Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12- Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project Grant Proposal to MNRC Bozeman Greek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project Submitted by: City of Bozeman, Montana May 11 , 2012 71 Jr r; "n s .a Submitted to: Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation Renewable Resource Grant and Loan Program Resource Development Bureau P.Q. Box 201601 1625 Eleventh Avenue Helena, Montana 59620-1601 Step 1 ; Application Summary 1. Name of Applicant(s) City of Bozeman 2. Project Title Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Proiect 3. Type of Entity City (City, county,tribal government, district,other) 4. Type of Project Stream enhancement (Irrigation, municipal, groundwater study, other.) 5. Project Location Southeast '/ of Section 7, Township 2 South,Range 6 East (Include a map of the project area and latitude/longitude coordinates) 6. State Senate District 33 State House District 66 7. Population Served by Project 40,000+ 8. Households Served by Project (if applicable) (if applicable) 9. Number of Farms or Ranches Served by Project (if applicable) 10. Number of Acres Served by Project (if applicable) 11. County Gallatin Proposed Funding Sources Proposed Project Budget Funding Source(all are grants of cash or in-kind) Amount Committed/ Uncommitted DNRC RRGL Grant $100,000 Uncommitted City of Bozeman,Open Space Bond Fund $250,000 Uncommitted City of Bozeman,Capital improvement Fund $40,000 Unconu-nitted- City Uncommitted- City of Bozeman,Park Improvement Grant Fund S20,000 Uncommitted Recreational Trails Program,large grant bride $90,000 Uncommitted Friends of Bogert Park $20,000 Uncommitted Gallatin Valley Land Trust $8,000 Committed MT Trout Foundation $6,600 Uncommitted MT FWP Future Fisheries $20,000 Uncommitted Recreational Trails Program,standard grant trails,access sites $45,000 Uncommitted Recreational Equipment Industries $10,000 Uncommitted Charlotte Martin Foundation $20,000 Uncommitted Land and Water Conservation Fund $75,000 Uncommitted Montana Conservation Corps(in-kind labor $9,000 Uncommitted TOTAL $713,600 Note: Committed monies must have a written letter committing funds to the project. Estimated Total Project Cost$ 534,610 1 CHIEF ELECTED OFFICIAL OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE: PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON: Chris Kukulski Thom White (Name) (Name) City Manager Parks Superintendent (Title) (Title) 121 N. Rouse St; PO Box 1230 814 N.Bozeman Ave. (Street/PO Box) (Street/PO Box) Bozeman, MT 59771 Bozeman MT 59715 (City/State/Zip) (City/State/Zip) 406/582-2306 582-2339 4061582-3224 582-3201 (Telephone) (FAX) (Telephone) FAX ( ) ckulkulski @bozeman.net twhite @bozeman.net (E-Mail address) (E-Mail address) PROJECT ENGINEERIARCHITECT: GRANTILOAN ADMINISTRATOR: Mike Sanctuary Ken Stocks (Name of Engineer) , ' , ' (Name) Confluence Consulting, _ Grants Sp_eciaiist {Name of Firm} Inc. (Title) -_ PO Box 1133 PO Box 1230 (Street/PO Box) (StreeVPO Box) Bozeman,MT 59715 _ Bozeman,MT 59771 (City/State/Zip) (Owstatelzip) 406/585-9500 4061582-2940 (Telephone) (FAX) (Telephone) (FAX) msanctua conFluenceinc.com _kstocks @bozeman.net (E-Mail address) (E-Mail address) LEGAL COUNSEL: BOND COUNSEL: Greg Sullivan - (Name) (Name) City of Bozeman (Name of Finn) (Title) PO Box 1230 (Street/PO Box) (Street/PO Box) Bozeman, MT 59771 (C€ty/StatelZip) (City/State/Zip) 4061582-2311 582-2302 (Telephone) (FAX) (Telephone) csultivan @bozeman.net (FAX) (E-Mail address) (E-Mail address) CLERK/CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER: ACCOUNTANT: Anna Rosenberry (Name) (Name of Accountant) Finance Director (Title) (Name of Firm) PO Box 1230 (Street/PO Box) (Street/PO Box) Bozeman,MT 59771 (CWStatelZip) (City/State/Zip) 4061582-2325 582-2344 (Telephone) (FAX) (Telephone) (FAX) arosenben!@bozeman_net (E-Mail Address) (E-mail Address) 10 Authorizing Statement An authorized representative of the applicant must, by his/her signature, indicate that the application for funds and expenditure of matching funds, as represented, is officially authorized. A. Grant Authorization I hereby declare that the information included in and all attachments to this application are true, complete, and accurate to the best of my knowledge,and that the proposed project complies with all appfica.bh state, local,and federal Paws and regulations. I further declare that, for_ City of Bozeman (Applicant Name), 1 am legally authorized to enter into a binding contract with the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation to obtain funding if this application is approved. 1 understand that all funds must be authorized by the Montana Legislature and that grant funds will become available only as revenue is earned. Chris Kukulski S-- -Z Applicant Name Date CQJ"- .A. XIJ& Auhorized Representative(signature) Cily Manager Title B. Loan Authorization I hereby declare that the information included in and all attachments to this application are true, complete, and accurate to the best of my knowledge, and that the proposed project or activity complies with all applicable state, local, and federal laws and regulations. I further declare that,for (Applicant Name), I am legally authorized to enter into a binding contract with the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation to obtain loan financing if this application is approved. I understand that all funds must be authorized by the Montana Legislature,that loan funds will become available after the sale of state bonds, and that I will be expected to enter into a Band Purchase Agreement when funding is available and according to my construction schedule. Applicant Name Date Authorized Representative (signature) Title 3 Step 2: Proposal Abstract The Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project will restore many of the functions of a healthy stream corridor to a highly degraded reach in the heart of Bozeman. True ecological restoration, in the sense of a return to the natural condition that existed prior to human disturbance, is constrained by the creek's proximity to utilities, buildings, streets and culverts. Rather, the goal of this project is enhancement of the creek reach's structure and ecological function, and its value to the community. Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park in its current condition is essentially nonfunctional. The creek is channelized with high and unstable banks,no floodplain, little hydraulic diversity, a thin zone of streamside vegetation, and poor habitat for fish and wildlife. The creek provides minimal value to park users, and poses a significant safety hazard during annual spring high flows. This enhancement project will realign and reconfigure the creek channel to improve planform, profile, and cross-sectional characteristics, returning the creek to a morphology more consistent with its hydrology and valley setting. Channel materials will be adjusted to provide appropriate roughness elements and substrate size classes to support aquatic habitat. A floodplain will be re- established to slow velocities, filter runoff, and improve safety. Banks will be re-graded to sustainable slopes. Existing vegetation will be augmented,widening the riparian zone and improving diversity of species and age-classes. Park amenities such as a hardened stream access site,gravel trails, and a new, clear-span footbridge will protect resources while accommodating public use. The project will vastly improve the value of the creek as a community amenity, with opportunities for fishing(especially for kids), wildlife watching, outdoor education, and enjoying the aesthetics of a wild stream in the heart of town. 4 Step 3: Resource and Citizen Benefits Renewable Resource Benefits Overview Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park in its current condition is essentially nonfunctional. The creek is channelized with high and unstable banks, no floodplain,little hydraulic diversity, a thin zone of riparian vegetation, and poor habitat for fish and wildlife. The creek provides minimal value to park users, and in fact poses a significant safety hazard during annual spring high flows. The extent of impairment is detailed in the Technical Narrative. The Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project will restore many of the functions of a healthy stream corridor to a highly degraded reach in the heart of Bozeman. True ecological restoration, in the sense of a return to the natural condition that existed prior to human disturbance, is constrained by the creek's proximity to utilities, buildings, streets and culverts. Rather,the goal of this project is enhancement of the creek reach's structure and ecological function, and its value to the community. This enhancement project will realign and reconfigure the creek channel to improve planform, profile, and cross-sectional characteristics, returning the creek to a morphology more consistent with its hydrology and valley setting. Channel materials will be adjusted to provide appropriate roughness elements and substrate size classes to support aquatic habitat. A floodplain will be re- established to slow velocities, filter runoff, and improve safety. Banks will be re-graded to sustainable slopes. Existing vegetation will be augmented, widening the riparian zone and improving diversity of species and age-classes. Park amenities such as hardened stream access sites,trails, and a new, clear-span footbridge will protect resources while accommodating public use. The project will vastly improve the value of the renewable resource as a community amenity, with opportunities for fishing (especially for kids), wildlife watching, outdoor education, and enjoying the aesthetics of a wild stream in the heart of town. These enhancements to channel/floodplain morphology and riparian vegetation will re-establish many of the traditional functions of stream corridors that have long been seriously degraded or absent on this site. Specific preservation, development,management, and conservation benefits to each renewable resource are detailed below. WATER RESOURCES Preservation/Restoration of Stream Channel Structure and Function Channel characteristics will be modified to restore Bozeman Creek's ability to effectively transport the water and sediment produced by its watershed, while dissipating stream energy and slowing velocities; stabilizing streambanks; improving floodwater retention and groundwater recharge; storing and routing bedload; filtering sediment,nutrients and pollutants; and creating diverse aquatic habitat. Preliminary design morphology has been developed—and will be refined during final design- using hydraulic and sediment transport analyses, regional regression values, and data from 5 reference reaches. Adjacent infrastructure—a pavilion and a sewer line—along with existing park uses and property boundaries impose an upper limit on the design belt width. The project's goal is to restore as much of the creek's ecological function as possible within the limits imposed by the urban location,while enhancing the creek's value to park users and the general public Two full meanders will be added to the existing 710' stream reach through Bogert. This will increase channel length by 80' and sinuosity by 11%. Adding a floodplain will increase the creek's belt width from 35' to a maximum of 95'. The average width of the channel will remain at 28' -roughly the same as the existing condition of the less-impacted reaches. The current profile exhibits little variation; it is essentially a featureless run for the entire reach length. A riffle-pool profile will be constructed to increase channel competence,hydraulic diversity, and habitat value. Pool widths will be 25'on average, with a maximum depth of 3.75', an increase of a foot and a half in depth over the maximum existing depths. Bank slopes will be reduced from the current near-vertical situation to an slopes varying from 3:1 to 5:1. Wherever possible, existing bank armor will be removed and replaced with vegetation. The proposed channel morphology will greatly improve aquatic habitat Development of a Functional Floodplain and Low Flow Channel A floodplain bench will be inset along the entire east bank of the creek, as well as along the west bank where the inside of the newly constructed meanders provide room for point bars. Just under%z acre of floodplain will be constructed. The floodplain areas will spread out and slow flood waters, reducing the erosive force on bed and banks. Floodwaters will seep into the soil, recharge the aquifer, and slowly return to the stream. Sediment and pollutants in the flood flows will be filtered, improving the creek's water