Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02- Old Depot Pocket Park Grant Proposal, MFWP. _ v l.'~ cJ .~~ ° -, v ~~ , _. - ---_ ,; ~ :.: ~•. wo;;. ,. yL ,~~. Y yy ^ .~ ~. i ~' ~` i~i~ r ~ `~' ~ ~ ~+ .w .:,~" n ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ,~, ~~ n f ''`.F ,' ~~ - , ;.~ • ~ a~~,~. l' ~~ .~ ,T:_ ~ 1 ` ~ k Y„1~ ~ t( ,j }` ~ .I ~~ jT. G ~' , ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ .y s RECREATIONAL TRAILS PROGRAM PROJECT APPLICATION FY 2002 & 2003 SUMMARY PAGE Fill in this summary page completely. Your answers/explanations should be brief. 1. PROJECT SPONSOR N~(_ PaS~ /V e f`~(~,h0 f ~aa~t ~J"$~1~~0~! Name of Agency,~rganization, Club 2. PROJECT NAME Ol ~ l~t~ot ~CC''k ~ I ~a ~ ( ~o f ~[~ o r Trail Name and/or Number or Project Title 3. PROJECT TYPE /V D ~1 MQ 1 d ~ ~7~ /Diversified, Non Motorized, Motorized 4. LAND OWNERSHIP (., ~~ D~ p0~ rltd~'j Private, Municip 1, County, State, US Forest Service, BLM, etc 5. CONCISE PROJECT ~rGt ~• ~ Coh 5 ~~ c~cf, b n , ~.e,('(Q ~ (r?Sl orc~ ~fo n. DESCRIPTION (Examples: Trail Renovation, Trail Construction, Weed Control, etc.) 6. GRANT AMOUNT $ Z S, 2$ `r< , 3 0 REQUESTED N,Er~ A. M,c.c. , 7. SPONSOR FUNDS $ 3~ ~-° QS~i ~ l ?OO.a° ~+~' ~~.d `~3'I °0 • -~ k-~~. `, ~ l ~~ r l ~ba.r 8. TOTAL PROJECT $ ~ 3~~ 38T '30 COST 9. MEPAMEPA FORMAT /f~l t, ~7r1 ~~1~lG~lf~ Examples: MEPA Checklist, NEPA EA, EIS, Categorical Exclusion w 14 CHECKLIST This checklist is to assure you and Fish, Wildlife & Parks that you have completed the application, included all of the necessary documentation and provided two (2) copies of the completed application. Please check the appropriate items below as you complete preparation of your application and include this checklist as Page 2 of your applications. ® Completed and signed application form Sponsor contact person's name, telephone number and address are included and legible © if project is on land not owned by the sponsor (private or public), include letters of support from the landowner a/nd° c~Lopies of 25-year he/ases or easegmne'nts or let(t~ers authorizing access for the project if land is private. +~ $Cr 'Pf~r /vCCiyO r ~rC /~,.~ IO~.1 ~4'HGCK GAS ~ Ce(GQ.~D (G~~2.r Letters of support from trail user groups/individuals MEPA a~~d NEPA environmental •compliance: Completed Environmental Checklist [X] Public Scoping -How you scoped, for how long, public input received ® Alternatives considered and analyzed. •, Discussion of why a particular alternative was selected Impacts © If a private. organization, copy of minutes of meeting approving application Signed Wildlife Review form Signed Fisheries Review form Map showing project area (a USGS 1:24,000 scale map at a minimum) ^ p ~~ 6 I ~ra~ ~pn i./inCVK~'~ O"i ~al ~' ~• W d (~ ~~1Co~~p~ot~e X. Noxious weed lan ~ Q J 1~n to WC~ Can~t"ra l P~uSra~ ~cr ~~ -Fc,~ , ~2{(e~ ~or~(,~om.~~`~. PROVIDE TWO (2) COMPLETED COPIES OF APPLICATION 15 x 2. 3. 4. 5 6. PART A -GENERAL INFORMATION (See Pages 8-9) l . Classif cation of Project Applicant (Check one) Government Organization Federal Partnership State ~_ Incorporated Organization Municipality Individual County Other (Explain) Reservation I U~Y ~ ~2 Cc S ~ ~l2 og ti h a~20~ /~SS6 C~""~ ~ /U ~ /1/ ~ J Name of Applicant (Agency, organization, individual). ~~ ~ O . ~o~c X03 - ~z~r~.~ , MT s ~ ~ -~ ~ Address ~h~~~~~r ~y~~ / ~Te~hh~ ~ ~a~ ties/ - U~~~s~ :Applicant Contact Person .. ~$ -~. ZZ -l ~ ~g7- ~Sg 5" as~-SSo-s3$~ deS~~,~e~o u-~'~ ~~-, cam. Home Telephone Work Telephone FAX E-mail Classification of Land (Check one) L"J Public Land Project Location. ^ Private Land ^ Combination Public & Private G~l(~~~ County ~bze~~ Ciiy, Town ~~5 ~-~ Secfia b N~ SE Township, Range, Section, '/, Section National Forest BLM Unit 16 7 Intended Use (Check one). I ]Non-motorized single use (such as hike or horseback only 2)Non-motorized diversified use (more than one non- motorized use) 3) Diversified Use for both motorized and-non-motorized 4) Motorized single use (such as snowmobile or ATV only) 8 9 10. 5) Motorized diversified use (more than one motorized use) Trail use types that will benefit from this project ~_ Bicycle ~ Hiking/:Togging Trail Motorcycle Snowmobile _~ Equestrian _~ Cross Country Skiing All-Terrain Vehicle Four Wheel Vehicles (3- and 4-wheelers) ~_ Water Trail Activity Other (Canoe or Boat Trails) * Provide letters of support from user groups or organizations that support and elan to use the trail Indicate funding_or volunteer assistance from users and groups to show support for trail. Describe partnerships that have been or'will be created to implement this project 1.~„~a+' ~ S<.~.+(, rla~~-~. ~Jl~- C.a~--~-- ~l !'lC,~-{-~,,,,~, C~o~t.8v .~~~ . Type of Project (Check all that apply). Maintenance/Grooming oftrails Restoration of areas damaged by use Development of trail side and trail head facilities Acquisition (must be from willing seller] New trail construction Safety Education/Interpretation 11 Project Description. Describe the scope of work and what you intend to accomplish with this project. Limit your response to no more than 1000 words. Additional information should include provisions for disabled access, user abilities served and range of abilities served, provisions for cultural and natural resource interpretation, provisions for safety information and education and unique attributes or features of this project that could serve as exampled to~ other projects. Include maps (area and project specific maps, with a USGS 1:24,000 quad map (or more, if necessary to show entire project area). Identify on project specific map locations of shuctures, access points, trail-heads and trail-side facilities. 17 s ] 2. This project provides for upgrading, expanding or otherwise facilitating (widening) motorized use or access to recreational trails predominantly used by non-motorized recreational trail users and on, which, as of May '1~, 1991, motorized use was prohibited or had not occurred. Yes i' _No 13. Does this project link to or is it an integral part of any other existing trail, trail system or greenway? k Yes No If yes, explain. 14. Does this project link with designated scenic byways, natural, cultural, historical, recreation or park areas? . ~_ Yes No If yes, explain. 15. Does this project provide a safe transportation corridor for the public, i.e. ]inking homes with work places & schools, etc. X Yes No If yes, explain. ~S ~~~L ~~ ~~`~ ~t~ l 6. Will this project widen an existing trail? If so, describe the extent and locations of widening and the rationale for it. (This information should be provided by the land managing agency) V1~0 17. What impact will this project have on the current types of trail users? Are certain types of users likely to be adversely impacted or displaced by this project? (This should be completed by land managing agency) ] 8. Reference any agency plan/s which supports this project. This could include, but is not limited to, the Montana State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP), State Trails Plan, a community or county comprehensive plan, a U.S. Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management Travel Management Plan or other plans? ~oZe,,~c~ 1a ~Za /7~fQrP(.~.,,, ~ ~et~iboorhoo h~ d ~s o ~ s°~~ 1Nor~ing ~'oget~ier to Create Community z ~ ~ % P. 0. Box 203 • Bozeman, ]vl`IJ 59771 ' 'w-vw.geocit-ies.com/nort(~eastneigF~6ors _ , November 23, 2001 TO: Fish, Wildlife and Parks State Trails Programs Coordinator PO Box 200701 Helena, MT 59620-0701. FROM: Northeast Neighborhood Association, Bozeman SUBJECT: Proposed trail/pocket park along an undeveloped right-of--way for Front Street between the Depot and N Wallace Street on the North side of .Bozeman Dear Steve Gilbert and Program Staff, As discussed with Steve Gilbert on the phone November 19, the Northeast Neighborhood Association is in the process of getting formal City Commission approval as noted by the enclosed letter of intent from Mayor Marcia Youngman. The letter states that the planning staff has been directed to consider any long term needs for the right of way. In addition hydrological information was asked for regarding the source of water at the site. The letter applauds this effort for enhance- ment of a blighted area and states that the city will follow through with the right of way needs investigation. To support NENA's view that this local street is not needed, aria) maps from 1969 to 2000 of this part of town are included in this application. Along with the arial views are two planning maps. One is the map of current and proposed parks and trail corridors from the 2020 Master Plan adopeted Oct 22, 2001, which shows this corridor as a future trail. The other map is from the 2001 Transportation Plan Update that shows Front St as a local street about 4 blocks in length paralleling the rail line and connecting nowhere at either end. Since a connection does occur one block south with the collector street, Tamarack, NENA argues that the section we propose to develop is extrane- ous to local transportation needs. In addition, only some sections of right of way are in the city's possession. To complete this local street, at least two historic buildings will have to be condemned and removed. Also, the new transportation plan identifies a new connector street from the Oak arterial to Cedar St to serve the yet to be developed Idaho Pole property just north of this park/trail proposal, which when built will necessitate the closure of the Wallace/L track crossing. Since buildout of the area south of the trackshas already occurred, no new local tt•affic needs can be demonstrated. The needed transportation infrastructure is north of the track. We are certain that a closer investigation of transportation needs along with the difficulty acquiring the entire Front St. right of way will be a clear indication to all that the highest and best use of this land is for a park/trail corridor as NENA has proposed. s Fish, Wildlife & Parks Project Proposal Description Northeast Neighborhood Association Old Depot Pocket Park &Trail Link The Northeast Neighborhood Association Parks Committee proposes to en- hance an undeveloped city street right of way (~50' x 375') located on the south side of the Montana Rail Link main line between the historic passenger Depot and Wallace St., near where the Story Mill spur Trail begins. The main fea- tures of the project are the spring fed mud hole at the west end which we propose to develop into a landscaped shallow pond, and the existing primitive trail on rail- road right of way which we propose to relocate to the city owned right of way and enhance to a 5' standard gravel trail. Barriers will be placed at both ends to pre- vent illegal. dumping and a parking access will be created oni the east end. A fence along the rail right of way with signage asking users to stay off rail property will be an important safety feature. Other features include cultural signage on the east end by the Depot which will display a history of the area, showing photos and draw- ings of this important brewery district at the turn of the century, including the many grain elevators and the passenger train service to downtown and Gallatin Gateway. Another feature of the proposal will engage students from Hawthorne Elementary School who will create brightly colored ceramic shapes for tiling a ce- ment table and bench. Students at Hawthorne have a ceramic room and have deco- rated several areas inside their school with the murals they created. This part of our proposal will give the students an opportunity to display their creativity out- side the school for all to enjoy. This part of the project can be funded in part by the Montana Arts Council, through the Artist in the Schools and Communities Pro- gram. This area was chosen for restoration for the following reasons: • The corridor links to the for Mill ~~ur Trail and provides bicyclers and joggers and commuters with an alternative for accessing the trail. • The corridor has historic and cultural significance with its location near the Brewery Historic District and next to the original rail Depot which may be redevel- oped in the future for passenger service as transportation becomes more diversi- fied. • The corridor has become an illegal um site since BN & MRL ended pas- senger service and removed the pedestrian amenites; the brick sidewalk was re- moved where the primitive trail along the rail line persists and the row of mature Cottowood trees was cut down. Maintenance on the Depot itself ceased and the passenger platform was removed. The site now attracts lar e refuse such as cars. trucks. campers, tires. cement and other unsightly trashed items. • The west end of the corridor has standing water where a spring has sur_ faced. (Please see enclosed letter from Streamlink Hydrology concerning the source of the water on site.) This area was known for its high water and artesian wells. The area due north is a filled wetland, as arial maps from the late 60's indicate. (See arial photo enclosure) It would be appropriate to enhance the water feature with wetland vegetation such as cattail, sedge and Aspen trees. NENA proposal description Page 3 Alternatives to Project Proposal For MEPA/NEPA compliance, 3 alternatives to the project proposal have been identified in the order of preference if the project proposal/preferred alternative is rejected. • Alternative I: In this alternative, the mud hole and standing water will be filled and landscaped. All other aspects of the project will remain basically the same. This alternative will eliminate a natural feature of the site. Long term im- pacts of covering the standing water through fill are unknown at this time, but generally seem imprudent, unless it is shown through further analysis that the source of the water is not an active spring or naturally high water table. • Alternative Ii: In this alternative, nothing will be done to alter the existing mud hole and standing water. The corridor will be closed at each end with either bollards or fencing, the trail will be constructed without parking and signage or outdoor furniture. Long term effects of leaving the standing water as is are un- known at this time. However, the muddy nature of this area will be a hazard for pedestrians and trail users. This is the alternative originally favored by the Bozeman Department of Public Works because of the ability to develop the right of way into a local street at some unknown time in the future. However, further discussion with the City Com- mission and staff engineers has revealed little logic or need for developing this portion of the right of way. • Alternative III: No action to the city owned right of way. The long term effects of no action will be the probable continued use of the site for illegal dump- ing of large and heavy refuse. Knapweed will continue to encroach in the area. Cars and trucks will continue to use the mudhole fora "proving ground" further degrading the area. In comparing the 3 alternatives to the project proposal./preferred alternative, it is clear that the project proposal offers a more complete enhancement of a de- graded area. The most outstanding feature of this site is also the most problematic - what to do with the standing water and mud hole. Enhancement of the water feature will add plant diversity to the site and attract other water loving life forms, including the possibility of frogs. Mosquito breeding is not a new impact since the water is there already. Nor is it a new hazard for young pedestrians who could possibly drown if not supervised. Again, this water exists now in a degraded state. Only covering the water with fill will remove the existing "negative" impacts of the water. Northeast Neighbors, the fish and wildlife biologists consulted and the various Advisory Boards and organizations that have written in support of the project, all agree that the positive impacts of enhancing the existing water feature far outweigh the negative impacts. DriJ r.._- 979 ~ '1" " ~ FaiK i ~r ~ ~ ~ _~ `• ~ .