boundary
Flood Hazard Zones
0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard
Regulatory Floodway
1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard
íííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííí íííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííí íííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííííí46504648465046504659465846574654465546534652465046694665466446634651464946564648467146664669466846664651465046474646 46474646466846674662466146604674467346664675467046694667 467046694667465146504654
46674665466646644665465346514650
46494649464846484653FIGURE: 6DRAWN BY: EJFDATE: 8/23/2024PROJECT: 14-167³0 40 80 120Feet
NORTH PARKEAST GALLATIN EFFECTIVE BOUNDARY VS2018 COB LiDAR DELINEATIONBOZEMAN, MT P:\2014\14-167 North Park\08 ArcGIS\2023 - Flood Study\Zoomed In\Possible Revised East Gallatin 100-Year.mxd1 inch = 80 feet
MandevilleCreek
Legend
Final Condition Features
1-ft Contours from 2018 COB LiDAR
East Gallatin 100-year BFE Delineated with2018 COB LiDAR Terrain
ííííííííííííBase Flood Elevation line and value
FEMA SFHA
Floodway
1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard
0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard
Frontage Road culvertreplaced with box culvert
East Gallatin River
The intent of this figure is to compare the effective flood hazard boundary to the delineated boundarybased on current topography. The effective study was based on topography generated in 2001.The data used to complete this delineation is based on 2018 COB LiDAR which we anticipate producesa more accurate "bare earth" surface compared to the 2001 data. This exhibit is conceptual only aselevations have not been verified by ground survey. It does indicate that areas impacted by MandevilleCreek may also already be impacted by the East Gallatin River.