quality. A HEC-RAS hydraulic model, developed in 2011-12 using funding from a DNRC RRGL Planning Grant,was instrumental in analyzing flood elevations and flow velocities,thereby guiding design of channel and floodplain. The HEC-RAS model indicates that channel enhancements will reduce the 100-year flood elevation by 1.3 feet and slow velocities of that flood from 6.8 feet per second to 6.2 fps. Currently, low flows in mid-summer spread out across an overly wide channel bottom, heating the water to temperatures that stress resident fish,particularly trout. Reconstructing the creek to provide a low flow channel along with deep pools at the outside of meanders and pocket pools behind rocks and woody debris will cool summer temperatures. Success will be measured by measuring actual stream temperatures during low flow periods after construction and comparing this information with the current situation. Management of High and Low Flows Construction of a functional floodplain will provide a tool to manage the hazards of springtime high water flows, including channel erosion, destructive inundation of the park and west-side properties, and threat to human life. Reconfiguration of the stream channel's cross-sectional shape will concentrate the marginal flows of late summer and early fall into a low flow channel to maintain habitat for fish and other aquatic organisms during a high-stress season. Conservation of Water The restored stream channel will slow flood flows and spread them out on floodplain surfaces, allowing infiltration and greater recharge of the aquifer. This will incrementally reduce flood 6 flows while increasing summer base flows, often a limiting factor for aquatic life as well as human use and enjoyment of the creek. Preservation of Water Quality Bozeman Creek through the City of Bozeman is on the state 303(d) list of impaired waterways for sediment, eColi, and nutrients. Bogert Park immediately adjacent the east side of the creek channel is maintained in turfgrass, with chemical applications and extensive recreational use by human and canine park visitors. Banks are sloughing and contributing to the sediment problem. With no floodplain area and a very thin riparian zone,the creek's capability to filter pollutants is highly impaired. The enhancement project will widen the riparian zone to a width varying from 15' to 50' on either side of the creek, with improvements to species diversity, age class distribution,and structural complexity. The wider riparian area will be much more competent to filter overland flow. Vegetated floodplain benches will slow and absorb pollutants in floodwaters. A rain garden will be constructed adjacent the creek near the pavilion to filter polluted runoff from Bogert's parking lot before it enters the creek. Management of Water Quality While the poor water quality of Bozeman Creek must be and will be addressed on a system-wide basis, creek enhancements at Bogert Park can address site sources of pollution, as well as incremental abatement of pollutants in the water column from upstream. In the next few years, the City of Bozeman will be required to mitigate the water quality impacts of stormwater on Bozeman Creek. This project at Bogert Park will be a demonstration of how enhancements to creek corridor structure and function can contribute to the solution. The Gallatin Local Water Quality District and Greater Gallatin Watershed Council have been conducting long-term water quality monitoring of Bozeman Creek,with a sampling station located above and just below Bogert Park. Physical, chemical and biological parameters are being tracked to determine trends and the effects of projects intended to improve water quality. FISH and AQUATIC HABITAT Preservation/Restoration of Aquatic Habitat and Fish Reconfiguring channel morphology, along with improving bed substrates,re-establishing a floodplain, and improving riparian vegetation,will greatly improve habitat for fish and other aquatic organisms. Hydraulic complexity and diversity will greatly increase with variations in bed and bank topography, substrate,depth and flow velocities. These changes will improve habitat for all aquatic organisms, and will provide a much more productive environment for the survival,growth,migration and reproduction of fish, including trout and half a dozen other native fish species (Mike Vaughn, MT FWP,personal communication). Benthic macroinvertebrates will benefit from the multitude of microhabitats that will be created via the introduction of plants,woody debris,rocks, and interstitial spaces in bed substrate. Habitat value will be improved in the water column, the bed surface,and within the hyporheic zone. Invertebrates help to break down organic matter and are relied upon by many fish species as a food source. Benthic macroinvertebrates are widely used as indicators of stream health. 7 Cover will be greatly increased for all life stages of fish. Pools, turbulent reaches, interstitial spaces in large cobbles and boulders, woody debris,undercut banks and overhanging vegetation all provide holding water for adult fish. Shallow water refuges also will be provided as refuges for juveniles.The newly created sinuous riffle-pool complex will provide feeding lanes and adjacent resting areas for feeding fish. Deep pools will provide overwintering habitat. Spawning habitat will be created by replacing the existing cemented cobble bed with a gravel- dominated mix of substrate sizes that will mobilize during high flows. The enhancement design will create channel characteristics that encourage hydraulic sorting and accumulation of gravels into bed forms appropriate for spawning. The enhanced and expanded riparian,zone will play an important role in aquatic habitat improvement as well. Riparian benefits to aquatic life include contribution of food(leaf litter, nutrients, insects), shade to help control summer temperatures, large woody debris and overhanging roots for cover, root masses to stabilize banks and allow for undercuts, and improved water quality. Floodplain riparian vegetation also will provide refuge for juvenile and adult fish during floods. Development of a Community Fishery The fishery through Bogert Park, and the rest of the downtown reach,has been greatly impaired by poor aquatic habitat. Yet the lowest reach of Bozeman Creek, where the creek has better morphology and good riparian vegetation, supports large populations of big german brown trout. People do routinely see and catch 18"trout in Bozeman Creek through the city, indicating the great potential to develop the fishery through habitat improvements in other locations. Fish populations are expected to respond very quickly to the habitat improvements planned for Bogert Park. While the enhancement project will have some positive effect upon water quality, it will take a watershed approach to markedly improve existing impairments. However,planned enhancements to the aquatic habitat in the 820' reach through Bogert Park will have a measurable effect upon the local fishery. Many community residents used to fish Bozeman Creek as kids—some still do—and strongly support an improved urban fishery and better opportunities to fish at public parks, and Bogert Park in particular Management of a Community Fishery Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park will be promoted as a community resource where families can bring their kids to learn to fish_ Sustainable stream access sites will be constructed to attract kids yet survive the impact. Bogert will be an outdoor classroom with interpretive signage describing this restoration project, the types of aquatic life in the creek,and the opportunity to catch fish. A strong population of fish in this reach will have benefits beyond this location. Excess fish produced in good habitat will move into adjacent reaches where lack of spawning and recruitment are limiting fish numbers (Mike Vaughn,MT FWP,personal communication)_ FWP will repeat their 2011 electrofishing of this reach after construction to ascertain changes in 8 populations due to this enhancement project. Both FWP and the City of Bozeman will take appropriate action to maintain aquatic habitat, fish populations, and fishing opportunities at Bogert Park. SOILS Preservation of Soils Sustained and recent accelerated erosion has been occurring where creek banks are steep, vegetation is sparse or absent, and park visitors have trampled the banks. The worst of these eroded areas expand in width and length each year with continued use and as higher flows erode the exposed soils. The soils lost from creek banks and eroded access sites wash downstream, exacerbating the creek's existing sediment impairment. 325' of the west bank and 225' of the east bank show evidence of erosion and recession, with the worst areas on the park (east) side. Bank erosion will be controlled by reconstructing the creek in a more-sinuous riffle-pool channel to dissipate stream energy, constructing floodplain shelves,re-grading bank slopes to a sustainable angle, and providing a denser and wider riparian zone to provide long-term bank stability while allowing some channel adjustment. Management of Soils Soils constituting the creek banks, floodplains, and the adjacent terrace transition areas will be protected from future trampling by planting dense riparian vegetation, and discouraging park users from entering these areas through a combination of species selection,temporary fencing, signage, and directing users to formal creek access areas. Two designated stream access areas will be designed with materials to allow these sites to withstand heavy use without degradation. Given the requirement to protect infrastructure along the creek, cobbles will be buried at the outer edge of the constructed floodplains to ensure that the creek does not avulse in a large flood before vegetation has had a chance to establish and root masses to develop, RIPARIAN WETLANDS/FORESTS Preservation/Restoration of Riparian Wetlands/Forest Existing riparian vegetation occurs in a very thin zone-basically an intermittetnt single line of trees, with occasional shrubs -between and below the terraces on either side of the entrenched creek. Species diversity is low and age class distribution is poor. Vegetation is lost as banks slough into the creek during high water events. Many of the mature cottonwoods are very old, and are not being replaced. No cottonwood or willow recruitment occurs due to the absence of depositional surfaces with access to the water table. The existing streamside vegetation does not provide the range of ecological services that is provided by a properly functioning riparian zone. This project will stabilize and re-grade banks to preserve existing vegetation,while greatly expanding the riparian zone. Development of Riparian Wetlands/Forest Bozeman Creek Enhancement at Bogert Park will greatly expand the riparian zone, creating a vegetated stream corridor varying between 40' and 90' in width. Riparian acreage will increase by half an acre along the 800' reach. A variety of tree species will be planted to create an 9 understory and replacement trees for the older cottonwoods. Vegetative complexity will be increased to include a multi-storied community of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation for increased biodiversity and maximum function in slowing and filtering runoff and buffering the creek from the effects of park use. Much of the expanded riparian zone will be planted with wetland obligates on newly constructed floodplain surfaces. Plantings will occur in three zones. The Emergent Zone, along the channel margins,will be planted with rushes, sedges, wetland grasses and forbs at a density of 11,000 plugs/acre (plantings spaced 2' on center). The Saturated Zone, between the bankfull line and the edge of the floodplain,will include narrowleaf cottonwood, willows, quaking aspen, dogwoods, currants, snowberry, silverberry,wheatgrasses and fowl mannagrass. Planting density in this zone will be 730 trees/shrubs per acre, at an average spacing of S'on-center,plus herbaceous plugs. The Transition Zone, from the floodplain edge to the park terrace, will include thorny plants such as shrub rose and hawthorn to control trampling. Density will be 900 plants/acre at an average of 7'on-center,plus herbaceous plugs. Trees and shrubs will be clustered, rather than evenly spaced. Specifications call for 1 '/z"caliper trees and 5 gallon shrubs. Management of Riparian Wetlands/Forest Two areas along the creek will be designed to encourage human use and enjoyment of the creek, and will be hardened to withstand the impacts of heavy use. Signage will aid in site management by directing park users to these areas. The remainder of the riparian wetlands and forest is intended primarily for habitat and other ecological functions, and will be designed to discourage human entry. Thorny shrubs planted at the periphery will discourage entry. Signage and fencing will also help the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department manage visitors until the vegetation establishes. Aside from the ecological benefits, these areas will serve an important park function by providing a visual amenity and the opportunity to watch birds and other wildlife. Riparian vegetation will also provide a visual buffer between park users and west-side landowners. A maintenance and monitoring program will aide plant establishment, track survival, replace mortality, and continue to introduce young trees in future years as needed. WILDLIFE HABITAT Development of Wildlife Habitat Most wildlife species depend upon riparian areas for at least a portion of their life history. Nationally, over 250 species of birds have been observed using riparian areas during some portion of the year. Some of the highest known densities of nesting birds in North America occur in cottonwood habitats. Nearly all amphibians (salamanders,toads, and frogs) depend on aquatic habitats for reproduction and overwintering; Boreal toads have been observed within and adjacent to the Bozeman City limit. Many reptiles are found primarily in stream corridors and riparian habitats. Mammals that would benefit from an improved riparian corridor through Bogert Park include mule deer,white-tail deer, elk, cougar,black bear, raccoon,beaver,mink, muskrat, coyote, fox and bobcat. 