__ii - _ ~~ ~ ~ ~ `ti` ~~`\ - ' ~ -- ~ccM •~ ~ IT ~ o ~ I `~ ~ 86 ~ • i ~I ~ . ~• __ ~ _ j Ta ~ ~ ^ ks ~ 1~ 1 - `~ f - \` r ~ gnu O ~ u 53 ` ~ ~~ b ~' r-~ ~ '~ ~ UlT ~. \ 1 ~ ' ~ , ~~ O Srq \ , I :f i Tea n!e" Pa~~ i : ~ 768AT ~ I • . ~ I 1 ~ , ,• ~ I x ~ ^ a/r9rognd ~ • ~4 I , is ~ ~ ~ _ P e *~:. • ~ _-_ _-_ .t l737Y ~ ~~. _ 4 ~ , i D ~, ,~ / 9T • s ~ a 1 ~ J Y ~c , , yF9 /y j - ~\ - ~ ~ -_. ~ * f• ~ - t ~ - ~ ~ O ~lcr ~ 1 ~m ~ j ~ „ ~ ~-~ 1 ~ marks gal9 ' x ,wu1V- ar 1 t 1 i '• -~.~ ~~ ~ __ , -,..-. y, ry, r t,. ~ .. fJ , r > ~ an ~r ~ i I ~ ~ ~ i ~/ f .. ~ • B ~ ~ /~ ~ ± 89806 ' '' y ~ Field le ~ ~ / S \ / ru~ Y ~ ~ - 98 / ~.9 1' ~ Cemetely ~ _ _ ~ \~ \ k ~ / , ~ .~ i ~~ _ o.n ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 _ t 9852 ~ ~ 99/ _ s ~i~ty i- ~ ~ ~ " ~ I ~ • T = ~ p I ~ ' . I ~~ ~ V , o ~ B ___ 3~. ~ I p ~ I ~ 1• .. I I ~ • ~ • • ~ ~ o ttI ~ ,~ ~~ 1 thl~r:~ 99 Ti, °i ' ~ / ~ ~ ~ / ~ I _ i ~ ~/ I a ~ ~ ~ . I c ~ r------ ~ -095 --, ~ ~ _ , ~ ~ / Y ~ I I. ~• - - ( ~._/ • ~ . . 2 _ ~ +1 ~1 ~~ Vii/ y _l ~a,. r ;'~~ tt' ~ . f~~u~ (~f Y ~~~ 1 ~4^^ ~' ~j .,... `~ + o ~ X 1 ~ 1 9 y v i L r4 i d ~ io j ~ UI} 1 ~ ~ _ g ~ g j ~ 4 a 4 ~ C a ~ e ~ ~ 6 ~+ C$ 3 k ~ ~ y d I 4 _ ~~. d ~ o ' ±c~g ~ ~ !~ ¢ a ~~ ~ ~ R o ~ ~ ®, RI ~ i ti ~ iJ N +• c O ° ~ ~ ~ L ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ I ~~: ~ ,. +II ° ~ ~. ; a ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ C a ;~ + ~ a t ~ ~ ~ c ~ a '~-` ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ d ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ c ~ % # ~ ; -,1- ~y w ~ i C m ~ ~ ~ + _ ~ ^ p ~ A ~ ~ 7 ~ .~ q ~ ~ +++~~~,,, + V UA ~, 4 ~ p i 1g1g ~r F = m..,.-~-e. l~ ~ gg ~`• 4 e ~a~~ R^ ~ ~ { ~ 4 • ~ ~ F { : ~~ Alm.. ~" ~ .... .. , ~ ~ ~ ._ ,- 4.o F _ ~ r! _ ._ _.~. E.'i~~ I[IT I~ ~ Y 1 ~' t4_+ i~ ~ Y'~ ~ ~ k ~~ ` 4.. ~' ,t .fir 7€ w r Q {~ 1 z 06 ~ ~/G~ rlsi~~ ~ ~ eo/t (il ~p o~iC.1~e ., , ~; ; ~~ ~ .,4~ -o ~r,~~. -,~ ~°`- `'- z 39. ~iff~ ~i~~lFtai~nadUnderpass. ~40_ Cada: 5tr~~t- Up~ade to 2. urban cailectorand car~ct to Rcws~. s ~ ~~ e~ ..µ ' `- ~; ~` ~ ;~, ,r ~.~ ~ ~ ~~:oF . ~:~ , _ ~`+.~~ ,` ``. ~~. # t ~ ; ~ ~,..., . ,~~ ~~z, ~; ~ ~ , 3 ~~ ~ ~ ~,~ t Yf~ a ~ ~' < < ~ sue" 5 ~~~' . ~ ~'~ t ~ ~. , .,. a~~ '. t ~ •~'-. WWWW~~~~ ~/' i ' ~3 '~I 4.2. iY ~~iP ~ ~l.~ ^ ~~ n~~ Y V ~ V e S q ~ ., ~-~ ~r r" ~ ti n ~ .,eta ~ ~~,, ~ ~.;1. P ~~ ~ ~,. a ~ +~ ,~~ ~ ,:,. ,~ ~, e 4e q "~a~t . ~ ~ '. ~` ~ .< :~1 ° ~~ ~:. ~~ti s ~~ E;, . . a ~ ~ ~~ ,~ ~, ~ ~; .~ ,~ ~ i,. ~i' 4 ~ 4 4 y~ ~ Y ti R t` K yq'~ t ~I ~ ~_ TMq ~ P i} ~, ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,Ss 9F~'t ~ ~ ~ !' r ~r ,..Y ~ '"~, ~ ~ ~ M Y ~ s a -~;. p. ~ ` ~ r~ 1 ~ ~x + ~ `, 4i.~ ~: `,~ { .rfh' ~ 4th i~ t _ _ ~ ., I K L ~: ~ ~ '= ~ ~ a:~ ~ ~ y~ ~3j °`°' ~' `'`~ o ~; ~ ~ ~~~ A ~ ~ ~ }~ ' 1 ~ f Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~' v d ~ ~ 7 _: ~{' ~. ,. ~ . ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~" '-a, `~ ~' November 20, 2001 Bozeman All-America City Zoos ~' Office of the City Commission ~' CITY OF BOZEMAN 411 East Main Street P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 f ~: (406) 582-2300 Fay. (406) 582-2323 TDD: (406) 582-2301 Support Letter for NENA Pocket Park Grant Application Attention: Fish, Wildlife and Parks The Bozeman City Commission is very interested in the Northeast Neighborhood Association's (NENA) proposal for developing a pocket park along our unused Front Street right of way, including restoration of a spring-fed wetlands area. I understand a Fish, Wildlife and Parks representative was informed the Commission was unable to take an official stand by your deadline, because we have questions we need answered first. Thank you for your willingness to accept this letter as a placeholder until we can send you our formal response. Because the park is proposed for a street right of way, we need to examine carefully any likely future needs for that right of way. The proposed Front Street was deleted from our 2001 Bozeman Area Transportation Master Plan update, so we no longer have any plans to develop it as a major street. As a result of NENA's proposal, we've added to staff's priority list consideration of any long-term city needs for the right of way. We've also asked for hydrologic information on the degraded wetlands area. We have several reasons for finding NENA's proposal appealing. 1. The neighborhood has no parks and is separated by busy collector and arterial streets from the nearest developed parks. 2. The neighborhoods' historic mix of industrial and residential uses makes it important to develop amenities to protect the stability of the residential neighborhood, enhance quality of life, and provide a green oasis for business employees and residents to share. 3. Our new 2020 Community Plan, our Critical Lands Study, and our Transportation Plan stress protection of wetlands. They also emphasize avoiding further damage to or loss of critical lands such as wetlands due to future development of infrastructure or land. 4. The pocket park would improve the viewscape of the railroad corridor in anticipation of a potential return to passenger train use. We applaud NENA's efforts to enhance its neighborhood and will be in touch with you again as soon as we can take a formal stand. Sincerely, ~~ Marcia Youngman, Mayor www.bozcman.net Bozeman Beautification Advisory Board P.O. Box 640 Bozeman, MT 59771 (406) 582-2360 Fax: (406) 582-2363 November 23, 2001 Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks Department State Trails Programs Coordinator P. O. Box 200701 Helena, MT 59620-0701 Dear Program Coordinator: This letter is in support of the Bozeman's Northeast Neighborhood Association's (NENA) grant proposal supporting the development of an "Old Depot Pocket Park," on city land which is adjacent to the railroad and old Northern Pacific Railroad Depot. Paul Weiss and Jeanne Weesly, northeast neighborhood residents, gave a presentation of the pocket park proposal, "Old Depot Pocket Park," to the Bozeman Beautification Board on November 14~'. They introduced the idea of incorporating a new pocket park on city land adjacent to the Northern Pacific Railroad Depot. The area is presently used for illegal dumping. The proposal has the support of the Gallatin Valley Land Trust, the U. S. Forest Service, and the Montana Conservation Corps, who have all pledged labor in support of the project. If this proposal is approved, native plant restoration, as well as restoration of a natural spring will occur in a park area of 12-15,000 square feet. A trail will be constructed to run through the park and connect to Bozeman's Main Street and the mountain trail network. It was brought to the attention of our board that this is the only neighborhood in Bozeman without a park. The motion was passed unanimously on November 14, 2001, by the BBAB supporting the project 100%. If you have any questions or comments regarding this proposal, please call me at (406) 585-6932. Sincerely, -~~ ~~~ C~ Christopher Nixon, Vice-Chair Bozeman Beautification Advisory Board ~ ruuy suppor-rme .via Lepot rocxeI rarK/ 1Ta11 Jpur Yro~ect proposed by the Bozeman, North East Neighborhood Association (NE1~1A). The proposed project will .improve `public safety.by creating a short spur trail that provides bicyclists and pedestrians with an alternative route, .away, from a very narrow, busy street. The project. will also help clean up a public right-of--way that has turned into an ugly, trash covered, dumping, ground. NENA's :.plan also calls for landscaping of the frail corridor and restoration of a small wetland that ' now serves as a muddy truck proving ground. All of these-improvements.will`benefit the quality of life for ,many residents of our community -and truly demonstrates how much the .North East Neighborhood cares about it's surroundings. I help build public trails for the Gallatin Valley I;and~Trust around~the Bozeman area. It has - been my experience that small connector trails, similar io the-one proposed by NENA are important support builders for improving non-motorized transportation mour -community. By working together.to connect these small trail segments, we will eventually create a more cohesive and usable trail system. This proposed Old Depot trail segment is within a few yards of the. Story Mi11 Spur trail, a histoncrail-trail: This small corridor of proposed green- space, next to a historic. rail depot, is a potential bright spot in what has been a primarily industrial area: The Recreational Trails .Program funding will provide a wonderful opportunity to expand our community to y tem and improve the quality of life in Bozeman. The Gallatin Valley Land Trust stro~PPorts this valuable project. Since Gary Vodehnal Resource Specialist P.O. Box 7021 ^ Bozeman, Montana -59771-7021 ^ ' 406-587-8404 ^ Fax 406- 582-1136 ^ www.gvlt:org. recycled pnper MONTANA n~A .CONSERVATION CC coRPs November 19, 2001 Northeast Neighborhood Association PO Box 203 r . ~: ~.t. .. ~' BozemanMT 59771 ~ ~~~ - ti;: DearNENA, ,~ s'. ham writing m support`of~the Recreational Trails Grant for the Old Depot pocl.et park trail. MCC Bozeman Region crews have worked on Story Mill Spur trail projects; and appreciate that this pocket park~wi]l,enhance the Story Mill Spur and Old Depot areas. The,h%Iontana Conservation Corps always appreciates the opportunity to collaborate' with community groups. This project fits very nicely with our mission of stewardship and enhancement~of natui•ai resources combined with community service. The MCC will be glad to donate a week of crew labor and expenses as in-kind service to the O]d Depot pocket park trail project.. The full cost to MCC of putting a crew. on an in-town project for one. week is $3,013: This includes labor, transportation, equipment,. tools, and indirect costs: As you-know our crews come equipped with tools, spike gear, transportation, and worker's compensation- coverage. In 2002 MCC will have field crews of 7 members with 2' crew leaders .and S corpsmembers. If you wish to consider only hourly labor costs, our crews average 45+ hours in a week on most projects. Thanks for working so hard to secure the necessary funding for this worthwhile project: We look forward to the collaboration with the Northeast Neighborhood Association and working with the neighborhood volunteers. We would also be willing to make MCC tools available to the neighborhood volunteers. Si cexely, C~ Don 7ackso Bozeman Region Supervisor Montana Conservation Corps STATE OFFICE • 220 West Lamme, Suite 3-C, Bozeman, MT 59715 • Phone 406-587-4475 Fax 406-587-2606 • email: mccC~mtcorps.org • www.mtcorps.org • MCC is an Americorps program. REGIONAL OFFICES • 636 Haugen St., Billings, MT 59101 • 1015 1st Ave. N, Suite 13, Great Falls, MT 59401 1900 N. Main St, Suite 11, Hdena, MT 59601.307 1st Ave. East, Suite 20, Kalispell, MT 59901.415 N. Higgins #105, Missoula, MT 59802 Streamlink Nydrolo~ 407 Bonner Lane, Bozeman, MT 5971 S 406 587-8655 November 6, 2001 To Whom It May Concern: Re: Northeast Neighborhood Association Park Proposal Bozeman, Montana It has come to my attention that the City of Bozeman plans to install sewer and/or water mains along an abandoned street adjacent to the railroad right of way immediately east of North Wallace Avenue. This area, informally known as Bozeman's mud bog, is typically wet throughout most of the year by my own observation, raising the question of the source of water at this location and associated complications of installing infrastructure. Through my formal education at Montana State University (BS Hydrogeology, 1992) three seasons of perfomung stream surveys on over 600 miles of stream on the Lewis & Clark National Forest and two years of groundwater consulting for petroleum remediarion at 45 petroleum release sites around the state of Montana, I feel I have the ability to make a professional observation as to the nature of the water at the proposed pazk/mud bog. Without a formal assessment of the immediate azea involving pump tests and measurement of static water levels I cannot be conclusive as to the source of water. However, it is highly likely that an underground spring, in conjunction with surface runoff, provides the water commonly observed at this location. The reasons supporting the possible existence of a spring aze as follows: - Standing water is observed long after precipitation events (months). - No standing water is observed in other low azeas in the vicinity for similarly long periods of time after a precipitation event, suggesting that runoff into other low azeas successfully drains into the subsurface. - A 1969 photograph exists of an artesian (self-flowing) spring in the immediate vicinity across the railroad tracks, indicating a naturally high groundwater table in the azea. - The still undisturbed azea to the north and east exhibit a high water table and all aspects of wetlands, also indicative of a high water table persisting in the subject azea despite infilling associated with the railroad and adjacent azeas. While it is possible that the subject area question has a natural clay liner and holds water for uncharacteristically long periods of time, I would deem this to be the less likely of the two scenarios. Because of the challenges presented by wet areas to the installation and maintenance of water and sewer lines, such as piping deterioration, settling and leaking, it would be prudent to conduct a thorough study of water movements into and out of the azea before proceeding or avoid the area altogether. If the latter option is chosen it would be beneficial to everyone to allow the neighborhood association to contribute the northside's fast pazk at this location with the added advantage of keeping the historic mud bogging and garbage dumping to a minimum. These are my professional opinions only and I present them as preventative measure. I would be happy to provide additional information upon request. Sincerely, ~~~ Paul House Streamlink Hydrology CITY OF BOZEMAN Bozeman, Montana November 15, 2001 North East Neighborhood Association Park Project Committee Chandler Dayton P. O. Box 203 Bozeman, MT 59771 Dear Chandler: As discussed verbally with Jon Gerster, and as explained by James Goehrung, Facilities & Lands Superintendent at the Recreation & Park Committee meeting last week, the City of Bozeman will not allow a "pocket park", as proposed by NENA, to be installed within the Front Street right-of-way between Tamarack Street and Wallace Avenue. I will not rebut the issues you presented in your November 9 letter, but will again reiterate that while rights-of-way are not intended for park purposes, we are willing to work with NENA on pedestrian improvements within the right-of-way. The exception is your comment that "the city has plans to develop Front Street". Because I was unable to attend the meeting, I don't know what the group was told about the city's "plan to develop Front Street". As you are well aware, the 1993 Bozeman Urban Transportation Plan recommended the construction of a northeast arterial from Rouse to East Main. While the Plan indicated this route would travel along Front Street, it also recognized "detailed route planning will be necessary due tq an abrupt elevation change north of the Highland Boulevard and East Main intersection, and the presence of industrial uses between Front Street and I-90". The 2001 Transportation Plan Update now calls for the upgrade of Cedar Street for access to the northeast industrial area; however, it does not connect to Main Street, and is no longer referred to as an arterial. Although the arterial is no longer proposed for this portion of Front Street, there is no guarantee that Front Street will not be continued as a local street. To the best of my knowledge, the City has no immediate plans to construct this portion of Front Street; however, it could be developed sometime in the future -likely by a developer for access to adjacent property. Thus, we will not allow this section of right-of-way to be used for park purposes as proposed. Street address: 411 East Main Street Phone: (406) 582-2300 Mailing address: P.O. Box 1230 Fax: (406) 582-2323 Bozeman, Montana 59771-1230 TDD: (406) 582-2301 NENA Park Project Committee November 16, 2001 Page 2 As I relayed to Jon, I believe we can work together to improve this section of right-of- way for a gravel trail and native grasses within the standard street location, grass/trees in the standard boulevard locations, and barricading to prevent encroachments such as those that can ently exist. If FWP is aware that this is street right-of-way, and it could be reclaimed as such in the future, we would be supportive of your grant application, subject to the parameters set above. If you have further questions, please contact me at 582-2306. Sincerely, ~_ ~. Debra H. Arkell Director of Public Service DA/dla Cc: Clark Johnson, City Manager James Goehrung, Superintendent of Facilities & Lands Date: November 12, 2001 To: Chandler Dayton, Northeast Neighborhood Association From: Recreation and Parks Advisory Board Re: Front Street park After hearing your presentation on the park proposed for a portion of Front Street between the old railroad depot and Tamarack Street, the Board supports this concept. The park would provide a great aesthetic improvement over the current de facto dump and mudhole, create a small wetlands to replace the mudhole, and supply a link in the Main Street to the Mountains trail system with its connection to the Story Mill Spur. We are confident that disputes over right-of-way extent and uses can be resolved to allow creation of the park. I~orth~s~t l~¢i~hborhood ~9~~oeiation ~4ddr~s~ to thQ ~oz~man ~it~ ~ommi~~ion. March 12, 2001 1. Mission of the Northeast Neighborhood Association. A. Positive approach to "Challenges". Focusing more on code enforcement. B. Solution focus. C. Inclusive of Business and Residence. II. Assets of the Northeast Neighborhood A. Diversity B. Affordability C. Historic inventory of buildings and heritage. D. Proximity to large undeveloped Open Spaces E. A "Smart Growth" neighborhood. Business and Residential area. III. Challenges" met during NENA's past year. A. Dialog maintained through newsletter. Distribution to 1200, Rouse N, W to 7th. B. Neighborhood meeting at Historic Brewery, Feb 2000, well attended (85 people). C. New speed signs on Wallace. "Northeast Neighbors Tfurnk You for Driving 25MPH" IV. Goals of the Next Year A. Neighborhood Meeting: March 27th, Hawthorne Gym 7 - 9 PM. Commission invited B. Participate in an exciting "Off Broadway" Development C. Cleanup NENA -part of Cleanup Bozeman Apri121, 2001 D. Monitor new speed signs on Wallace E. Participate in positive, neighborhood sensitive development north of the railroad F. Wrap up creation of N. Church Historic District G. Beautification of depot park at historic depot. Other projects of beautification too. V. Signs of Hope for the Northeast A. Restoration/renovation work on the Brewery B. East Main improvements, American Bank, Montana Aleworks, Beauty Board C-Tep project C. Retention of Strategix -expansion in an historic building. D. Library on CMC E. Off Broadway. Past vigilance pays off. Future vigilance on the way! F "777" G. Four Season Sunrooms H. Jacob's Crossing I. Interneighborhood Council VI. Issues of Concern for the Future. A. Expansion of Heavier Industrial base -Traffic/transportation issues. 1. Empire concern -illegal development/ after fact permitting2 Bronken's 3. Idaho Pole 4. Cupola Land This one is looking good, (Off Broadway) but we are WATCHING!!! 5. Front Street. Kill this once and for all!! VII.- NENA "Wish List" A. Pocket Park along neglected Bozeman Creek B. Preserve Open Space C. Compliance Issue help with Ordinances. We are encouraged by Vicki Hefler! We are discouraged by Empire..It is so important to keep citizen involvement and communications, especially within planning. While "Fast Track" is promising, it should never circumvent the public process. Manytimes, the public has insight beyond the planning dept. Volume 3, Issue 1 Northeast Neighborhood Association Nezt NENA Meeting ,Please Plan to Be There! by Christopher Nixon, 719 N. Wallace Ave. (585-6933) or lehrkindmansion@imt.net The Northeast Neighborhood Association will hold its 3rd Yearly Neighborhood Meeting on Tuesdays March 27, 2001, 7:00-9:00 PM in the Hawthorne Elementary School Gymnasium. There are several quite significant issues to be addressed, and everyone should take advantage of this opportunity to express their ideas and concerns. A great deal has happened since NENA began its renewed activism with the meeting in February 1999. Much more is in store for us to make Northeast Bozeman the best place to live and work in the city. At that initial meeting we had excellent representation from both residents and businesses. The second meeting was well attended, however there was considerably less representa- tion by businesses. This area of Bozeman is quiet unique in it's interlacing of residential, commercial, and industrial properties. It is of utmost importance that all interest aze represented at these neighborhood gatherings in order to find common ground and means of weaving these interest together. Please help spread the word about the gathering by contacting the residents or businesses adjacent to your property. This will increase the awareness of the meetings occurrence and may be the additional reminder someone needs to prevent them form missing the event. Those who rent their properties, please make your landlords awaze of the meeting, since we may not have another y of contacting them if their name and address has not been added to the `mail list'. Any extra ...fort you can make to contact others about the event will be appreciated and it is an excellent opportunity to just say `hi!' to a neighbor. In light of current trends in school consolidation throughout the country, it is exceptional that we have a neighborhood school in our community. Let's all take advantage of this unique opportunity in our neighborhood to attend a citizen group meeting in what is increasingly a rare treasure in this nation, a neighborhood school. Agenda Items for 3f27/01 NENA Meeting 1. Development Issues A. North Church Historic District B. Cupola Project ("Off Broadway")-what is its current status? C. Ordinance compliance issues (New Zone Code Enforcement Officer-Vicky Hasler) D. Idaho Pole/Empire development- what is planned for this areal E. Open Space such as a neighborhood park or community garden area. 11. Discussion Items A. Formation of the Interneighborhood Council in Bozeman B. Safety Issues: 1. Speed along Wallace Street 2. Establishment of a cross walks at Wallace and Main, and Wallace and Lamme 3. Stop signs at North Church and Lamme (How are they working? Did their installment curb speeding?J C. Community Well Being 1. Beautification Project along Railway and Old Depot 2. Neighborhood clean up in conjunction with city wide clean up on April 21st 3. NENA Newsletter (How effective is it and how you may be able to help.) 4. Web page and e-mail as means of communicating neighborhood information 111. New Issues IV. Nominations and Election of Representatives to INC March 2001 Annual Clean-Up Bozeman set for Apri121, 2001 Liz Galle Noble will be the Clean- Up Coordinator for the Northeast Neighborhood this year. You may contact her to sigh-up for particular streets, stream sections, or vacant lots at 585-8748. Liz will also have asign-up sheet and map at the NENA meeting if you wish to speak with her there. NENA has had a tremendous participation in the clean-up the past two yeazs. Let's make this yeaz an even greater success! Businesses are encouraged to join in with the ef- fort by removing all the debris ac- cumulated over the winter, espe- cially in the mounds of snow in the snow removal areas. These areas in particulaz collect the waste from lazge plowed areas for the entire snow season and can be quite un- sightly aswell as hazazdous after the season's thaw. The Newest Plans for Cupola/ Off Broadway will be available for viewing at the next meeting. is Contents Page Two: • Waste Transfer Station • Work Day on Edgerly R.R. • Wallace Traffic Update • Parade of Sheds The' Prez Sez: It's time to meet again! NENA has a great reputation among other neighborhoods, for being able to get results, be positive and seek win-win solutions. New neighborhoods are forming and are using NENA as an example. Than to everyone in NENA who attends the meetings, reads the NENA News and participates. I encourage more of you to attend the upcoming meeting. Get your neighbors to attend -it's the best investment you can make in your home or business! We DO have power in our voting numbers! I am now running for a seat on th Bozeman City Commission. My platform revolves around neighborhoods -the core of the community. I am asking you to vote forme, Marcia Youngman, and Joe rost on Nov. 6! Why us? Marcia and Joe's records speak for themselves as pro neighborhood - particularly getting great results for our northeast corner. I hope my record of reviving NENA and getting us out of our A~n~ n~w~ Sidewalk Talk -Chris Nixon All the sidewalk activity in the neighborhood has raised many questions. I ~ talked with Andy Kerr, City Engineering Assistant for some answers. There are actually two different sidewalk programs/projects in progress. 1. Sidewalk installation, and 2. Sidewalk Repair/Replacement. The sidewalk instillation program is an annual city wide project. Each year a certain number of sidewalks are installed .along city streets where sidewalks have never been located. This year areas in the Northeast Neighborhood included in this program are the stretch on the north side of Tamarack Street along the fairgrounds and along both sides of Wallace Street between Main and Tamarack. The sidewalk repair/ replacement program deals with sidewalks that are in e poor condition. Each yearthe city concentrates on a specific section of the city. Last year the repair/replacement took place in the southeast neighborhood. This year the northeast area is scheduled. The orange arrows painted on the sidewalks throughout the neighborhood indicate which stretches of sidewalk are to be repaired or replaced. Residents and businesses that have sidewalks in need of work should soon receive letters from the city with the details of what is needed. Cost of repair or replacement is the responsibility of the property owner. Those with sidewalks needing repair/replacement may do the work themselves according to city specifications, hire the work done by a private contractor, or just have the city do the instillation and be billed for the NENA FQ•LL MEETING work. shadow of neglect and October 17th, Wednesday, 7-9 pm Both installment and getting great results will eam Hawthorne School Gym. replacement/repair pro ect 1 me your vote. Please vote should be completed by June GERSTER, AGENDA: 30, 2002 or the city will then YOUNGMAN, and 1-Waste Transfer Station - PresentationJDiscussion contract to have the work done. FROST on Nov. 6! 