10 Wildlife populations are intimately linked with the extent, diversity of structure and species, and health of the riparian forest. Well-functioning riparian areas provide wildlife with a permanent source of water,horizontal and vertical habitat diversity,high primary productivity and biomass, dramatic spatial and temporal contrasts in cover types and food availability, critical microclimates,maximum edge effect, connectivity between vegetated patches, and effective movement corridors and seasonal migration routes. The existing degraded condition of the riparian vegetation in Bogert Park has greatly limited the value of this reach of creek for wildlife. Planned improvements to the extent, structure, diversity and health of this riparian area will develop the potential of this reach to provide high quality wildlife habitat. The enhancement project will provide an additional one-half acre of quality riparian wildlife habitat connecting with the wide riparian zones to the south at Ice Pond Park, along the GaIlagator Trail, and through the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood. Enhancing creek corridor habitat through Bogert Park brings watchable wildlife that much closer to be enjoyed by the urban population. Management of a Watchable Wildlife Area Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park will be promoted as a community resource where families can bring their kids to watch wildlife in the vegetation along the stream corridor. Birds and small mammals will be frequently seen, and sightings of larger animals won't be uncommon. Bogert will be an outdoor classroom with interpretive signage describing this restoration project and the types of wildlife that call the creek corridor home. Riparian vegetation will be managed primarily for its ecological and habitat values, ensuring its continued value for wildlife in the heart of the urban area. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Preservation/Restoration, Development, and Management of Renewable Resources and Development of Natural Resource-Based Recreation The Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project is the first larger-scale enhancement project planned for the creek. The City of Bozeman is working with the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee and many community stakeholders to develop a long-term enhancement plan for the six miles of creek through the city, and has already identified numerous potential enhancement projects. Several of these are located in close proximity to Bogert Park, in the highly-impacted 1-mile reach of Bozeman Creek through the downtown area. The next creek enhancement project likely to be constructed, currently in the conceptual planning stage, is located just 500' downstream. Completing the Bogert Park project will demonstrate the value of creek enhancement to the community,build support for continued efforts, and eventually result in cumulative improvements to water, soils,riparian vegetation and wetlands,wildlife habitat, and aquatic habitat. 11 Public or Citizen Benefits Natural resource-based recreational opportunities Bogert Park provides one of only a very few publicly-owned areas where the public can access Bozeman Creek in the 9-mile reach between the national forest and the East Gallatin River. The vast majority of stream frontage through the valley is privately owned. One of the goals of the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project is to "Provide ample public access and appropriate recreational opportunities along the creek corridor, while ensuring resource protection". A citizen survey administered by the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project in 2011 asked respondents to identify where along the Bozeman Creek corridor they would like to see enhancements, and what kind of enhancements they would like to see. The most common response was to enhance the natural resources and recreational value of Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park. Similarly, the recently completed Master Plan for Bogert Park identified citizen's desires to improve the value of Bozeman Creek for park users, including: - Stabilize creek banks with vegetation and grading. -Develop points of controlled public access to allow for different experiences and uses. -Explore overflow opportunities of the creek to better accommodate changes in water levels. - Improve water quality. -Implement a stormwater management plan for Bogert Park(rain gardens, bioswales, etc.). -Add educational opportunities such as interpretive signage. -Formalize a pervious pathway/trail along Bozeman Creek through the park. The creek's existing degraded condition through Bogert Park discourages recreational use. Its high, steep banks and linear, monotonous character are unattractive to most park users. The two areas that are easily accessible are used primarily by kids, have been severely degraded, and are getting worse. By improving the structure and function of the creek corridor through Bogert, the recreational experiences available to park users will be greatly enhanced. Opportunities to watch birds and other wildlife will increase as improved habitat attracts a greater diversity and number of animals. Passive enjoyment of the sights and sounds of a stream corridor also will be greatly improved by creating a more-hydraulically active stream with a wider,more diverse riparian zone. Adjusting channel morphology to create better aquatic habitat will support many more fish and a full cohort of age classes, enabling families to bring their kids to Bogert to learn to fish. Many adults used to fish Bozeman Creek as kids—some still do—and strongly support an improved fishery and better opportunities to fish at public parks, especially Bogert. Despite poor existing habitat, large trout are seen and caught in Bozeman Creek,including the reach through Bogert. This indicates that improving aquatic habitat wherever possible in Bozeman Creek is a worthwhile endeavor. A stream access site will be designed to attract people to the water's edge, and will be designed 12 and constructed to withstand heavy use without site degradation. The access site will incorporate boulders and other appropriate landscape materials to allow people to sit and enjoy the creek. Kids love to play in the water, and this access site will accommodate their desires while drawing people away from other, more-fragile riparian areas Safety Entrenchment of Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park has severed the channel from its floodplain. Flood flows are concentrated within the steep-banked channel, unable to spread out on floodplain shelves and dissipate energy. The high velocities of annual spring flows present a significant safety hazard to park users.Without a floodplain shelf acting as a safety zone of shallower and slower flows, children, dogs, and anyone else who accidentally or intentionally enters the creek during high flows will have a difficult time getting out again. Just 150' downstream of Bogert Park,the first of the culverts awaits that take the creek beneath streets and buildings. Surveys taken of Bogert Park users cite safety as a serious concern. Elsewhere along the bank(alongside the pavilion) where there is little riparian vegetation and high human use along the terrace,the creek banks are calving, leaving 4'-high scarps. This creates a hazard whereby inattentive youngsters could take a fall onto the rocky creek bed. Health Water quality in the reach of Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park is rated as only partially supporting primary contact recreation. The enhancement project will make marginal improvements to the creek's water quality, which will improve its value for fishing, wading and swimming. Additional improvements to water quality can be expected in the near future as concerted efforts are made to identify and mitigate contributing sources,restore degraded sites, and improve stormwater treatment. Education and interpretation The Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project will be used as a demonstration of the creek's potential to provide environmental educational opportunities to the public. Interpretive signage will be installed describing creek corridor resources,riparian wildlife habitat, and the value of fisheries enhancement and stream habitat restoration in an urban environment. The combination of an accessible environmental education site with hands-on fisheries habitat improvement will help recruit young anglers and future advocates for habitat preservation. The raingarden planned at creekside to treat parking lot runoff presents an added opportunity for environmental education. The project will create an opportunity for Bozeman School District youth to become involved in the re-vegetation and post-construction monitoring activities, and to use Bogert as an outdoor classroom to learn about the outdoors. The park's value as an educational venue will be enhanced by its connection by trail to the Main Street to the Mountains community trail system. Non-motorized transportation The Bogert Park Master Plan noted that trail connectivity within the park and through the park is lacking.The enhancement project will make major improvements to the pedestrian footbridge connecting Bogert to the residential neighborhood west of the creek. The footbridge design will 13 be distinctive, creating a new park focal point. The existing trail segment within the park will be realigned to conform to the new creek alignment, and will connect with new trails to the Bogert parking lot,pavilion, and the Gallagator Trail, a principal artery in the Main Street to the Mountains community trail system. Park trails will also connect with Burke Park one block to the East, and with Church Street and the downtown area just two blocks north. Community and economic vitality Communities across America have been rediscovering their rivers, restoring natural features, redeveloping underused properties, and celebrating newly created parks and greenways. Many towns and cities have shown that streamfront revival can improve residents' quality of life and boost economic vitality. The City of Bozeman and our many partners feel its our turn now. Bozeman Creek in its current condition is a marginalized and underappreciated resource with huge potential to be a central asset to the community. While currently channelized and culverted, the creek flows right through the heart of downtown. Quite a bit of creek frontage in the downtown area is currently used for surface parking lots. Given a 2011 parking commission study that found there is a surplus of parking downtown, this presents the possibility of adaptive re-use. The adopted Downtown Bozeman Improvement PIan recognizes the tremendous potential of Bozeman Creek to contribute to downtown vitality. Calling for a network of open spaces,plazas and courtyards, the downtown plan recognizes in Bozeman Creek a future downtown destination, as well as a greenway corridor linking the north and south neighborhoods with the city core. Time and again, communities have found their restored stream corridors to be a magnet for new businesses,new residents and visitors and increased community vitality. Bogert Park will serve as the southern anchor for this urban greenway,with City Hall the northern anchor four blocks downstream. The Bogert Park project is our first planned creek enhancement. Another in the conceptual planning stage is located just one block north, on the south side of Main Street downtown. This project will reconstruct a city-owned creekside parking lot to enhance the stream corridor, create a greenway park, treat stormwater, and bring parking up to code. Other projects in preliminary planning stages envision partnerships with landowners to redevelop their parking lots with mixed uses that include and capitalize on creek enhancement. The downtown greenway would terminate at City Hall, where an expanded creekside park would further establish the connection between the City, the creek and the downtown business district A Farmer's Market held at the Bogert Park Pavillion on Tuesday evenings has been a productive source of operating funds for its host, the non-profit Friends of Bogert Park. Improving the attractiveness of the stream corridor through Bogert, and connecting the park more clearly with downtown, will provide a boost in visitation and profitability. Other nascent events held at Bogert, such as a summer market for local artisans,will enjoy a similar boost. Numerous public meetings soliciting continent about the Bogert Park project and the larger Bozeman Creek project have revealed an enormous pent-up public demand to transform Bozeman Creek into a meaningful community amenity, something that residents can be proud of 14 We anticipate that construction of the creek enhancement project at Bogert will energize the community and help kick off a sustained effort to realize our vision. 