2. Pocket ParklTrail proposal progress report Kerr said it is a bit less expensive 3. Wallace Street traffic update to privately contract for the work Music from "Big Pink". That 4. Off Broadway/Cupola update rather than have the city do the sound you here is Nate and 5. Sidewalk Talk work. Also, if the damage is not Shaw Thompson renovating 6. Open for any issue too extensive, repair with an the old pink grain elevator. epoxy/grout material may be It's a first-class job that will insure allowed. Individuals should call Andy on an individual basis to see if this type preservation of one of the beautiful repair is appropriate for their stretch of sidewalk. landmarks of the northeast The price of installing or replacing sidewalks can be expensive. People may neighborhood. wish to get together to contract for the needed work as this may help save on cost. With the sidewalk instillation program, the city can do the work and bill the Thanks to Kietra Nelson of Classic property owner, dividing the cost over five years. For sidewalk Ink on East Peach for our new logo. repair/replacement, the work is usually billed for a complete payment. Est the right feel and professional However, if these cost are great on an individual, the city can on a case by case duality. Free too! Thank Kietra when base arrange for payments over several years with this program. you see her. Like a neighborhood Come to the meeting on October 9th to find out more on the issue, possible T-shirt? Call Jim Vernon at 587- ways to save money, and possible financing options. 1109. All proceeds to NENA. s Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address:_ _~~~~ /I/s,~/Ss=. I have considered the NENA trail/park propos and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes [~No ^ Yes, with the followin revisions: g I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. YES . ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. DYES ^ NO If YES, phone ~' -- ~''' Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: •^ ~ ~ e - 3/s~ I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would tike to express support for the trail corridor a~roposed. Yes ~j No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. ~ YES . ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site pre aration, l~d- scaping or trail construction. ~ YES ^ NO If YES, phone: ~~ ~ S Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) ,~ o ~ ~ °~ r ~ ~ u T~/n /~ ! o ~~ T 7~. ~ ~ Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: 1~ 221 ~, G~uv-~~ ~,..~~ I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. ~ Yes No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and p ovide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail tine. YES . ^ NO This trail/park proposal wilt help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willin~to donate some -time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. C~ YES ^ NO If YES, phone: ~ 86 _ °0 35 ~ Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) U~,~ M~ C, ~ U~/~ ,~~G017~ ~~P~ -fia v~ ~ l'ow- ~-`M~o ic~~dC. Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiess~elASAP but before Nov. 15 (next~do~or to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: ~~/ ~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~" " ~~~~`~ `~~ I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. ~ ~ ^ No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. [~ YES . ^ NO This trait/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. (~1 YES ^ N0 If YES, phone:.~~ly ~..~5~ Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed; ~~~, ~ ~~a /1i i~l, ~; /Y! r 7`~~J Gc/,~/,u/V .6~~~~ Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: MA~c~s~ Slb N.W~11.AcE I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ,~] No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. YES . ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some -time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. YES ^ NO If YES, phone: Sg5.9389 Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) ~~~ Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov: 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: _ ~Ir.~1,~~2 ~-~S~ 5 (G¢_ N • WA~t._.c_..~~, I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ~" No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. YES . ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. .'YES ^ NO If YES, phone: sus • g sS q Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) p-,ysiaal Go --n m t SSi on u,.~t;.l Sprt ,~~ , Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: /~f ~ ~ c.E ~v f1 ye nrE I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ®No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. ~ YES ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. [~ YES ^ NO If YES, phone: '~`~ ~ 4 lop Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: -~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~-- - I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ,~ No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: Q/ I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. ~ YES ^ NO ~- This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. ®YES ^ NO If YES, phone: ~~~ ~' (l ~ `~ Other Comments: (Use reverse if nee ed) , I ~ a ~~~ ~~~ Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: / ` ~~~ ~ have considered the NENA trail/pa .proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ^ No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. ~ YES . ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site reparation l d- J scaping or trail construction. (~ YES ^ NO if YES, phone: ~ - ~~v~I (~t/dr~~ ~n `~~G `~p ~~n 4~ ~ Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) / Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: ~o-~,~~: I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. ~1(es ^ No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. YES ^ NO This trait/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willin o donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. YES ^ NO If YES, phone: ~~~~ - ~/ ~ ?-3 Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul 1Niesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: `~ I~~ ~.~1/t~\~- I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ,~ No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. ~ YES ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. ^ YES ^ NO If YES, phone: ~ Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) X07 ~~ k~~((~~e~ Name and address~~ ~ ~~ e- I have considered the NENA trail/par roposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ~ No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. [YES ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willin to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. YES ^ NO If YES, phone: S8~- 2 2 ~ 7 Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion! ! ) ~O~ N Name and address: ~ ~ d~~ Gt,~ I have considered the NENA trail/park rop sal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main railline°~~YES ^ NO This trail/park proposal wilt help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willin to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. YES ^ NO If YES, phone: ~~~ ~~~ Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse Af S'AP` b~u't before Nov 15 (ten/ext door to Lehrkind MansiQon! ! ) Name and address: ~ / ' (!`- `J~ ~-~ ~ l' V . ~ ~'C~~ n._q 1-~ Z ~ i have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ^ No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. YES. ^ NO This trait/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the si a pr_ ar ion land- scaping or trail construction. I~ YES ^ NO If YES, phone: ~, Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: ' • c z.~w~-~ i rv~ i Sgt/J~ I have considered the NENA trail/park roposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed, es No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station an vide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. YE ^ NO This trail/.park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. DYES ^ NO If YES, phone: ~d' 2-' d'47,^ Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: I have considered the NENA trail/park proposa nd I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this tr it/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and ovide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. YES ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willin to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. YES ^ NO If YES, phone: ~ ZZ - ~ ~- f l Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) IvufulCd~l IVCIY~,~IUU~lluvu tw~u~ia~iui~ rani Sian ~uiiwui nuNu~d~ ~uNNui~ ~ues~tonnaue Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal d I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail./park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and p ~'de a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. YES . ^ NO This trait/park proposal will help to eliminate n illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to Bona some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. ^ YES NO If YES, phone: Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) ~G'~ Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: J~ (~ ~- ~e~k- ~{O 2 /V. C~ v ~ I have considered the NENA trail/~~oposal and I would tike to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ^ No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line.~YES. ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. YES ^ NO If YES, phone: 5 S 6 ' 7f 0 (7 O-t~hfer Comments: (Use reverse if needed) rvortneast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: ~~~ ~ 1t~u,1(~ 5~~ ~ ~,~,,,..e,: I have considered the NENA trail/park p posal and I would like t press supp for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes No ^ Yes, with the following revision Wv~-9~1~ ~~ ..~-~ ~ U,Yn~ ~~-(~.~.~ P/LoPvs ~s 6vLr s~por~-; ? I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station d p ovide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. YES . ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willin to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. YES ^ NO If YES, phone: Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) ~ r~y ~ 0 Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: ~~~ /-~~ n.~~c~ ~o~ I have considered the NENA trail/park propo l and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes [~No ^ Yes, with the followin revisions: g I believe this rail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and rovide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. YES . ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trait construction. ES ^ NO If YES, phone:. Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) IVOfLfledSl IVCIYJI IUVI I IVVU /-WJVt.ia~w~ ~ ~ a~ ni ~ ~ w~ ~..v.. wv. . . vrv.+aw. r..~.r..... . .t ~.............+.• .- Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP b~. before Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ~`No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. YES . ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the si~prepar3ation, land- scaping or trail construction. ~_^ NO If YES, phone: Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ~; No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trait/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. ~J YES ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. ^~YE~S ~^~N~YES, phone: S~'.~-3v~~ Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (-next door to Lehrkind Mansion! ! ) ~ ber ~~ Name and address: ~'~ ~ have considered the NENA trait/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ~ No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. (~ YES ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. OYES ^ NO If YES, phone: ~~ ~ DGBy Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: ~~~~~}i~~1~ ~ ~1 D~~`~ I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes No ~ Yes, with the following revisions: ~~ ~~~ I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. ~ YES ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. ~--YES ^ NO If YES, phone: Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) ~fj~~j~~il ~~~ ~~ ~'~ ~ ~~ ~Q ~~ ~~ ~ ~ a.~ Vac!eh~..~,1 ~ -~e~~ G.S rY. ~cl~ Cs -~~ss; 3CsZ ` / Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wies~se ASAP but before Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion! ! ) .-- ~A Name and address: +~ ___ _4~rU ~~~ I VI C ~~~ ~ . i have considered the NENA trail/ roposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ^ No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: ~ ~,I I ve this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail State vide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main n ES ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to ona a some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or tra l construct' n. ^ YES NO If YES, phone: Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) ~ i Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion! ! ) Name and address: I have considered the NENA trail/park proposa and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ~No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and pro '$e a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main rail line. ~-ar+' ' ~' ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. i would be willin~o donate some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trail construction. L~Q YES ^ NO If YES, phone: 5 $ ~ - ~Z- (2_ Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but befor~,Nov 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion!!) Name and address: ~G~~cc-ems ~ ~~/ ~-.3 ~~ I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ~ ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trait from the area south of the main rail line. ~ ^ NO This trait/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to ovate some time to the sit reparation, land- scaping or trail construction. ^ NO If YES, phone: ~ -' 8a Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) Northeast Neighborhood Association Park/Trail Corridor Proposal Support Questionnaire Return to Paul Wiesse ASAP but before Nov. 15 (next door to Lehrkind Mansion! ! ) Name and address: ~~SG(A, ~/1~6 I have considered the NENA trail/park proposal and I would like to express support for the trail corridor as proposed. Yes ~' No ^ Yes, with the following revisions: I believe this trail/park proposal will enhance the Northeast Neighborhood Historic Rail Station and provide a safer access to the Story Mill Trail from the area south of the main railline.~YES ^ NO This trail/park proposal will help to eliminate an illegal dump which has been an eyesore for many years. I would be willing to dona a some time to the site preparation, land- scaping or trait construction. YES ~NO if YES, phone: Other Comments: (Use reverse if needed) f a AGENDA BOZEMAN BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY BOARD NOVEMBER 14TH, 2001 4:30 PM Al Stiff Professional Building Basement Conference Room 1. Call to Order 2. Approve minutes of September meeting. (October meeting was cancelled) 3. Presentation by Chandler Dayton regarding a "Pocket Park Proposal" 4. What exactly are we doing about watering, caring for, etc. the East Main trees that were recently planted with BBAB's proposed CTEP of 1996? 5. Suggestions for future BBAB Awards Presentation: * Continue Power Point Process!! " * Publicize before and after in Tributary and Radio as well as Chronicle 6. Regarding Zone Code Regulation Revisions and ideas: * Give input to City....Chris Saunders * add articles about specific landscaping in Tributary, Chronicle and Chamber Newsletter 7. Decide if we want to have a city wide fundraising for a specific project or area of town (8th Street Medians, 19th Street medians, 7th Street??) Reir Broadcasting is willing to promote and confident lots of money could be raised. Should this coincide with the Clean-up week?? 8. Decide on a fun place to hold our December 19th meeting. 9. Prepare to discuss time line and delegate responsibilities for Clean-up Day at our December meeting. 10. Other 11. Adjourn _. PART B - .PROJECT COST INFORMATION (See Page 8) Value of Total Grant Sponsor Tn-Kind Project Requested Funds Contributions Cost Design and Engineering ~ 3 00 , °~ -~ l DO , ~ ,~ FjQ (~ . ~, Labor '~ 2 ~ZYO ae .~ t,~, ?jam , ~ ~~'S `l d ,a'o Equipment Rental ~' ~r ~ O~ ~Q ~ ~ 350. Ct0 Construction Contracts ~ ~ ~6z3o i Y 462.30 ~ Materials ~ `~.~32 °° ~r'f ~?32,~~ .Purchase/Lease of Maintenance Equipment Operation of Maintenance Equipment Land Acquisition TOTAL PROJECT COSTS '2~j~ Z$`~. 3~ '~ j Ua , Aso ~ ~.. f 1~~ , do ~~38~ . 3a • Identity amounts and sources of sponsor funds and in-kind contribution including the value of volunteer labor • Be specific! For labor, list the number of employees, salaries, # of hours and the weeks/months of year this grant will finance. • Be specific! For materials, list the quantities of materials and cost thereof. • Be specific! For rent or purchase/lease of equipment, list the items of equipment and cost per item. • For land acquisition, what is the basis of your quoted amount. Has a certified appraisal been completed? 20 :{ PART C -ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW (See Page 9 & Pages 32-48) The Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) must be satisfied before a project can be approved for funding. Depending on the extent of impact to the environment,' this may involve a Categorical Exclusion, Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement. MEPA and NEPA must be satisfied by the sponsor and/or land management agency involved in the project whether that project is on federal, state, county, city or private land. • •.. Federal agencies or,_projects on federal lands can use .~ MEPA checklist or provide their own NEPA .. - r, procedures with a NEPA EA `fo satisfy MEPA for this progiam, but may need to provide additional materials. ;However, the easiest way for everyone to deal" with .environmental overview is to fill out the ~. MEPA .checlist and to provide a narrative project description that also explains need, a list of alternatives .. ,, considered and analyzed, a description of impacts, and a discussion of why a particular alternative was selected. PART D -NOXIOUS WEED PLAN (See Pages 30-31) PART E -WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES REVIEW (See pages 24-29) Provide a copy of the Wildlife and Fisheries Review Form signed by federal or state wildlife and fisheries biologists or professional consulting biologists. Plan this process well in advance in order to meet deadlines. Have your project description, maps, and other information with you at your meeting with the biologists. We advise that you have materials to biologists by September 28! PART G -SIGNATURES Chandler Dayton, Project Director Typed Name and Title of Authorized Official ~.~ v Signature of Authorized Official 21 _ ~~ U , ~~~ ~ S'~-S i _ ~ Q'a _ ~ o~n~~GC~a~< i~$ i ~ 7 Z , r i , C ~ ems- -.,... ~~~ ~ . ~ 1 3 5 d , °~° ~~ ~ y -iT' r ee. s ~ 8 0 ~ 3a I F tee. C~,~-~ r ~ ~ - ~ 2 530 , ~" ~ _ , -- ~ S - e.. ~~r. ~ ( (~ ~ 5 oa ;. G ~.~.~ ~~" 2.5 2 ~ '~ , 3 a ~. , iS ~~ ~ l1 ~~~ ~ C~. _ ,, __ -- ., - ~ - - -- ~ ~''~ '' G n"~GN~..v.. ' ~ I ~ ~ ~~ S. ~~ 7 ,a~ex< `r~~R. ~ .~ ~ C: v , I ~~ 1 ~. ,i x ~~ ~ ~ ~ A ~~ ~.~ 1~ ~; , f2 hrs ~ ...,., ._._ i I; t E ~~ i i i { ~( _ /~( ~ S ~°"~ ~ ~ --~" ~1 ~'3cra °~' I ~ 2 __ i z it ~_ L'~'\. \ 7 ~.. C-.\ ~'1~ ~ /'~ C_ 11. • ~ ~..- ~:tn,..~ 5 C...~G.' - - -.-_. ~n~l ~!v'~itj ~Gv ~ ~ ~ ~ l JWtQ•v~.~ ~`T ~ •WV ~-~o~ ~ Lcs„,~cr,~e. L-~ec~~t5 ~ 2 2-~0 a~, ~ l i ~ ~ L ~j ` ~ r~ ~ ; Q ~ - - - / .ga ~ r ~ ^ ~ - __-- - ----~+ Aso ~~--_-_.__ . - -~~ r ern rt • c~ ~ S ~~ ~~ i ~~~ 5~~~. ~ ~ ~~ --- - 5 ~a ~ , f~ Vas.. ~ ~ ~ ~ C~~~g ~ -- ;; ~ ' r (S ~r'a 5y .' ~ ~ ri. G ? ~ i j ~ I. ! 1 _ .f ~~ ~ ~ ~ w - ;; ~ /aP~~ - '' ~ $ firs - 7p • ~°~~ ~ " ~~-~p~'~v~c~~ wl ~~x,c , j ~~ ~ y8 I~rs - ~.5.~ ~ a ~ ~; ~ ~ c t se~~ u-c• e ~,~~ ~ ~ S • ~,7~5.~, i I i ate, ~3~0 i ~ 5Zo ~' ~~ 7 LCi _~ __ s ~ ,- _.__.. _ _ ~ ._....._ .___.__a_ .___ _.._..._..__. _...__..._... _.,._..._ .-_- Q . -.-----_--- ---_._.__.. _-----~--.. ___._._..____.._w -------- -- ~ ..e e, -- ____..~ _...,~. ___.___. __----...-----_.._..___._..~_._w _.~___._.--.-.-----.__...__._..----._..._.__._.... F ~v h~ ~' ~5.~ ~~.~ i ~' 13 ~ ~ __ ' ~ ~ _. _ .._._~ __ . _C_~-~-~~~~... ___ . __.. _ . . _ . _._- -........ _ .......__...._... __._ ___ ..__.__.. ~.. _ _ .___...__..----- ~__^ _ . .~ ~ s 3 _ ..._.._i .__.. _ 3. ~ 5' 30 t~e~~~`5 ~------___ 1 21• _i _ _ 7Z. ~ ..__ ... _ ... .. ~ ~ ~': -- r i l.'J' 2 ~ 5 3 a `~ -~ -- ~ .. ----_ _._ ____..~_ -- k - - . _.._.__ __ ._._ ..._._..._ ...~ ,... _._ .. _ __._. ._ ___...._....__ __ - _ ____.______.!_._._.__._...__......________.._..._.~w_.. _..,._---. , _..._ _..~....__ _ - _..._ __.._.__ .- ----..._......._._......._..w.._,.,_--_,. ......._...--___ ..___._...-i r--. ._,._..__. ._.._._..---_.._ _. __. ----..._ .. _.... _.... ._ _.._ _..__... _.._.____._.._ ......_.._.. __ . --, I! r ---- ._._.......----- _.------ - .. .. _. _.._ __..._ _ .._____....._...._.. ----- __............._ , .. .. _----...----....___.__ ---....._..._ i_..__....._...--__..._._._._.._-----_.__..... ... 2 r~~„~ .,. 1' i .. s~_ .._.. __.._..---.. __..__.__.__.... __ _.._ .... _ _ - ~J i c~c ~C ~ ~a h ~, e_ C _ ~„~ ~r - -__ C M~~a-~-- __ M-~---M~ -! ---- --------- _ -- --- -----~----- ---------- _ _ --- ~ pc~ ~ ~ ~ Q-in { S s q w =nom t I /~~s. ~ ~ T ~ Z U7j cn' ~ ' ---- -- -- . -. -- --~- ------ __--- - .~ c _ - '~ l ~ 1~ , ~ _ .. -- ~` 3 ~_ 0 ~`' ~~§at~"'"fi'r:~'~ ,ice' ~ -'~"~-ti. ct \ y,~, i.:.~. f~ ~. _ ~ ~ i .r i Z., ..~~~.: 3 .1( t ..... N ~~N~e~Hees ~e~N-~-~N~- September 28, 2001 To: Pat Byorth, Fisheries Biologist Kurt Alt, Wildlife Biologist Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks From: Northeast Neighborhood Association Contacts: Chandler Dayton 587-3585 and Jeanne Wesley-Wiesse 587-2277 Subject: FWP Traits Grant Application Project Description and Review Form Dear Pat Byorth and Kurt Alt, I am submitting this FWP grant proposal with the advice and guidance of Gary Vodehnal from the Gallatin Valley Land Trust. Several members of the Northeast Neigh- borhood Association met with Gary and on another occasion with Ron Dingleman of the Parks Department to discuss the viability of our proposal. Both individuals expressed enthusiasm and support for the project proposal. We expect to have letters of support from them and from.the Montana Conservation Corps who have volunteered labor for the project. A map is enclosed which was cropped from a 2000 GIS tiff file, obtained from the Bozeman GIS office. The image shows a dark area that is evidence of a spring. This area is generally wet in the spring and could be developed into a shallow pond as part of the project. The project area is located between Ida and Wallace/L Streets and along the south side of the main Rail Link line. The area has a primitive trail used by joggers and bicy- clists to access the Story Mill Spur Trail which begins on the north side of the rail and the west side of L St, as shown in the arial photo. The project area is within a city right of way for Front Street which is not expected to be developed for transportation. In the past, the area had been landscaped with Cottowoods and a brick sidewalk. When passen- ger rail service was terminated, the bricks were removed, and later the trees were cut. One Maple remains. Sprouts from the Cottonwood stumps are now about 20 feet high. The area has become an illegal dumping spot for cars, tires, furniture, and campers. We wish to do the following to this area: 1. Remove all abandoned trucks, trailers, tires, garbage and debris. Page 2 FWP grant proposal description Northeast Neighborhood Association 2. Install a barrier on each end to prevent vehicles and other debris from being dumped and to protect the integrity of the improvements to the trail and the landscaping. 3. Either cover the wet area with clean fill for landscaping, or develop the muddy area into a shallow pond, planting with appropriate species like cattail and sedge. A pond is preferred but may present other obstacles with the City, and therefore is only suggested until details regarding the development of wet features can be obtained. Filling the area for landscaping is an acceptable option as well. Guidance will be sought on how to deal with the muddy area from the City, and other agencies. 4. The development of a trail which will roughly parallel the rail line and meet the Story Mill Spur Trail. We will work with Montana Rail Link to create a pedestrian crossing which is a needed improvement since this area is already heavily used by pedestrians and bik- ers. 5. Install landscaping appropriate for the area, relying on native plants and using species appropriate for the soil conditions. 6. The City Parks department has accepted weed control responsibility and in addition, neighborhood residents will police the area for weed encroachment. Benefits to area include: 1. Removal of illegal dump. 2. Landscaping and beautifying an area that is used already by pedestrians, joggers and bikers. 3. Beautification of an area near the historic passenger rail depot. If rail service comes back to Bozeman, this area will be even more heavily used. 4. Beautification of a neglected area in Northeast Bozeman which lacks parks and landscaping. RECREATIONAL TRAILS PROGRAM -FISHERIES REVIEW PROJECT SPONSOR r SPONSOR CONTACT ~~ r ~CC ~ S~ j ' 3 s'g5~ Name Telephone # PROJECT CATEGORY: Check appropriate box. ® New Trails Construction -new trail, trail-head, trail-side facilities ^ Trail Renovation -Renovation, expansion, relocation, and redesign of existing facilities ^ Trail Maintenance ® Other ~6~f ~ac~ ~ REQUIRED MATERIALS Map of project location (USGS 1:24,000 at a minimum) Complete description of project Applicant fills out informative above this line Fisheries biologist fills out information below this line 1. Are there any fisheries or fisheries habitat concerns? ;/u (~ 2. Describe any potential effects on: a. Fish species ~a~ b. Federally-listed threatened, endangered., sensitive species -are there any in the area? Will this project affect any? How? Will this project, as proposed, require a Biological Assessment as part of consultation with the FWS on TES species? /~ o v~cz. 24 c. Riparian areas ,v ~ ~+,~- d. Water quality ~: ~~ ~ ~~~t w~. ~~ ~~ ~ G~.a- ~ , a-~.. fi- e: Potential sedimentation or any other issues rJ ~ ~ ~. £ Other N ~'~ ~ a~~ ~~~~ 3. Mitigating measures: Examples could include alternate routes, signs, design changes to crossings, etc. If there are no mitigating measures and project is not acceptable, reject the proposal! Supply additional pages if necessary. ~~ e. ~ .~ ,.~.~ .~..~.~-~-_. i^GS~'o ri ,~-j-(~.vi~ CAS ~ ~ ~ , ~7`~ a-E-u~~ i ~ a ~ 5, -, l~e -~ P 4. Will this project require 124, 310 or 404 permits and, if so, have they been completed? /U o 5. Additional comments. 25 Fisheries Biologist Signature Page To the signin biologist: Did you. receive the application package on or before September 28, 2001? ~ Yes ~ No . ~w~ ~~~~ ~~ ~, ~ ~~ o ~.. P -~,` ,M.e.. -b rye ~ ~ ~ ~,.~ 1 don't recommend this project as proposed Signature Agency, title, phone # I%I I recommend this project with the following stipulations. ~~L a ~~~ r~-~ ~w`(~.. S i o,t a-~- (~~~ ~C~v~-~ !r~¢S`~v ~'a. fi~~l,~ ~ ,F ~ a--S ~ ~ ~ 2 Signature Agency, title, phone # ~ -5 ~ W ~ (~ (~ ,~ Q. ~ ~ Pte-/~ S ~~~~) -9~~-Gq3~ I did not have enough time to adequately review this proposal and subsequently do not want to give authorization. Signature Agency, title, phone # 26 RECREATIONAL TRAILS PROGRAM -WILDLIFE REVIEW PROJECT SPONSOR I~O~~f'h ~aS{- 111Q 1~~~(~~d ~SSD~ 1`d.~0~ SPONSOR CONTACT ~ ( h C~ 35$5 Name Telephone # PROJECT CATEGORY: Check appropriate box. New Trails Construction -new trail, trail-head, trail-side facilities ^ Trail Renovation -Renovation, expansion, relocation, redesign of existing facilities ^ Trail Maintenance Other ~oG~- r `~Q r ~' REQUIRED MATERIALS Detailed. maps of project location (USGS 1:24,000 scale quad map at a minimum) Complete description of project Applicant fills v~ut information above this line Wildlife biologist fills out information below this line 1. Are there any wildlife concerns? Explain. ~v 2. Will there be any possible effects on: a. Critical seasonal wildlife habitats. ~v b. Fawning or calving areas. ~(/(~ c. Breeding, roosting, nesting, perching or hunting areas. il/O 2 ~ d. Riparian habitat. /~OLi ~ e. Federally listed threatened, endangered, sensitive species -are there any in the area? May this project affect any? How? Will this project, as proposed, require a Biological Assessment as part of consultation with the FWS on TES species? /Uo ~ e f. Other/~~~ 3. Mitigating measures: Examples could include signing, alternate routes, use restrictions, timing, etc. If there are no mitigating measures and project is not acceptable as proposed, reject the proposal! Supply additio 1 page if necessary. /-"mod C~.~~ ~ o ~P ~~ ~~.. ~, e f~~ ~ P~'~ - ~ 7c~ ~ .~ f~~~ ~af~ aLwe~. 4. Additional comments. /l%~ ~ P Zs Wildlife Biologist Signature Page To the signin biologist: Did o receive the application package on or before September 28, 2001 ? ~ Yes o ^ I don't recommend this project as proposed. Signature Agency, title, phone # ^ I recommend this project with the following stipulations C~~ f cc c~~ ~Ol~~~ l Signature 'i~_"-'' Agency, title, phone # ~i/i~~~ (~C '~~~/~~~ ~ ~' ~ f2r T /-~ ~/ ~' 9~~- ~aYz ^ I did not have enough time to adequately review this proposal and subsequently do not want to give authorization Signature Agency, title, phone # An excellent source for determining effects of actions on wildlife resources is: Joslin, G., and H. Youmans, coordinators. 