15 Step 4: Technical Presentation 1. Project identification The Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project is located just 2 blocks south.of Main Street and the heart of downtown Bozeman, Montana. The project is in the Southeast I/ of Section 7,Township 2 South,Range 6 East. Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park is channelized in a linear alignment with eroding, vertical banks,no floodplain, and a thin riparian zone. The creek is ecologically dysfunctional and offers little value to park users. This design and construction project will enhance the creek corridor's structure and ecological function and its value to park users and the larger community. Ke Y ; r Via,.° ► �S:u# �'�r `� '"� � t f 6axem$n Y Creek Legend „ ma w Trails M Parks Ah 016 0 �. flA aA1u 16 71 �*TeN L �Q9. 117, 1i 'I £1'! .{^ 0 t Ea7x r`ti Rraxea5An2 1J 18 LM l J 2AAlet 24 .'78 . ' a Z2 J u l9 2fs.�. 'a a�. f 22fi[ , ' 1 �5 .,157E r + z 30. East 2s x Za 7 --.--- Gallatin �E R1V�.f .r5. k ", ..-;,:F� �£• r•�..w � �`°s '� ..� ?9 3 .,�. •��- 3�.. LID +aa Lill :a :. Bogert Park 14 `1 ? y 9 1g g +ra 25�4`E `L r. ryry 1 �4 �a � gyp. 21 20, 21 4, 75, 2J'-, u 27. 28 25 s0 _2$, 27 o ? f 2S, 1 3 �7 r . Bozeman — Bozbmart , .32" .� C� :>� s•: :�. reek Limits t 06 05 N' tY' 02 er Source for City of Bozeman }} t f$ =.g 14 s } AE SC^ s «� �3S16E Y� 3517E g € 19 :r 22 RL Y€# -za• S1 .; .3 '2s Legend N _ . MajorRoads Bozeman Creek ~tt East Gallatin River ,' Other Streams Bozernan Water Source 4S- n City[grits Townships Sections I �, ..'3 °i J. --A i%, a ` 17 2. Project history and related work conducted to date Running through the heart of the City of Bozeman,Bozeman Creek has been narrowed and straightened, its banks armored with rock and concrete, its riparian vegetation removed or reduced to a thin green line. Downtown, the creek runs underground beneath streets and buildings. Elsewhere in the urban core,the creek is girdled by parking lots and other development. These alterations severely impact the creek's ability to filter runoff, pass flood flows,provide fi*sh and wildlife habitat, and provide citizens with a community asset in the heart of town. The most highly impaired reach of Bozeman Creek is the one-mile reach extending on either side of downtown, from Story to Peach Street. Bogert Park is located at the head of this reach. Bozeman Creek through the heart of town is a greatly underappreciated asset with huge potential to serve as a highly valued community centerpiece. History: Bozeman Creek was channelized through the center of town, including through Bogert Park, back in the early days of the area's settlement. Sanborn maps dating from 1891 show the creek mostly confined to the west edge of Bogert Park. A meander toward the private lands west of the park that existed at the turn of the century had been straightened by 1927, and the creek by then ran a straight course along the west property line of Bogert. A citizen's group called the Bozeman Watershed Council formed in 1991 primarily to address issues on the national forest in the creek's headwaters. The council completed a Sourdough Creek Watershed Assessment in 2004. (Bozeman Creek runs through Sourdough Canyon in the national forest; the creek is referred to both as Bozeman Creek and Sourdough Creek). This document provided a comprehensive analysis of the watershed with management suggestions for the future, including recommendations for restoration of the creek where possible in its lower reaches through the City of Bozeman. In the fall of 2010, a group of community organizations, city and agency staff, and landowners began meeting to discuss how to improve Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park. The City of Bozeman applied for and was granted assistance from the National Park Service's Rivers and Trails Program to provide technical advice and to coordinate the group's efforts. The group quickly determined that the scope of the problem was far larger than Bogert Park, and turned their attention to the entire 6-mile reach through the city, from Goldenstein Road to the confluence with the East Gallatin River. The overall goal of the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project is to improve the condition of Bozeman Creek wherever possible throughout the city. The Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee (BCEC)t has been working to develop a 20-year Bozeman Creek enhancement framework while simultaneously identifying and beginning work t The Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee is a partnership of community groups,city and agency staff, landowners and other individuals. The partnership includes the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department, Downtown Bozeman Partnership,Friends of Bogert Park,Gallatin Local Water Quality District,Gallatin Valley Land Trust,Greater Gallatin Watershed Council,MT Fish,Wildlife and Parks,Trout Unlimited's Madison-Gallatin Chapter,landowners and professional firms.The Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee meets regularly,and receives planning and technical assistance from the National Park Service's Rivers and Trails Program. 18 on high-priority early-action projects. A creek enhancement project at Bogert Park has been identified as a very high priority project by the BCEC due to: the reach's impaired condition and location at the upsteam end of the most-impacted part of Bozeman Creek; public ownership and use of the site as a popular city park; high visibility and proximity to the center of town; value as a demonstration project and site for environmental education; and very strong public support. This creek enhancement project at Bogert Park will assist in attaining all of the stated goals of the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project. 1) Restore the natural processes necessary for a functioning creek ecosystem 2) Provide ample public access and appropriate recreational opportunities along the creek corridor, while ensuring resource protection. 3) Improve water quality to meet criteria for supporting aquatic life and primary contact recreation. 4) Foster broad awareness of and appreciation for Bozeman Creek,leading to a strong community stewardship ethic The Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee contracted with two local consulting firms to conduct a site analysis, develop a range of alternative conceptual designs for the creek through Bogert Park, and assess the benefits,risks, limitations, and relative costs of each. The BCEC hosted a well-attended city-wide open house in November, 2011 to present this work to the community and hear people's comments, ideas, and preferences regarding the alternatives. Additional comment was solicited by posting the alternative designs along with explanatory material on the city's website. After analyzing public continent, a preferred conceptual plan was developed that combined the best-supported elements of several of the alternatives, avoided expensive infrastructure alterations, and minimized conflicts with adjacent landowners. This preferred concept plan is guiding detailed design of the project. After the project was approved by the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, $20,000 was raised from a city Parkland Improvement Grant and a matching grant from the Friends of Bogert Park. The City released a Request For Proposals in February, 2012, and a consulting team was selected to begin the design process for the enhancement project. The consulting team consists of Confluence Consulting,TD&H Engineering, Intrinsik Architecture,Nishkian Monks Engineering, and Design S Landscape Architecture. This team has a breadth and depth of expertise in stream restoration design, aquatic and riparian enhancement,wetland assessment, hydraulic, civil and structural engineering, stormwater management, landscape architecture and park design. The team has developed a 30%design for the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project, along with an estimate of construction costs and phasing options. Their report is included in the appendix. Once additional funds for the project have been secured,the consulting team will complete the design, secure necessary permits, assist in preparing bid documents and selecting a construction contractor, and assist the city in providing construction supervision. 19 Other related current and recently completed projects -Thomas, Dean and Hoskins Engineering completed two survey and mapping projects at Bogert Park in 2011: one of topography and infrastructure, and a second of the property boundaries for parcels along the west side of the park. -Allied Engineering Services, Inc. has completed a HEC-RAS hydraulic model of Bozeman Creek from Story Street to Peach Street, where the creek has been most heavily impacted. The hydraulic model will serve as a planning, design and permitting tool for considering opportunities and constraints for channel and habitat enhancement projects in the modeled reach, which includes Bogert Park. The model was used to develop the preliminary design for the creek channel, floodplain and footbridge at Bogert, and will guide final design of these elements. Allied's report is included in the appendix. -The Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee is working on other on-site projects in the one- mile downtown reach of the creek. The intention is for these separate projects eventually to connect and form a greenway as contiguous as possible through the heart of downtown, improving downtown vitality while connecting neighborhoods to the north and south with the downtown area. -One block north of Bogert Park, at a city-owned parking lot adjacent the creek,the BCEC is working with the Downtown Bozeman Partnership and Bozeman Parking Commission to accomplish 3 objectives: enhance Bozeman Creek and create a creekside park, reconfigure public parking for greater efficiency, and mitigate site stormwater impacts to the creek. -BCEC has been working with the Downtown Bozeman Partnership to discuss creek enhancement ideas with several property owners that own creekside parking lots north of Main Street. The property owners have expressed interest, recognizing that creek enhancements would benefit their adjacent businesses and downtown as a whole. -The City is considering re-alignment of the creek through the City Hall parking lot and the neighboring Creekside Park, improving on the creek's structure and function and relieving a hydraulic constriction that has resulted in localized flooding.This property includes the northern-most creekside parking lot downtown, and is contiguous with the south end of the MDT project described next. Montana Department of Transportation plans to reconstruct Rouse Avenue, north of Main Street. This project is located at the north end of the one-mile reach of Bozeman Creek that is most impacted, and presents an opportunity for restoration of up to 1000' of the creek. The City and BCEC are working with MDT on options to create a creek greenway along this reach. -The BCEC has been assisting landowners in removing creek bank revetments and stabilizing the re-contoured slopes with vegetation. The BCEC member organizations participate in the Bozeman Creek enhancement effort because it complements their core missions: Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department(creekside parks),Downtown Bozeman Partnership (downtown vitality), Greater Gallatin Watershed Council (water resources),the Gallatin Local Water Quality District(water quality), MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks (fish and wildlife),Trout Unlimited(fish), Gallatin Valley Land Trust (community trails), and the Friends of Bogert Park(Bogert Park improvement). 