1999. Effects of recreation on Rocky Mountain Wildlife: A Review for Montana. Committee on Effects of recreation on Wildlife, Montana Chapter of The Wildlife Society. 307 pp. 29 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST MEPA/NEPA PART I. 1. Type of proposed action. Development Renovation Maintenance Land Acquisition PROPOSED ACTION DESCRIPTION Equipment Acquisition Other (Describe) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7 If appropriate, agency responsible for the proposed action. Name, address phone number and E-mail address of project sponsor. EMAIL: dayglo@avicom.net or design@webouffant.com Northeast Neighborhood Association ~ c/o P.O. Box 203 Bozeman, MT 59771 PH:406-587-3585/587-2277/585-6932 Name of project. Old Depot Pocket Park and Trail If applicable: Estimated construction/commencement date July 2002 Estimated completion date September 2002 Current status of project design (% complete) Location affected by proposed action (county, range and township). j ~ S R 6 E s~~~'~vn 6 ~w S£ G-~ ila f-~~~ ~v . Project size: estimate the numbers of acres that would be directly affected that are currently: 32 (a) Developed: residential .................. _ acres industrial ................... acres (b) Open Space/Woodlands/ Recreation ................. acres (c) Wetlands/Riparian Areas ......................... acres (d) Floodplain ............................. acres (e) Productive: irrigated cropland .................._ acres dry cropland .......................... _ acres forestry .................................. _ acres rangeland ...........:................... _ acres other ....................................... acres 8. Map/site plan: attach an original 8 1/2" x 11" or larger section of the most recent USGS 7.5' series topographic map showing the location and boundaries of the area that would be affected by the proposed. action. A different map scale may be substituted if more a ropriate or if required by agency rule. If available, a site pplan should also be attached. /~al MAPS (~6q ~ ZoQo , bvt~ 2D?0 MaSf~~~~r~, rx~P ~ oN~ frav~s~ollztF~ocr 9. Nai7•ative summary of the proposed action or project including the benefits and. purpose of a "t~P~ the proposed action. NENA proposes to construct a gravel trail between the Old Depot and Wallace where that street meets the rail line. The Story Mill Spur Trail begins on the north side of rail at this location. This trail section would provide an alternative to using Wallace St for access to the Story Mill Trail and it would relocate an existing primitive trail which is used by bikers and pedestrians but is on the Rail Link right of way. The railroad would like to see the trail relocated at a safer distance from the track, which is what NENA proposes, using the city owned right of way which is 50` wide. In addition to construction of a gravel trail in the city owned right of way, NENA proposes to develop the spring fed mud hole into a shallow pond, landscaped with appropriate water loving vegetation such as cattail and sedge. Other landscaping will include native grasses, shrubs .and trees. (Please see letter from Streamlink Hydrology regarding the source of water at this location.) The purpose and benefits of this proposal are closely linked. This section of right of way has become an illegal dump attracting cars, furniture, tires, cement fill and other miscellaneous refuse. This project will empower the local neighborhood residents to improve an area the city of Bozeman has refused to deal with. Bollards will be placed at each end to prevent further dumping-and signage will be installed to commemorate the history of the Old Depot, including a map of passenger rail service that served downtown Bozeman and Gallatin Gateway- before the automobile became the prominent mode of transportation. 33 10. Description and analysis of reasonable alternatives (including the required no action alternative) to the proposed action whenever alternatives are reasonably available and prudent to consider and. a comparison of the alternatives with the proposed action/preferred alternative: Alternatives: Proposed action/preferred alternative- :Develop spring fed mud hole into shallow pond with appropriate landscaping and benches. Install bollards at each end to prevent illegal dumping. Construct gravel trail from Old Depot to Wallace St. Landscaping throughout right of way. ~?~ ~d~e 3 ~ ~~ P~aSec.f ~~PoSal '~ Alternative I: Fill spring fed mudhole, insta 1 bollards, construct trail, landscape. Alternative II: Leave mud hole unchanged, install bollards and construct trail only,. Alternative III: No action to city owned right of way. Comparisons: Alternative II is preferred over I because it would not impact the spring, ~ut dege~~~in~ hg wate~ rgs~urce ntP a land~ca~~erna~ivey ~$rohos~~ ac~io~)instead of eavin m d~io a unc an a is tie referre a p 11. Listing of each local, state or federal agency that has overlapping or additional jurisdiction. (a Permits Agency Name: Permit: Date Filed: b Funding Agency Name: Funding Amount: c Other Overla in or Additional Jurisdictional Res onsibilities Agency Name: Type of Responsibility: 12. List of agencies consulted during preparation of this Environmental Checklist: Fish, Wildlife and Parks Bozeman Public Works 13. Name of Preparers) of this Environmental Checklist: Chandler Dayton and Chris Nixon 14. Date submStted. November 23, 2001 34 '' ° RT II. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Land Resources" checklist, provide a narrative description and evaluation of the cumulative and secondary effects on land resources. Even if you checked "none" in this table, explain how you came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects of the action as well as the long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 1. LAND RESOURCES 1MPncT will the proposed action result in: f'otentiall~' Can Impact fie Comment Unknown None Minor Significant Mitigated Index a. Soil instability or changes. in geologic substructure? b. Disruption, displaccntcnt, erosion, compaction, ~~+C'~s1Q1 t(/~, Z moisture loss, orover-covering of soil which p ~. y would ruiucc productivity or fertility? ><} Il'e~na h v~ Z c. Destniction, covering or modification of mty unique geologic ar physical ti:atures? ONb d. Changes in siltation, deposition or erosion / patterns that may modify the channel of a rn•er or V stream or the bed or shore of a lake? c. Exposun: of p~rople or property to earthquakes, ~/ natutal hazard? her landslides, ground failure, or ot lI ~~ '~ Other Y~ (btl'f'yLL~ILtS ~ ~~ Narrative Description and Evaluation: a.) The proposed action to develop the water source on the city right of way would I1elp to restore the area that has been filled in the past. The area between the rail track and I 90 was historically all wetland until the Idaho Pole Company filled, along with filling done by the railroad and Dept of Transportation for the Interstate. It is unknown whether restoring the water feature at this location will cause soil instability or any changes in geologic substructure. b.) Alternative I which proposes filling the water source rather than developing it would displace surface water. No mitigation would be possible on site. The proposed. action would increase surface water and productivity by developing the sprinu and land- scaping with wetland vegetation. c.) Alternative I would destroy the water feature on site by filling. If file city were to develop the right of way for transportation, this water feature would have to be filled The proposed action will enhance the water feature through pond construction and landscap- ing. The .long term effect will be the preservation of this surface water. d.) None: there is no stream or lake, only a spring which creates a small water feature. e.) None: there is no fault line or steep embankment on location. f.) Otlier: The proposed action would have a significant long term positive effect o,. the site. The water resource would be developed and preserved and landscaping to . attract wildlife would be installed. Preservation of the land and water resources will have a positive i:~tpact on adjacent development, including the potential restoration of ti,e Old Depot for passenger rail service in the future. 35 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Air" checklist, provide a narrative description and evaluation of the cumulative and secondary effects on air resources. Even if you checked "none" in this table, explain how you came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects of the action as well as the long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 2. AIR Ih1PACT Will the proposed action result in: Potentially Can Impact [3e C'ontment Unknown None Minor Significant Mitigated Index a. Emission of air pollutants or deterioration of ambient air quality? (also sce 13 (c)) h. Creation of objectionable odors? c. A-teration of air movement, moisture, or temperature patterns or any change in climate, either / locally or regionally? ~ d. Adverse effects on vegetation, including crops, due I to increased emissions of pollutants? ,X\ e. Any discharge that +vill conflict with federal or state air quality nags? f.Othcr ~ rOU~ M~ Narrative Description and Evaluation: a.) None: no emissions created, non-motorized use only. b.) None: No odors created. c.) idone: No effect on climate. d.) None: No pollutants created, non-motorized uae only. e ) ;'one: No dischar,;es created. f.) Improvements: Landscaping with trees and shrubs will improve the air quality. 36 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Water" checklist, provide a narrative description and luation of the cumulative and secondary effects on water resources. Even if you checked "none" in this table, explain how you. came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as the long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 3. WATER IMPACT Potentially Can Impact Bc Comment Will the proposed action result in: Unknown None Minor Significant Mitigated Index a. Discharge into surface water or anv alteration of surface water yuality including but not limited to temperature, ' dissoh~cd oxygen or turbidity'? ~ b. Changes in drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surface runoff? c. Alteration of the courx or magnitude of floodwater or 1 ~ other flows? n • d, Changes in the amount of surface water in tmy +vater ~ ' f>ndy or creation of a ne+v water body? ~ e:. Exposure: ofpc~ctple or propccty to water related hazards such ns flooding? f. Changes in the quality of groundw•atef? g. Changes in the yututtity of groundwater'? x h. lnercase in risk of aattamination of surface or undwatcr? i. EffecKS on any existing water right or reu:rvation? j. Effects on other water users as a result of am' alteration in surface or groundwater quality? k. Effects on oth+v users as a result of am• alteration in surface or groundwater quantity? 1. Effects to a designated tlocxiplain? m. Any discharge that will aRect fcxlen•al or state +vater quality regulations? n. Other. 1 O1< S ~~~ Narrative Description and Evaluation: a.) There may be some short term turbidity durin; construction of pond and before lrndscaping takes hold of the surroundin; soils. No long term effects expected. b.) No new drainage created by project after construction is co;nplete. c ) idone: No alteration to floodplain course. d ) Proposed action will increase the a;ottnt of surface water through movement of soil to take advantage of t;re siring on site. The increase in surface water will be are i~:proverrent for plant and wildlife habitat. e.) None: No extra exposure created by proposal. f.) Unknown: The proposal is expected to improve the quality of groundwater. g.) Unknown: No expectation of change in quantity of groundwater. h ) None: No increase in risk of water contatnination, s~~nificant decre~:sc of risk expected once bollards arc in place to discourage damping o_: refuse. ~~ i.) None: No existing water ri~I:t effec~s. j ) I'done: No effects on otizer w;•..ter u:-;ers. k,) None: No effects on other users. 37 OVL'_:-- ~- ~ PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Vegetation" checklist, provide a narrative description and ~luation of the cumulative and secondary effects on vegetative resources. Even if you checked "none",in this table, ~,~plain how you came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as the long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 4. VEGETATION IMPAC"f Will the proposed action result in: unknown None Minor Potentially Significant (;~ lmpact Be "Mitigated Comment Index a. Changes in the diversity, producrtivity or abundance of plant spee:ies (including trees, shruhs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)'? Y '\ b. Alteration of a plant community? a Adverse effects on any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered spcroies? ` ~ X d. Keduction in acreage or productivity of any agricultural land'? e. Est~nblishment or spread of noxious weeds? f. Effects to wetlands or prime and unique familand? (~ g.Othcr: ~(P S Y~j f1 0 f V'(' ~G~I /t7 Narrative Description and Evaluation: a..) Significant changes in diversity and abundance of plant species will occur with this project. Since the spring will be enhanced and water loving species introduced, the cum- ulative effect will be positive in this regard. We also expect to plant trees and shrubs ,ong the pedestrian trail which will have a positive-impact on diversity. of vegetation. ~.) NENA is starting with a degraded street right of way where mature Cottonwoods were removed. The stumps are now producing shoots up to 30' in height. After consulting with the Bozeman Parks Dept., it was determined that complete removal of the Cottonwood stumps is necessary to prevent damage from fast growing shoots that fall over in adverse weather. After removal and after the pond is developed, new tree species will be introduced to the area. New species of trees will be chosen after consultation with the DNRC and the city Parks Dept. We expect a mixture of large shade bearing species with some species that prefer high water, like Aspen. New species will be introduced around the pond, including cattail, sedge and possibly Willow and Hawthorn. c.) We expect no adverse effects on rare or endangered species. d.) This is not agricultural land. e.) A weed control program administered by the City of Bozeman Parks Dept. will be in place. In addition, neighborhood residents have pledged labor to help control the spread of weeds. f.) This is an enhancement of a filled area where the water. table is very high. A wetland area, though small, will be developed. g.) Restoration of vegetation: NENA would like to emphasize the current degraded state of the area we would like to develop. Our project will enhance and improve the diversity and abundance of vegetative species. 38 s 'PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT. At-the bottom of this "Fish/Wildlife" checklist, provide a narrative description and ~.luation of the cumulative and secondary effects on fish and wildlife resources. Even if you checked "none" in this tame, explain how you came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as he long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. ~ , 5. FISH/WILDLIFE IMPACT Wtll.,the piopOSed aCtiori result in: Unknown Nome Minor Potentially Significant can Impact Be Mitigated Comment Index a. Deterioration of critical fish or wildlife habitat'? ~ ~, h. Changes in the diversity or abundance of game animals or bird species? a Changes in the diversity or abundance of nongame species? d. Intmduction of new species into an area? e. creation ofabarricr to the migration or movement of animals? Y /\ f. Adverse etl'ects nn any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species? x. g. Increase in conditions that stress wildlife populations or limit abundance (including harassment, legal or illegal harvest or other human activity)'? h. Adverse effects to thrcatened/endangered species or their habitat? ' i. IntrcxlucKion or exportation of any spec;ics not presently or ' ~storically occurring in the receiving location? C / ~. Other:. ~ ~ ~~ r'~ l 1U h CI f Gt' ~J I f7.t Narrative Description and. Evaluation: a.) None: This is not a critical fish or wildlife habitat. b.) There is a potential increase in the diversity of bird species as a result of the pond and landscape improvements. c.) Tllis project has the potential to increase the nongarne species like rabbit and songbirds. d.) There are no plans to introduce new species of fish or wildlife into the area. e.) ;gone: No barrier will be constructed. f.) i~'one: iyo endangered species in the area. Again this is a restoration project. g.) i~one: There will be no conditions created to stress wildlife. h.) i`Iorte: AIo adverse effects to habitat nor el~tdangered or otherwise s;~~ecies. T:is project will create habitat. i.) idorte: ido plans to introduce or eport species at this location. j.) Potentially significant positive impact on habitat through restoration of tai spring a..d V '~etut1011 . 39 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Fish/Wildlife" checklist, provide a narrative description and ~.luation of the cumulative and secondary effects on fish and wildlife resources. Even if you checked "none" in this tanle, explain how you came to "that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as he long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 5. FISH/WILDLIFE IMPACT Will the proposed action result in: Unknown None Minor Potentially Significant (;~ Impact Be Mitigated Comment Index a. Deterioration ofcritical fish or wildlife habitat'? ~, b. Changes in the diversity or abundance of game animals or bird species'? a Changes in the diversity or abundance of nongamc spexies? d. Introduction of new species into an area'? e. Creation ofabarrier to the migration or movement of animals? X f. Adverse effcxts on any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species? ~• g. Lrcrease in conditions that stress wildlife populations or limit abundance (including harassment, legal or illegal harvest or other human activity)'? ~ ,. h. Adverse effects to tlrreatened/endangered species or their habitat? ' i. IntrcxlucKion or exportation of any species not presently or ' ~storically occurring in the receiv ~ng location? / L ~. Other.. ~ ' f p t'C( I l U n O~ d h 1 fA Narrative Description and .Evaluation: a.) None: This is not a critical fish or wildlife habitat. b.) There is a potential increase in the diversity of bird species as a result of the pond and landscape improvements. c.) T}iis project has the potential to increase the nongarne species like rabbit and songbirds. d.) There are no plans to introduce new species of fish or wildlife into the. area. e.) i~'one: No barrier will be constructed. f.) I~'one: ivo endangered st~ecies in the area. Again this is a restoration project. g.) ddone: There will be no conditions created to stress wildlife. h.) done: No adverse effects to habitat nor endangered or otherwise s;.ecies. Ttis project will create habitat. i,) ;.done: Ido plans to introduce or eport species at this location. j.) Potentially significant positive inpact on habitat through restoration of tt~ spring a.~c V'vetatlOn. 39 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Vegetation" checklist, provide a narrative description and ~luation of the cumulative and secondary effects on vegetative resources. Even if you checked "none".in this table, ~~plain how you came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as the long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 4. VEGETATION 1MPAC'r Will the proposed action result in: unlmown None Minor Potentially Significant Can Impact Be 'lNtigated Comment hidcx a. Changes in the diversity, productivity or abundance of plant spcx:ies (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)'? b. Alteration of a plant community? c. Adverse effects on any uniyuc, rare, thrcattened, or endangered SptY:1C5? d. Reduction in acreage or productivity of any agricultural land? e. Est<lblishment or spread of noxious weeds? f. Effects to wetlands or prime and unique farmland? g. Other: l~ S ~ YQ ~ C1 f V'~ ~d hd ~/ "\ Narrative Description and Evaluation: a..) Significant changes in diversity and abundance of plant species will occur with this project. Since the spring will be enhanced and water loving species introduced, the cum- ulative effect will be positive in this regard. We also expect to plant trees and shrubs ,ong the pedestrian trail which will have a positive impact on diversity of vegetation. ~.) NENA is starting with a degraded street right of way where mature Cottonwoods were removed. The stumps are now producing shoots up to 30' in height. After consulting with the Bozeman Parks Dept., it was determined that complete removal of the Cottonwood stumps is necessary to prevent damage from fast growing shoots that fall over in adverse weather. After removal and after the pond is developed, new tree species will be introduced to the area. New species of trees will be chosen after consultation with the DNRC and the city Parks Dept. We expect a mixture of large shade bearing species with some species that prefer high water, like Aspen. New species will be introduced around the pond, including cattail, sedge and possibly Willow and Hawthorn. c.) We expect no adverse effects on rare or endangered species. d.) This is not agricultural land. e.) A weed control program administered by the City of Bozeman Parks Dept. will be in place. In addition, neighborhood residents have pledged labor to help control the spread of weeds. f.) This is an enhancement of a filled area where the water. table is very high. A wetland area, though small, will be developed. g.) Restoration of vegetation: NENA would like to emphasize the current degraded state of the area we would like to develop. Our project will enhance and improve the diversity and abundance of vegetative species. 38 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Noise/Electrical Effects" checklist, provide a narrative description and evaluation of the cumulative and secondary effects of noise and electrical activities. Even if you checked "none" in this table, explain how you came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as the long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 6. NOISE/ELECTRICAL EFFECTS IMPACT Will the proposed action result in: lJnknovn None Minor Potentially Significant Can Impact de Mitigated Comment Index a. Increases in existing noise levels? h. Bxposurc of people to serve or nuisance noise levels? c. Creation of electrostatic or electromagnetic effects that could.be detrimental to human health or property? d. [nterference with radio or television reception and operation? e. Other: Narrative Description and Evaluation: . There are no aspects of this project that would contribute in any way to an increase in noise levels or create any electrostatic or electromagnetic effects. 40 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Land Use" checklist; provide a narrative description and luation of the cumulative and secondary effects on land use. Even if you checked "none" in this table, explain how y.,a came to that conclusion. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as the long-term effects. 7. LAND USE 1MPAC•I' Will the proposed action result in: Unlrnown None Minor Potentially Si~tificant Can lmpact Be Comment Mitigated Index a. Alteration of or interference with the productivity or profitability of the existing land use of an area? b. A conflict with a designated natural area or area of unusual i tif r d i al i ? ` ' sc en ic o e ucat on mpottanu: n c. A conflict with any existing land use whose presence would consVain or potentially prohibit the proposed action? , d. Adverse eftccKs nn, or relocation of, residences? c. Compliance with existing land policies for land use, transportation, and open space? f. Increased traffic hazards, tratc volume, or speed limits or effects on existing transportation facilities or patterns of movement of ` / people and gcxids? .X` g. Other: Narrative Description and Evaluation: _e subject area is a portion of a city right-of-way that is approximately one .block long, fifty feet wide. It is currently used illegally as a dump. This project would bring it further in the direction of it's natural state. The surrounding areas are industrial, the rail tracks and a Rail Link right-of-way on the east side, a lot on the west with piles of -.burned tires in the process of being removed. No conflict can be determined with any of the adjoining uses, It would be an enhancement of the historic train depot sited at the south end of this proposed project. There would be no relocation of any residents and the impact on the residential population are all positive, i.e. an enhanced and extended trail corridor, enhanced wild life habitat, enhanced envirom~ent for wet land plant species through noxious weed mitigation, increase scenic recreational possibilities, and enhances rail corridor for future passenger service at the Depot. The project is a restoration of a neglected city property which appears as a right-of-way, not as an arterial or city street in the Transportation Plan Update for the City of Bozeman. The City of Bozeman 20/20 Master Plan encourages open space and alternative transportation. The project would not cause any increase in traffic and-will create a safer alternate pedestrian path connecting to the existing Spur Trail on the Downtown to the Mountains trail system at the north .end of the site. 41 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Risk/Health Hazards" checklist, provide a narrative description ~ evaluation of the cumulative and secondary effects of risks and health hazards. Even if you checked "none" in ~.__~ table, explain how you came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, .short-term effects of the action as well as the long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 8. RISK/EIEALTH HAZARDS ilvlPAC'r Will the proposed action result in: unknown None Minor Potentially Silatificant Can Impact Be Mitigated Comment Index a. Risk of an explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or other forms of dismption? X b. Effects on existing emergency response or emergency evacuation plan or create need for a new plan? c. Creation of any human healdt hazard or potential hazard'? '~ d. Disturbance to any sites with ]mown ur potential deposits of hazardous materials? e. The use of env chemical toxicants? f. Othc~': Narrative Description and Evaluation: ' re are no known current or past--:exposures to or uses of hazardous substances on this site. i~ has never been used as a street and ~taot7~ld not impact on any emergency response. The park would not create a human health hazard. The site has never been identified as a site used by any adjacent industry, i.e. Rail Link or Idahc-.Pole Company. Planting the disturbed. soil after bringing in clean top soil would have the opposite impact. 42 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Community Impact" checklist, provide a narrative description evaluation of the cumulative and "secondary effects on the community. Even if you checked "none" in this table, ,.plain how you came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as the long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 9. COMMUNITY IMPACT IMPAC'!' Will the proposed action result in: unlmowm None Minor Potentially Significant Can Impact Be Mitigated Comment Index a. Alteration of the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? ' b. Alteration of the social structure of a community? a Alteration ofthe level or distribution ofemployment or community or personal income? f~, d. Changes in industrial or commercial activity? e. Increased traffic hazards or effects on existing transportation facilities or patterns of movement ofpcople and goods? ,~ ~, f. Other. ' Narrative Description and. Evaluation: The project is basically aclean-up and reclamation of the natural and historic assets of the site. It would not impact on growth rate. It would not alter the social structure, '-pact on employment in the area or have a financial impact. The project would not change .dustrial or commercial activity as it has never been used for any of -these purposes. It will create a safer .pedestrian trail thereby decreasing a ':potential traffic hazard. It is a community building project which would enhance neighborhood esteen and volunteerism. 43 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Public Services/Taxes/Utilities" checklist, provide a narrative scription and evaluation of the cumulative and secondary effects on public services, taxes and utilities. Even if you __.ecked "none" in this table, explain how you came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as the long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 10.