20 3, Project purpose The purposes of the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project are: • To preserve/restore, develop, manage, and conserve the renewable resources associated with Bozeman Creek though the project site, including water resources, soils, aquatic habitat and fish, riparian wetlands/forest, and wildlife habitat. • To provide public/citizen benefits associated with creels enhancement, including natural resource-based recreational opportunities, safety, health, education and interpretation, non-motorized transportation, and community and economic vitality. Project benefits are described in detail in Step 3: Resource and Citizen Benefits. Project implementation tasks are described below under Technical Narrative section 8. 4. Existing condition Stream channel,Soils Data: Bozeman Creek morphology measurements through Bogert Park, hydrological and hydraulic analyses,property ownership survey and map. Documentation: Confluence's design report,Allied's hydraulic modeling report, BCEC field reconnaissance notes. Underlying causes: Channelization, inadequate facilities for park users to access the creek Limiting factors: Past desire to maintain existing land uses and to protect infrastructure Bozeman Creek long ago was channelized from Bogert Park downstream through much of the city to the north. This channelized condition has been maintained over the years to protect adjacent property and infrastructure. In Bogert Park, natural stream structure and function has been sacrificed in order to maximize park acreage in flat, grassy terrace. The 3 '/2 mile reach of Bozeman Creek from the city's jurisdictional boundary to just south of Bogert Park flows in a relatively unaltered state, though constrained in places by revetments. This reach flows across the same valley slope and over the same soils (alluvial fan deposits) as the reach from Bogert Park north to the East Gallatin River, yet the pattern of the two adjacent reaches is markedly different. The upstream reach exhibits a single-thread meandering pattern, with a sinuosity(channel length divided by valley length) of 1.4, as measured through two reference reaches.From Bogert downstream to the East Gallatin River,the creek has been highly channelized,with an overall sinuosity of 1.1. Through Bogert Park itself,the creek has been confmcd in a linear and entrenched channel along the extreme west end of the public property, with a sinuosity of 1.0. This channelization has increased the slope of Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park by about 40%, from an inferred pre-development slope of.8%to the existing condition in the park of 1.1%o. Steepening the channel has increased shear stress and resulted in downcutting and entrenchment, severing the creek's access to its historic floodplain.Flood flows are prevented from spreading out, dissipating energy, dropping sediment, and recharging groundwater. Channel banks typically rise 4 feet above bankfull (floodplain) elevation to meet the terrace elevation on both sides. Much of this rise, and in places all of it,is vertical and unstable. 21 Hydraulic forces and trampling from park users has degraded and eroded much of the length of the bank. Of the 720 lineal feet of streambank in the project area, 325' feet of the west bank (private residences) and 225' of the east bank(Bogert Park) shows evidence of significant erosion. The downstream 240' of the west bank has been armored with placed stone. Two areas along the east bank habitually have provided creek access to park users, and have been trampled and denuded of vegetation. The creek banks in these areas are severely eroded and have receded as much as 12 feet. High flows in Spring, 2011 were observed causing a large swath of bank 4' deep to calve and wash away. This process will soon threaten a nearby cluster of 5 large, old growth cottonwood trees located at the edge of the high terrace. Soils lost from creek banks and eroded access sites wash downstream, exacerbating the creek's existing sediment impairment. Water quality Data and documentation: TMDL study and macroinvertebrate study Underlying causes: Agricultural and residential pollutants. Urban stormwater below Bogert Park Limiting factors:Both major sources of pollutants will require long-term abatement measures. Water quality in Bozeman Creek is listed on the State of Montana's 2008 303(d) list as being impaired for the following pollutants: E. coli,Total Phosphorus, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, and sedimentation/siltation. The impairment designation begins at the confluence with Limestone Creek,just downstream of the city's jurisdictional boundary near Goldenstein Road, about three miles upstream of Bogert Park.2 Water quality impacts above Bogert Park are primarily due to nutrients entering Bozeman Creek from tributary streams, as well as limited residential runoff and bank erosion. Downstream of Bogert Park,urban impacts greatly increase as the stream flows through downtown Bozeman and dense residential areas along Rouse Ave. Pollutant sources include input from numerous stormwater and other effluent pipes,runoff from yards, streets, and parking lots. The situation is exacerbated by channelization and removal of riparian vegetation, greatly reducing the creek's ability to filter runoff. Benthic macroinvertebrate communities were assessed in a 2011 study and report.3 Two sites were sampled on Bozeman Creek, one '/mile downstream and the other 1 mile upstream of Bogert Park. Both showed evidence of nutrient enrichment. The downstream site had below average taxa richness(32 taxa), while the upstream site had above average taxa richness (44 taxa). The Gallatin Local Water Quality District, in collaboration with the Greater Gallatin Watershed Coalition, monitors water quality on Bozeman Creek as well as other streams in the Lower Gallatin Watershed. Monitoring efforts have been ongoing for four years and will continue into the foreseeable future,providing one mechanism to track beneficial changes due to creek-related enhancement projects. z 2009 Lower Gallatin`I'MDL Planning Area Nutrient.Algae and E Coli Source Assessment,Greater Gallatin Watershed Council,December,2009 3 Identification and Analysis of Macroinvertebrate Samples,Greater Gallatin Watershed Council,2011 22 The creek in its current entrenched condition at Bogert Park is not competent to detain and filter floodwaters. Bogert Park immediately adjacent the creek channel is maintained in turfgrass, with fertilizer and pesticide applications and extensive use by human and canine park visitors. Similar problems exist on the privately owned west side of the creek. The creek's thin riparian zone cannot do an adequate job of filtering pollutants from runoff entering the creek from the terraces on either side. Hence, water quality impacts to the creek marginally increase through the Bogert reach. Poor water quality has some impact upon aquatic habitat through Bogert Park,though not as severely as farther downstream, where the creek is exposed to greater urban impacts. To comply with new regulations,the city will be improving treatment of stormwater and lessening impacts to the creek. The education efforts of the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee and Greater Gallatin Watershed Council will improve the stewardship of creekside landowners. Over time, Bozeman Creek's water quality is expected to improve. Aquatic habitat and populations Data: Fish population counts, visual assessment of aquatic habitat, Wohlman pebble counts Documentation: MT FWP reports;personal communications with Mike Vaughn, MT FWP Fisheries Biologist; 2004 Sourdough Creek Watershed Assessment Underlying causes:Lack of hydraulic diversity, vegetation and cover, suitable substrates, and geomorphic features that contribute to habitat for all stages of the life history of aquatic organisms. Impaired water quality is a contributing factor. Limiting factors: Poor physical habitat is the greatest limitingfactor. Water quality impairment is not as important. Aquatic habitat through Bogert Park is poor due to the lack of hydraulic diversity,vegetation and cover, suitable substrates, and geomorphic features that contribute to habitat for all stages of the life history of aquatic organisms. Gravels and finer materials have been scoured from the creek bed, and excessive stream velocities prevent new gravels from depositing in this reach. Wohhnan pebble counts from the two nearby water quality sampling sites reveal a D50 (median pebble size) of 135 mm (5.3") and 93 mm (3.7"), indicative of a high-energy stream environment. The cobbles constituting the creek bed through Bogert have been cemented together,providing poor habitat for aquatic organisms such as fish and macroinvertebrates. The riffle-pool structure that should be expected in this geomorphic setting is absent, replaced by a featureless run. Hydraulic complexity is very low, with minimal channel curvature and few roughness elements such as larger rock or woody debris. Little cover is provided for fish by deep pools,overhanging vegetation, large woody debris or rock. Low flows in the summer are spread over the wide channel bottom; there is no low flow channel to concentrate summer flows nor pool refugia to cool temperatures. In September of 2011,Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks electrofished 400' of the creek through Bogert Park. They found 25 brown trout, mostly 10-12"; 4 rainbow trout, I Yellowstone cutthroat trout,mottled sculpins, and suckers. FWP staff concluded that the fish were relatively healthy,but their numbers and sizes were well below what a stream this size should be able to carry if it had better habitat. Older fish predominate, indicative of poor reproduction. Staff estimated that Bozeman Creek through the park may currently support only 25% or less of its 23 potential for introduced trout(personal communication, Mike Vaughn, MT FWP Fisheries Biologist, April 2012). Creek reaches above and below the urbanized section exhibit much better aquatic habitat and fish populations. In an upper watershed reach of Bozeman Creek in the national forest, over 200 rainbow and brook trout per 1000' were documented. The downstream-most reach of Bozeman Creek,just upstream of the East Gallatin River,has a substantial population of large trout over 12",with good aquatic habitat provided by dense understory vegetation, a thriving beaver population and many deep pools. Ri arian wetlands/forest Wildlife Data: 4ge, species and condition of woody plants in Bogert Park riparian zone Documentation: BCEC vegetation report,photos. Underlying causes: Channelization, loss of floodplain benches,past preference of property owners for grassy areas over woody vegetation. Limiting factors: Entrenched channel condition greatly limits the area hydrologically suitable for riparian vegetation The riparian zone through Bogert Park is very thin, consisting primarily of an intermittent single row of cottonwood trees,with occasional chokecherry shrub patches. A few blue spruce and green ash trees and some ornamental shrubs are the only other near-channel vegetation. Many of the cottonwood trees are over 12",with about 1/3 of the trees pole-sized at S"— 12". A cluster of five very large cottonwoods, in excess of 100 years old, stands in close proximity to the highest use area of the creek. These trees may be decaying and posing a safety risk to the recreating public. There is a near-total absence of cottonwood or willow seedlings or saplings, attributable to the lack of low-elevation surfaces where seedlings would have ready access to groundwater. Almost all of the riparian trees are growing on the steep bank slopes below terrace level. Other than the chokecherry patches, there is no understory of woody or herbaceous vegetation. Wildlife habitat provided by Bogert's riparian vegetation is poor, and attendant