~,PUBLIC SERVICES/TAXES/UTILITIES 1MPAC"1' Will the proposed action result in: Unknown None Minor Potentially Si~tificant Can Impact Be Commeqt Mitigated index a. An effect upon, or result in a nec~l for new or altered, govenuncntal services in any of the following areas: fire or police (~ protection, schools, parks/recreational Facilities, roads or other ^ , public maintenance, water supply, sewer or septic systems, solid waste dispose(, health, or other govemmcntal services? Lf so, ~ecify: h. Effects on the local or state tax base and revenues'? c. A need for nLw Facilities or substantial alterations of any of the following utilities: elecxric pow-cr, natural gas, other fuel supply or dishibution systems, or communications? d. Increased used of any energy sourer? X c. Other. Additional information requested: f. Uefine projected revenue sources. e ~ I . I O w I~ ~~. Define projected maintentuwe costs. ~ Nan•ative Description and Evaluation: a.) This project will require the city to absorb the cost of solid waste disi~osal of t~~ie illegally dumped refuse. However, this is not a newly created i;~rpact, ju:;t a condition t:tat exists on site and which must be dealt with be+_=ore t~:e project cc,n be~i,r. T'he completion o~ t;tis project will save the city dt~<,tp costs because t:re beautification and the physical bc_rricrs placed at each entrance will deter illegal ciu.apin a~. t;ris site. T~ere will be a minor i;_i~act on resources for weed c.,ntrol which the Parks De_artrte~rt ha:: plcd~ed t,~ absorb. T;rere will i)e a r:,iror i;apact on rc.sotrrces f~;r landscape maintenance. The ad j~~cent lanuo~~rn::r leas pledged to mow where needed and nei~l)borhood residents :eve offered lz;)or and eqt;il~i:~ent n_ecied for mr_intenance. Because this project is being initiated by the nei~hborilood, tare nei 1-tborhood organization e pects tc oversee the m~~intenance required for the landscaping. b.) None: As city owned property t;tcre will be no effect on tax base. c.) Mono:, No need for new facilities or alter~_tions tc~ any utilities. A 12" water line is proposed for the area, but altern~aives to this short se~taent o~ right of lJ3y do exist. Tte nei„i)borhood will wort: witl: the city regarding at:y plans to place a water line` in this se~,:rer.t of ri;;ht of way. d.) Idc.;n:: I`lo increased use of any encr~~y source. e.) Idore: Overall effects or. public services are minor. Effects on utilities nl.ce:,ent can be resolver', sir_ce new utilities will ue installed in t;.e siring o~: 2~)C2, before tiro start date o_ this project. f.) Projected revenue sources: F[dP grant - $35,000; cash contribution from the ilortl)east i_Uhi~orhood Gssoci=aion of ti 5'i:0; In :~inc~. donation fra-.t P~iontana .Conservation Corps - ~310u; ~.~ kinc donation:; o~ labor by reCidcr,ti. o; the iiortirc~_st IVeig:borilooci - !>s needed fc~r i~:: fellation and maintenance. Value or Nr;ilA is load la;~or is a minis;cur;r of ~350U. g.) Cost of wat.~rin~ near trees fur fir.~t two years with don~.ted labor - $G00 esti~~t~;t~~. Weed control proviced by 'arks ile~artm,,nt. ~ rlowi;tg and Lrimrnir.U don:.t~d b~- residents. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Aesthetics/Recreation" checklist, provide a narrative description evaluation of the cumulative and secondary effects on aesthetics & recreation. Even if you checked "none" in ~..ts table, explain how you .came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as the long- term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 11. AESTEIETICS/RECREATION 1MPAC"1' Will the proposed action result in: unlrnow•n None Minor Potentially Si iificant Can Impact Be Comment ~ Mitigated Index a. Alteration of any scenic vista or creation ofan aesthetically offensive site or effect that is open to public view? b. Alteration of the aesthetic characte7 of a community or ncighbofiood? c. Alteration of die quality or quantity of tticrrational/tourism opportunities andsettings•'? (Attach Tourism Repott) d. Adverse effects to arty designated or proposed wild or scenic ,,` rivers, trtils or wilderness areas? `J(` c. Other: Narrative Description and Evaluation: a.) None: This project will enhance an eri~tin~; oien~ice site. b.) Potentially significant alteration o~: the aesthetic cli~r«cL-er o= neig;tbar~~ood t;trou;h enhance~aent o.= a i~]_i~:~:L-ed and urtc;~rservec~. area. The compl,~tit;n of =tlli project wi ~l !,,^. ~. s i~niLican'~ milestone in t:l~ rC'Ji rta~ of this n~i::~d use nei~ilUoritooci. T;~e project will inirove the q:?Slity r~.creation?1 and touris~a settii:~s. The trail .j~rove;:lef~ts a,ui pond creatior. will ehance the user's experience. lhcre is an ol~~ortunity to e=iect a ~o:~itive e.:~~erience for tour:Yts if p:~sscrler rzil service is reinstated at t:li~ histo_ is location d.) 1i0i1..': i0 (iLSlv,iat.Ci; W ~ 1L Of 5~.0.:11C :rCF. . 45 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Cultural historical Resources" checklist, provide a narrative cription and evaluation of the cumulative and secondary effects on cultural/historicah resources. Even if you c:,tecked "none" in this table, explain how you came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as the long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 12. CULTURAL/HISTORICAL RESOURCES IMPACT Will file propOSBCi action reSUit ltl: Unknown None Minor Potentially Si~iificant Can Impact Be Mitigated Comment Index a. Destruction or alteration of any site, stricture or object of prehistoric historic, or paleontological importance? b. Physical changes thaz would atTect unique cultural values? a Effects nn existing religious or sacred uses of a site or area? d. Adverse effects to historic or cultural resources? c. Other: Narrative Description and Evaluation: .,T--. ~ _ a.) No desh~iction or alteration of any site, structure or abject of prehistoric or paleontologi- cal importznce. b.) Patelitially signifitant physical. changes that ~tirill positively af.Eect the ul~ique historicllly significant area. The enha_ncel.nents to this area will bring a renewed appreciation for the history of passenger .r1i1 se.rvi.ce and the history of Bozeman's Brewery District with. its ma11y gr~ul mills and large distillery. c.} No religious or sacred uses here. d.) No adverse effects to historic or cultural resources. E1~11ancement only will occur. 46 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT. At the bottom of this "Summary Evaluation of Significance" checklist, provide a ~ative description and evaluation of the cumulative and secondary effects. Even if you have checked "none" in this tale, explain how you came to that conclusion. Consider the immediate, short-term effects as well as the long-term effects. Attach additional pages of narrative if needed. 13. SUMMARY EVALUATION OF 1MPAC'I' SIGNIFICANCE Will the proposed action, considered as a whole: Unknown None Minor Potentially Significant Can Impact Be Mitigated Comment Index a. Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project or program Wray result in impacts on two or more separate resources which create a significant etl'ect when considered together or in total.) b. Involve potential risks or adv~~c effects which arc uncertain but l h d s if th '? t t ~~ ex reme y aur ou ey wire o occ:ur c. Potentially conflict with the substantive requirements of any local, state, or federal law, regulation, sttuidard or format plan? d. Establish a prcroedent or likelihotxi that future actions with significant cm~ironmcntal impacts will be propou;d'? •~ e. Generate substantial debate or contmvcvsy about the nature of the acts that w i ld b t d'? ( ~ /1 x mp ou e cma c ` j ~ f Have organizt~d opposition or generate substantial public t/ controvtrsy? /~ "dditional inforniation requested: g. List any fcdenl or state permits reyuin;d. ~' // 'Ui ~'~. ~Itci(~tJb1 Narrative Description and Evaluation: ~~C,C cz~QG~l~i,~ 47 Page 47, 1-human. Environment Narrative a.) Considered as a ti~=hole the project's ~~~mulative impacts maybe considerable. l-Iowever, none of these long term impacts are negative. Restoring a spring with ~1=etland vegetation and relocating the primitive trail to the city right of ~~'ay; at a safer distance front the rail road can only 1?e posil-i.ve. l~~ addition, t1~e proposed. acti.oii ~vil.l help deter du~.npin.}; of heavy= refuse, introduce new vegetative species and introduce a weed control pl~1n far the persistent knap~veed encroachment. T11e social .impacts will be positive as tivell, inspiring a new standard far landscaping and pedestrian safety in an area where this infrastructure is marginal. at best. This project wild. be the first in the city to i.nrlu.de permanent functional. art created. by nel;hk?orhood scliaol children. An.d .it tivill be the fist corridor to include inter- pretive signage which. displays historic images of t:he area. Impacts on city budget will be minimal, with the weed control plan only. All. other maintenance will be performed by individuals residing in the Northeast Neighborhood. li.}The proposed action involves th.e risk. to unsupervised chi dren who could. drown in the pond. 1-Iowever this is not a new risk, since the surface ~tirater. is already on site. Another risk is the potential for the pond to 1?ecome a nuisance reagarding the local mosquito popu- lations. HoLVever, this is not a necn% problem since water is present already both on site and in the tires stacked il.i the adjace~.~t lot. c.) Unknown: 'I`bis proposal does not conflict tivith any local transportation plan. hl fact, this corridor has been identified. as a passible fuhire trail. by the Bozeman 2020 Master flan. adopted Oct 2'', 2001. The 2001 Transportation Plan Update shows the Front St corridor as a developed loi:al street. As the a.rial photos fro.m.19fi9 to 2000 show, the Transportation Plan map (see enclosed) is incorrect. Front is not a developed local street alid only son}e of tl~.e right of way is now in city possession. Key portions are through existing historic buildings which ~~-ould have to be condemned if Front St were ever developed. On a reading of the map, it is clear that the proposed ser_tion is not a connector and is not needed, even if the other set:tiDns were developed. i.rl the future. Aletter Df. support from the City Coirl~nissian for the rise o.f this right of tivay is included i1.i. the application. The conflicting statement from the Director of 1'~iblic '~ti'orks regarding support for the trail only; due to htture local street development, was delivered prior to contact tivith the Commission. ti~~'e hilly expect the apparent co»flict regarding local. street development to be resolved. shortly. d.) UT~known: Since a1.1 impacts are perceived as l?DSi.tive, establishing a preceder.~t for positive restoration in this area is also a positive cumulative impact. e.) iVLin.ar debate about the need. for a developed. ].Deal. street i~~. this area has been generated. but evil be reso:(ved try action. of the City Commission. A developed water feature would. make future local street developm.eilt undesirable. Since the street is not needed and. sii.~ce the 1\~laster flan supports the concept of a trail in this location, this is anon-issue, f.) No or~;anired oppposi.tion tD the project has been enge~.idered. No letters opposed. to this project have been received, either by NENA or by the cih= of BDZeinail. g.) NENA is not a~~=are at this time of any permits regr~ired to landscape the mud hole to create a productive wetland feature. If any are required, NENA ~~~i11 make sure the project goes through.t any permitting process. No pern:iits required to construct a hail at this 1DCa- tion. PART III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST CONCLUSION SECTION 1. Di~cnss the cumulative and secondary effects of this project as a whole. ~:umuiative effects are: • Enhancement and restoration of a blighted area currently used as an illegal dtunp. •Restaration of a spring fed mudhole into a tivetland feature w=ith appropriate vegetative species reintorduced. • Relocation. of. existing primitive trail from. rail right of. way to the safer. city o~~=ned right of ~~=ay. Trail. widened to standard 5'. • Opportunity to engage school children for a permanent creative contribution through the Artist in the Schools and. Communities program. Recognition. through interpretive graphic si.l;nage of the histari.c significance of the area. Secondary effects are the costs associated with maintenance and upkeep and the undesirability of developing a local street for this section of right of way once the improvements are in place. 1. Based on the significance criteria evaluated in this Environmental Checklist (Part II), is an EIS required? YES NO X If an EIS is not required., explain why the current checklist level of review is appropriate. „ ~ The current checklist level of rev=iew is appropriate .for this project because it will be affect- ing a currently degraded and undeveloped city street right of `vay that has been identified by the 2020 Master Plan as a future hail corridor. The environmental impacts are all positive considering the degraded state of the area. 3. Describe the public involvement for this project. Public involvement consisted of short presentations at the last two NENA meetings, as showy by .newsletters and. meeting dotes. At th.e October "1' .meeting, comment forms were passed out to the attendees. No negative comments were received. (See enclosed) Other presentatio~ls were giveyl to the Parks a~ld Recreati.on.~.dvisory Board anal to the Beautifica- tion Board. An onsite ti~isit `~=as made by Ran Dingman of the Parks Department and by Gary Vodenhal of the Gallatin Valley Ladd Trust. A press release ~~Til_l be se~.l.t to area papers and an article will appear in the Tributary lvlagazine. 4. What was the duration of the public comment period? C~C.~ i ~ t o Nov 20 , ioo I 48 .~ ~1 r \~ ,J L ai V C n G_ .:e a a ..+ cs 'S3 G r3 r O v Cr C 3 c °..' M +-y N G !~ U th C GC 0.1 Q V ~, C V ~.~-~ •~ ly 4" ~w ~~ 4 v y w ~. w~ •~ . y '+. :Z. ~"' v {, «v. Zr I /'/ 1 O T r-r C~ 0 )\ \• O n SO_/0~~ .~1 /S'' s.-~q~ly c ~ *. ,1'. .S si..aa~ i e~ ~ ~ ~~T ~,~1 1 t~ ~,i.4 ~ ~ :~ ~ ~t:..: 2 ~ ,~ ~ G # i~ ~ 4 a _ t j!4~~ env ~y. Y - i ~ 7 r ~~ `d' .~ y ^` .r ~` ~? ~ `~ '! 1 A... ~~ _ ~ 1 y~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ I 1 . ~ ' ~(, ~ 1' ~ i ~: ~ - _ ;~~ < :? ~ ' ' -<M. r'~ > , .. ~, R'rt :y'= .c ~' :L~ .:.::~~- ?4::- .._.,:, - -. i 'V soic~~/d -~~ i s C ti (0 1 e Y r} e~l tJ ~f4M •.K '. C.l 1k ~ ~{~~~ ~...r. .; `'7 +/^ ~• per' ~' ,~~~"~1 '~.,~ Q, be c~~ hoc ~,,e f ~'~ ~. K.. -,'--.~ 3 00' ______ d I Sc~.~ ~. ~" ~5 Legend ;~cc,-~. 18, ~ ~~ ~~• -fit. ~ ~ ` X ~ P1rUL~~ o +- Pt'. n rt ~ cx, ~ S ~ boo' !~ ~~~ • ~.`` ~-.~ ~fc+ ~os~c~ ~a~ ~~c ~Yee.S ~ rt v o S P_ ~ /00` '~ c'v~c~s e t~ ~e,n.c e. ~ t~.~ . ~~ 0 ._____.. it~ali c+~,c ~ Sfi . ~~ `~ _~ ~. , .. + ~ .. ., Q ~ ~ ~3 .,. ,,~. x x .'. x ~0~` . ~° }~ • . • x •' x x • x x x x . x . x. TA~~+~.AcK 5T. ~~ ~'.