use by wildlife is far below its potential. There has been no formal study of wildlife populations or habitat in Bogert,but wildlife sightings mostly are limited to birds and squirrels. Recreational use of renewable resources Data and documentation: 2010 Bogert Park Master Plan, 2011 BCEC community surveys Underlying causes: Channelization, lack of riparian vegetation to stabilize banks, lack of a floodplain to serve a safety function, lack of appropriate recreational facilities that accommodate use while protecting resources. Limiting factors: 411 of the above Bozeman Creek could be a central asset for Bogert Park visitors,but its physical condition greatly limits its attractiveness and usefulness. Recreational access to the creek by visitors is limited by the creek's entrenchment. In most places, park users are confronted with a 4-6' vertical or near-vertical bank between the park terrace and the water's edge. In the two locations where people have routinely accessed the creek channel,banks have been trampled and denuded 4 Sourdough Creek Watershed Assessment,Bozeman Watershed Council,April 2004 24 of vegetation. At the downstream end of one of these areas, a large section of bank calved off during last spring's high water, creating a significant safety hazard. The issue of safety for park users is especially acute during spring high flows, when the current is swift, the channel deep, and the banks vertical. Without a floodplain shelf acting as a safety zone of shallower, slower flows, children, dogs, and anyone else who accidentally or intentionally enters the creek during high flows will have a difficult time getting out again. Just 150' downstream of Bogert Park,the first of the culverts awaits that take the creek beneath streets and buildings. Surveys taken of park users cite safety as a serious concern(Bogert Park Master Plan,2010, BCEC surveys,2011). The same surveys document a lot of interest in enhancing the creek to make it a better park amenity by improving habitat and aesthetics and making physical access easier. Future of the status quo Without action,the current situation will not improve. Rather, conditions are likely to degrade, as continued recreational use of the creek corridor takes its toll. The channel likely will not incise further, as expected flows are no longer competent to move the size of sediment composing the streambed. In a natural environment,recovery might be expected to occur over time, as the creek eventually would erode its high banks, flush out the excess sediment, and re-establish a sinuous,riffle pool morphology with floodplain benches within the existing terrace walls. However,this will not be allowed to occur, given the unwillingness of landowners on either side to allow creek banks to erode in an uncontrolled manner_ Riparian expansion will not occur naturally either. Willow and cottonwood seeds are unlikely to take root, given the absence of depositional surfaces. The park maintains the grassy terrace for existing uses, as do residential homeowners on the west bank. Vegetation suckering or seeding landward from the existing riparian vegetation either is intentionally removed or trampled by use. Continued concentrated recreational use of unprotected creek access areas will continue to degrade the channel,causing additional bank sloughs, and soon will begin to undermine the very large old growth cottonwoods at the terrace's edge immediately adjacent the main creek access area. The City, the Friends of Bogert Park,park neighbors and the general public support creek enhancements, but not in a gradual,uncontrolled fashion. Creek enhancement must be planned and implemented consciously,with protections in place to safeguard newly constructed banks and newly planted vegetation until the enhancements have established. 5. Desired Outcome The Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project will restore many of the functions of a healthy stream corridor to a highly degraded reach in the heart of Bozeman. True ecological restoration, in the sense of a return to the natural condition that existed prior to human disturbance, is constrained by the creek's proximity to utilities, buildings, streets and culverts. Rather,the goal of this project is enhancement of the creek reach's structure and ecological function, and its value to the community. A stable geomorphic condition will be created within which ecological processes can function,but major disturbances such as channel avulsions will be precluded by hardening project limits. Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park in its current condition is essentially nonfunctional. The 25 creek is channelized with high and unstable banks,no floodplain, little hydraulic diversity, a thin zone of streamside vegetation, and poor habitat for fish and wildlife. The creek provides minimal value to park users, and poses a significant safety hazard during annual spring high flows. This enhancement project will realign and reconfigure the creek channel to improve planform, profile, and cross-sectional characteristics,returning the creek to a morphology more consistent with its hydrology and valley setting. Channel materials will be adjusted to provide appropriate roughness elements and substrate size classes to support aquatic habitat. A floodplain will be re- established to slow velocities, filter runoff, and improve safety. Banks will be re-graded to sustainable slopes. Existing vegetation will be augmented, widening the riparian zone and improving diversity of species and age-classes. Park amenities such as a hardened stream access site, gravel trails, and a new, clear-span footbridge will protect resources while accommodating public use. The project will vastly improve the value of the creek as a community amenity,with opportunities for fishing(especially for kids), wildlife watching, outdoor education, and enjoying the aesthetics of a wild stream in the heart of town. A detailed and quantified description of the enhancement design is provided in Step 3: Resource and Citizen Benefits. Further detail on the design, including planviews depicting the design features, are provided in the appendix. 6. Description of alternatives Three alternative designs and a no-action alternative were analyzed. The preferred alternative provides the best combination of benefits to renewable resources and to the public and at a reasonable cost. The other alternatives considered were: Inset 1~loodplain only: The channel alignment would have remained the same as the existing condition,but a floodplain would be inset along the right bank. The floodplain width would have varied between 10' and 15'. Riparian improvements would have been less extensive and recreational features would have been similar to the preferred alternative. This alternative would have provided some benefits,but would not have fulfilled the majority of project goals. Wider Meanders: This alternative is very similar to the preferred, except the meanders would be wider, extending 40' farther into the park, and creating a stream channel 80' longer. More park land would be devoted to the creek corridor, and a sewer line would have to be relocated. Very similar vegetation and recreation features. Secondary channel: A sinuous,low-flow secondary channel would have been constructed to the east of the existing channel, creating a%z acre island in the southwest corner of the park. The belt width of this alternative would be about the same as for the `Wider Meanders' alternative. Two bridges would have been needed to span both channels and access the island. The alternative would have provided a new recreational opportunity for children. No Action: The existing condition would have continued. 26 7. Comparison of costs and benefits of alternatives Inset Floodplain: Some benefits to renewable resources would have been realized: bank erosion mitigation,reduction in flood elevations and velocities, some improvement in riparian vegetation,runoff filtration and nutrient cycling. However, without changes in channel morphology, including point bars and floodplain area inside channel meanders, benefits to fish and wildlife habitats and populations and the attendant recreational and educational opportunities would have been significantly less than with the preferred alternative. This alternative was comparatively inexpensive, but would have necessitated considerable disturbance to the stream corridor and park users, and would not have fulfilled project goals. Project costs were estimated at$143,750. Alternatilve #1 —Inset Floodolain Description Pty Unit Unit Price Cost Excavate material for floodplain 2500 CY $ 5 $ 12,500 Haul excavated material from project 2500 CY $ 10 $ 25,000 E Replace irrigation line 1 LS $ 31,000 $ 31,000 1 Remove and reset existing power pole 1 EA $ 3,000 $ 3,000 Revegetate inset floodplain and banks 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 ;Stream access sites 2 LS $ 20,000 $ 40,000 ?Final Design and permitting 1 L5 $ 1.0,000 $ 10,000 :Construction Oversight 25 HR $90 $ 2,250 Task Subtotal $ 143,750 j Wider Meanders: The benefits to renewable resources would have been similar to the preferred alternative in type and extent. Some benefits would be marginally greater, due to the slightly greater length of the stream channel, floodplain, and riparian area. Vegetated point bar/floodplain areas inside channel meanders would have been larger, creating additional habitat. The benefit of additional stream corridor length and width would be offset by more park land lost to established upland uses. A major public concern about this alternative was potential new conflicts with west-side landowners due to the creation of new parkland on the inside of the deep meanders, west of the new creek channel. The cost of this alternative would have been much higher than the preferred due to the expense of relocating the sewer line, estimated by the City Public Works Department at$1,000,000. Project costs were estimated at$1,455,500. 27 Alternative 2 -Wider Meanders Excavate material for channel and floodplain 4500 CY $ 5 $ 22,500 Create point bars on inside meander bends 300 CY $ 20 $ 6,000 Replace irrigation line 1 LS $ 31,000 $ 31,000 Relocate and upgrade city sewer 1 LS $ 1,000,000 $1,000,000 Remove and reset existing power pole 1 EA $ 3,000 $ 3,000 W _ $..._ Revegetate inset floodplain and banks 1 LS $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Stream access sites 2 LS $ 20,000 $ 40,000 Construct pool and riffle habitat features 2000 LF $ 10 $ 20,000 Replace footbridge 1 EA $ 140,000 $ 140,000 Final Design and permitting i LS i $ 100,000 $ 100,000 'Construction Oversight 200 HR $ 90 $ 18,000 i Subtotal: : $1,455,500 Secondary channel,: Benefits to renewable resources would have been similar to the preferred alternative in type and extent. The additional benefits of creating side channel habitat and refugia would have been offset by a reduction in critical summer flows in the main channel. This alternative would have created a new recreational opportunity for children to experience the creek(in the secondary channel) in a safe environment. Costs of this alternative would have been very high, as with the previous alternative, due to the requirement to move the sewer line. Project costs were estimated at$1,470,500. Alternative 3 -Secondary Channel rE Excavate material for channel and floodplain 4500 CY $ 5 j $ 22,500 Create point bars on inside meander bends 300 CY $ 20 j $ 6,000 Replace irrigation line T 1 L5 $ 31,000 i.$ 31,000 Relocate and upgrade city sewer 1 LS $ 1,000,000 $1,000,000 Remove and reset existing power pole 1 EA E $ 3,000 l $ 3,000 Revegetate inset floodplain and banks 1 LS $ 85,000 $ 85,000 Stream access sites - 2 LS $ 20,000 j $ 40,000 Construct pool and riffle habitat features 1500 LF $ 10 $ 15,000 Replace footbridge 2 EA $ 75,0001 $ 150,000 Final Design and permitting 1 L_S $_ 100,000 ; $ 100,000 Construction Oversight 200 mm ._ MR '. $ 90 I $ 18,O00 Subtotal: 1 $1,470,500 28 No Action: Natural recovery will not occur on this site. Degradation of renewable resources will continue as banks continue to erode and mature trees continue to die without replacement. No recruitment of riparian species can take place given the incised channel character and existing park use and management. Some costs would be incurred soon to replace the dilapidated footbridge, and remove large decadent trees posing a safety hazard. The hazard of high spring flows would continue,as would the opportunity cost of underutilizing a highly valuable ecological and community resource. 8. Project Implementation Plan Overall approach: The City of Bozeman will administer this project and will provide technical review and input in collaboration with the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee and its constituent agencies and organizations. Upon raising sufficient funds, the City will contract out the primary components of the project including preparation of final designs and specifications, regulatory permitting, and construction. Project phases and tasks: Phase 1: Contract qualified consulting professional firm(s) to prepare final design plans and specifications Phase 2: Prepare and submit all necessary regulatory permits; revise final designs if necessary Phase 3: Prepare bid package and solicit proposals for project construction Phase 4: Construct the project,including the following tasks: - Construct channel and inset floodplain - Construct floodplain revetment - Construct west bank stabilization - Install new irrigation lines - Reset power pole and overhead power lines - Install public access site - Revegetate riparian corridor - Install new footbridge - Install new trail system - Install new playground features Phase 5: Project monitoring(not included in grant application budget) Project staff: Phase 1 design will utilize contracted professional services (engineering, stream restoration, landscape architecture and architecture) estimated at 453 hours. Phase 2 permitting will require contracted engineering services estimated at 70 hours. Phase 3 bid package preparation will require contracted engineering services estimated at 17 hours. Phase 4 will include construction oversight by the contract engineer estimated at 120 hours. The average hourly rate for all of the above is approximately$100/hour. The City's Project Manager will be responsible for overall project management as well as operation and maintenance of the project once completed. The Project Manager's time is a 29 program cost, not a project cost, and is estimated at 130 hours during construction and 400 hours during a 3-year monitoring period post-construction Contracted services: The City will contract with a consulting firm to complete the project design, obtain permitting,prepare a bid package, and provide construction oversight. The City will solicit bids from qualified construction contractors who are familiar with stream restoration and enhancement techniques,revegetation installation, irrigation installation, bridge construction, and trail construction. Permits, approvals and easements: This project will require obtaining local, state, and federal regulatory permits including: - Gallatin Conservation District 310 permit -U.S. Array Corps of Engineers 404 permit -DEQ temporary turbidity waiver 318 permit -DEQ stormwater prevention plan - City of Bozeman floodplain permit -City encroachment and traffic plans (if necessary) Written agreements or easements will need to be obtained from four landowners on the west side of the creek along the reach where the channel alignment will be changed. All four landowners have stated their support for the project design. Is this project a phase of a larger project? The project is not a phase of a larger project. Long-term effectiveness: The Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department will assure long-term project success by closely monitoring the project for the first few years while vegetation establishes and use patterns emerge, and making adjustments and taking action as necessary. Newly planted vegetation will be irrigated and fenced for the first few years, and mortality replaced, until plants establish. Recreational features—trails, stream access site,bridge and playground—will be monitored to ensure the design functions properly,use occurs as intended, and the facilities hold up adequately. Park management will be adapted as necessary to ensure the new creek corridor continues to provide anticipated benefits to renewable resources and park visitors. The Friends of Bogert Park will play a key role in providing stewardship for the park and its newly enhanced creek corridor. The BCEC and MT FWP will monitor the project to document fish and wildlife improvements and will take action as advisable to maximize gains and ensure the creek's value to the community. 30 9. Project Time Schedule Design completion,permitting,bidding &contracting, and construction is expected to take about 13 months. ear I I 3t, gar Phase A A Final Design 0 Permitting �iaatn 1Ct>fitt�ctin Project Construction Monitoring 10. --Technical documentation Information on natural features: Section 4 of the Technical Narrative describes the existing condition of the project's natural features. In addition, an excerpt from the 2004 Sourdough Creek Watershed Assessment is included in the appendix. The excerpt describes resources in the reach of Bozeman Creek through the city of Bozeman. Technical reports and studies: Two relevant reports are included in the appendix: -Preliminary Design Report—Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project at Bogert Park. This is the May, 2012 30% design report(draft)by Confluence Consulting Inc.,May, 2012. - Bozeman Creek Hydraulic Model from Story Street to Mendenhall Street. This hydraulic model, developed by Allied Engineering Services in 2021, was used to design channel characteristics and floodplain elevations for this project. A DNRC RRGL Planning Grant paid for development of this model. 31 Project location reap: 2 CC= C9 {. i£ £t 7 U t ip Ei M e�atrca snnx 47 F P 2Milas , iS li 2 2t !�' a �4 4 x _- AE' .=17E� w r r�7; 317w � East i � '29 �26 .3 ,��, :� � �- �28 Gall ,53 .•. River `39 �a"`r. .•3fi �1: ''. 3; ..3+5- # ` ` '`::�� �w9.� 7 ..IIBp U5--• �€Y.4 tY2 1 .3 Bogert � 3� � � � 07. I3 - 09 313_ 32 i t £A 16, .£ I 3 i7. 2��E °� x �4 19 Ro 22-- .. -24` 'SH M 1 2a; 2. ` t 27. 6 a ;A 27 '( r s h t L�tr _... Bozema n Bozeman k x 3 '• city � i° w� Creek a _ Limits GI a �JS 05 714 C3--. 2 ;fit r 4 o- 4 C13 4,02 illtatersa a for City of Bozeman p 3SAE m ' � I 2D 2E i 2 �0 29e 29• a a27 Legend r /\/'' Major Roads r s2 # a Bozeman Creek }} r ! - �4 �i �' n �u , s JAAs East GallatinR°rrer 1 }; Other Streams Bozeman Water Source � ,;_t ,t•.. - __�-_ . sr Bozeman Ci ty Urnits awnships A sections 7 [�556 �' E"r:. N 32 Statutes and regulations to be met: Project planners have been and will continue to work in close consultation with staff from the City Departments of Parks and Recreation, Planning,and Engineering,with the Montana Department of Fish,Wildlife and Parks,with the Gallatin Local Water Quality District, and with other stakeholder agencies and organizations to ensure the project is properly planned with regulatory approval in mind. The City will work closely with the consultant team to produce a design sufficient for submittal of all necessary permit application materials. The design will include all information necessary for regulatory review including 1) impacts to environmentally sensitive areas, 2)quantities, areas, and specifications of all fill material placed in the stream corridor, 3) duration of construction activities,4) effects of proposed project on 100-year flood elevations, 5) erosion control measures and plans to minimize disturbance,and 6)mitigation plans, if necessary.Following development of final design,the City will submit joint permit application materials to the Gallatin Conservation District,Army Corps,DEQ, and City floodplain administrator for review and feedback. The City will coordinate permitting site visits and meetings to address comments and input provided by local, state, and federal review agencies. if necessary,the design will be revised to meet all regulatory compliance requirements prior to project construction. 33 Step 5: Project Management Plan 1. Staff Requirements a. City Manager Chris Kukulski will have responsibility for all official contacts with the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation(DNRC). The Mayor and City Commission will have ultimate authority and responsibility for the management of project activities and expenditure of RRGL funds. The approval of all contracts will be the responsibility of the City Manager, (Telephone: 406/582-2306) b. Anna Rosenberry, Finance Director, as the City's chief financial officer, will be responsible for the management of, and record keeping for,the RRGL fiords and other funds involved in the financing of the this project. c. Thom White, Parks Superintendent, is the designated Project Manager and will be responsible for overall project management and assuring compliance with applicable federal and state requirements for the RRGL project.The Project Manager will serve as the City's liaison with DNRC for the project. (Telephone: 406/582-2258) d. Greg Sullivan, City Attorney, as the city's legal counsel,will review and advise the City Manager regarding any proposed contractual agreements associated with the Bogert Park project and provide any other legal guidance as requested. (Telephone: 406/582-2311) e. Mike Sanctuary, Stream Restoration Division Manager, Confluence Consulting, Inc., will serve as the project engineer.The Project Engineer is responsible for developing construction-ready plans and designs, assisting with construction contractor selection, and monitoring/evaluating work completed through this project. (Telephone. 406/585-9500) f. Ken Stocks,Grants Specialist,will serve as the project grant administrator.The administrator is responsible for ensuring compliance with all administrative requirements including procurement,community participation,reporting, documentation, and record keeping. (Telephone: 406/582-2940) g. Gary Weiner,National Park Service, Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project Coordinator, is working with the City of Bozeman and the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee for overall restoration of Bozeman Creek. Mr. Weiner will work closely with the Project Manager,Project Engineer, community organizations and Contractors to ensure all design and construction work is consistent with plans and policies for the long term restoration of Bozeman Creek. 2. Procurement Procedures and Requirements h. The City has written procurement policies and procedures ensuring fair and open competition consistent with state and federal requirements. The Project Engineer was selected through a fair and open process that included developing and advertising a request for proposals (RFP), objective review and scoring of submitted proposals, 34 interviews with finalists and selection. A similar process will be used to select a General Contractor for the project, except request for bids will be solicited. i. In addition, the City has financial policies that ensure that all funds awarded under this program will be accounted for separately and distinctly from other sources of revenue. These policies are available for review upon request. j. Internal controls are audited annually. The city has gone more than a decade without a single finding of`significant deficiency' or `material weakness.' Internal controls include review and signed approval of all submitted invoices by the grant or contract Project Director, further review and recommendation for payment/clarification by the assigned Grants Administrator, and final approval by the Finance Director or Controller prior to submittal to the City Commission for public hearing and authorization of payment. k. Additional internal controls for staff partially funded through federal grants include maintenance of daily logs documenting time on task. 1. The City's record retention policy requires maintenance of grant and contract files for eight years following the term of the grant or contract. Other annually audited records are maintained for at least five years following the end of the fiscal year in which the transaction occurred. The City adopts standards promulgated by the Montana Department of Commerce and revises as necessary. 3. Coordination with Other Local, State, or Federal Agencies This project will require obtaining local, state, and federal regulatory permits including: -Gallatin Conservation District 310 permit -U.S.Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit -DEQ temporary turbidity waiver 318 permit -DEQ stormwater prevention plan -City of Bozeman floodplain permit -City encroachment and traffic plans (if necessary) Throughout the conceptual and preliminary design phases, staff from the City of Bozeman Departments of Parks and Recreation,Planning, and Engineering have met with the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee, which consists of regulatory and stakeholder agencies and organizations, to ensure the project is properly planned with regulatory approval in mind. The City and BCEC will work closely with the consultant team to produce a design sufficient for submittal of all necessary permit application materials. The design will include all information necessary for regulatory review including 1) impacts to environmentally sensitive areas, 2) quantities, areas, and specifications of all fill material placed in the stream corridor, 3) duration of construction activities, 4) effects of proposed project on 100-year flood elevations, 5) erosion control measures and plans to minimize disturbance, and 6)mitigation plans, if necessary. Following development of final design, the City will submit joint permit application materials to the Gallatin Conservation District, Army Corps,DEQ, and City floodplain administrator for review and feedback. The City will coordinate permitting site visits and meetings to address comments and input provided by local, state, and federal review agencies. If necessary,the 35 design will be revised to meet all regulatory compliance requirements prior to project construction. 4. Public Involvement Plans The City of Bozeman,working closely with the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee,has developed plans for the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park project, as well as the larger Bozeman Creek Enhancement effort, through an intensive process of substantive community involvement. The project's vision, goals and objectives were developed through public input received at numerous venues. These have included a well-attended public workshop in February, presentations to neighborhood associations and service clubs, three public opinion surveys, and several events. Bogert Park was selected for our first large-scale enhancement project largely due to public support. The Bozeman community,the Bogert Park Neighborhood Association, and park users have had numerous opportunities to express their ideas and opinions regarding this project, and to react to succeeding conceptual designs. The affected neighboring landowners have been contacted directly to discuss potential project impacts and to obtain their support for the project. On completion of the detailed design,public input will again be solicited through meetings and postings on websites. These efforts to maintain open lines of communication, address issues,and solve problems will continue through the design process and throughout construction. Bogert is a well-loved park, people will be very interested to know what's going on, and every effort will be made to let them know what to expect every step of the way. S. Consultant Management The Project Manager, in consultation with the BCEC Coordinator and other key committee members with expertise in renewable resources and park and trail design, will oversee the Project Engineer as he and his design team work to complete the project design and obtain necessary permits. The Project Manager, assisted by the Grants Administrator and Project Engineer,then will be responsible for: a. Assisting the City with all requirements related to effective project start-up and implementation. b. Coordinating project activities with DNRC. c. Establishing and maintaining complete and accurate project files and preparing all DNRC documentation and reports incidental to administration of the" grant. d. Preparing Requests for Bid, advertising and other procurement tasks consistent with City and DNRC requirements (procurement process will be administered through the City Clerk's Office). 36 e. Assisting the City with the selection of a General Contractor. Monitoring the contractor selection process,including the bid advertising,tabulation and award process for conformance to DNRC requirements. The manager will review the contract provisions for compliance and will request DNRC clearance(debarment check) of the most responsive and second most responsive submitters before a contract is awarded. f. Reviewing all proposed project expenditures or requests for payment to ensure their propriety and proper allocation of expenditures to the project budget. g. In cooperation with the Finance Director,processing payment requests and preparing drawdown requests to DNRC, including the Request for Payment and Status of Funds Report, the Project Progress Report and all other required documentation to substantiate payment requests. h. Schedule and attend all meetings with the Contractor. i. Monitoring Contractor's compliance with applicable requirements. j. Preparing all required performance reports and project closeout documents for submittal to DNRC. k. Attending City Commission meetings to provide project status reports and representing the project at any other public meetings, as deemed necessary by the City Manager. 6. Financial Management a. The Finance Director's responsibilities will be as follows: i. Establish a separate cost reimbursement fund account for the project. ii. Entering all project transactions into the City's existing accounting system (BARS), and prepare checks/warrants for approved expenditures. iii. Prepare reimbursement requests to DNRC. iv. With the assistance of the Project Manager,preparing the Request for Payment and Status of Funds Reports to be submitted to DNRC. All drawdown requests will be signed by two of the three following persons: City Manager,Finance Director and Treasurer. v. With the assistance of the Project Manager,preparing the final financial reports for project closeout. b. The Project Manager and Finance Director will review all proposed expenditures of DNRC funds and will prepare drawdown requests,which will be signed by the officials cited above.All disbursements will be handled in accordance with the City's established claim review procedures. Before submitting the claim to the Finance Director, the Project Manager will attach a certification to each claim stating the proposed expenditure is an eligible expense of the City's RRGL project and consistent with the project budget. The City Manager will review all claims before approving them. 37 c. The original financial documents (claims with all supporting material attached)will be retained in the City's offices. d. A project implementation schedule,which outlines the basic steps and timetable involved in the management of the project, will be developed and attached to the Management Plan immediately following award of contract. 38 Step 6: Financial Presentation FINANCIAL NARRATIVE 1. Explanation of Total Budget Project costs are summarized as follows: Tasks Cost Contract administration No project costs $0 Professionalftechnical costs Design completion and bid package preparation $47,000 Permitting $7,000 Construction oversight $10,800 Subtotal $64,800 Construction Costs Channel and flood lain construction $103,150 Reve etation $76,200 Relocate utilities and irrigation $34,000 Playground,trails, access site $67,860 Footbridge $140,000 $421,210 Subtotal $486,010 10% Contingency $48,600 Total pr2ject cost $534,610 Contract Administration will be performed by City of Bozeman staff as part of their regular duties.No project costs for contract administration will be incurred. Professional Services will be provided by Confluence Consulting Inc. to complete the project design. Confluence has assembled a design team consisting of Thomas, Dean, and Hoskins Engineering,Intrinsik Architecture,Nishkian Monks Engineering,and Design 5 Landscape Architecture. Confluence's team has produced a 30%preliminary design for this project;their report is attached in the appendix. Confluence's team will complete the design once funding has been secured. They also will obtain all necessary permitting, prepare bid documents, and will provide oversight of the construction contractors,under the supervision of the City's Project Manager. 39 Professional Services to complete the project design and to secure permitting were estimated using lump sum unit costs for individual work elements, as follows (excerpted from the project cost spreadsheet in the Financial Documentation section): Task 6 -Final Design and Permitting Final Design Final channel and tjoodplain design 1 LS $15,000 $ 15,000 Final playground, trails access and revegetation design 1 LS $10,500 $ 10,500 ;f=inal utility and irrigation design 1 LS $3,500 $ 3,500 ' 'Final structural and bridge aesthetics design 1 LS $12,$00 $ 12,800 Prepare bid package 1 LS $1,700 $ 1,700 ;Project metin s with City, IBCEC 1 _ LS 7 g Y, $3,500 $ 3,500 .... _.._..._.___._----- . ._ _.... . Subtotal:; $ 47,000 ;Permitting-- - - Prepare and submit joint regulatory permits 1 LS $4,000 $ 4,000 ` Prepare and submit SWPPP permit I LS $2,000 $ 2,000 'Permitting fees - (floodplain, 318, SWPPP) 1 LS $1,000 $ 1,000 Subtotal: $ 7,000 Task Subtotal:; $ 54,000 !, Professional services to provide construction oversight were estimated at 190 hours @$90/hour for a cost of$10,800. Total Professional Services costs: $64,800 Construction Costs a. Preferred Alternative: Construction costs for the preferred alternative are summarized in the following table. A detailed breakdown of construction costs is provided in the Financial Documentation section. Construction Costs Channel and flood lain construction $103,150 Reve etation $76,200 Relocate utilities and irrigation $34,000 Playground, trails, access site $67,860 Footbridge $140,000 $421,210 40 Construction Costs b. Inset Floodplain, Wider Meanders, and Secondary Channel Alternatives Construction costs for the three alternatives evaluated were: Inset flood plain: $143,750 Wider meanders: $1,455,500 Secondary channel: $1,470,500 A detailed description of costs for each alternative is presented in the Technical Narrative, section 7. 2. Operation and Maintenance Costs, and Source of Funding Thom White, Parks Superintendent, is the designated Project Manager and will be responsible for overall project management as well as operation and maintenance of the project once completed. Mr. White estimates a time commitment of 10 hours/week for the 20 weeks of the first growing season, and half of that for the succeeding two years. These duties are part of his normal scope of employment, and do not represent an additional project cost. He will use Parks Department crews for project maintenance tasks as needed, and again,this is part of their normal job. 3. Funding Structure Grants: City of Bozeman Open Space Bond Fund: $250,000. The Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project is one of this fund's Signature Projects and has an excellent chance of receiving funding in early 2013. City of Bozeman Capital Improvement Fund: $40,000. This funding will be used to reconfigure and add to the existing park irrigation system. City of Bozeman Park Improvement Grant: $20,000. This funding is highly likely and will be used for park improvement. Recreational Trails Program: $90,000. This RTP `large grant' will be used to help pay for the new footbridge. Friends of Bogert Park annual grant: $20,000. This Friends group provides annual grants for park improvements, especially at Bogert Park. MT Trout Foundation: $6,600 In-kind contributions: Gallatin Valley Land Trust: $8,000. GVLT has committed to an$8,000 in-kind donation of commemorative benches and associated labor(see letter of support and financial commitment) Unidentified Costs: No project costs remain undefined. 41 Backup plan if uncommitted funds described above are not realized: Additional potential grant sources totaling almost$200,000 are identified in the Application Sununary. The Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park project will compete well for these grants. In addition, conversations are ongoing with philanthropic individuals and organizations that have been generous in the past in the Bozeman community. This is part of the larger Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project's efforts to engage the local philanthropic community in the cause of making Bozeman Creek a community centerpiece. Funds raised can be targeted for future projects, or to filling a shortfall in the Bogert project if necessary. Finally, if efforts to fundraise the entire project cost fall short, the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park project can be split into 2 phases. We have identified two different ways the project could be phased. Either is feasible,but both are less preferable than constructing the project all at once due to the length of time that park use would be disrupted. One option would be to construct the upstream meander and footbridge in phase 1, then the downstream meander and the rest of the recreational facilities in phase 2. Costs would break out as follows: 'Option 1 -one meander at a time Phase 1 Tasks Cost Final design and permitting $ 54,000 Install bank toe along west bank $ 14,000 Construct upper meander and floodplain $ 39,850 Revegetation $ 38,100 Install bridge $ 140,000 Total $ 285,950 10%Contingency $ 28,595 Subtotal $ 314,545 Phase 2 Tasks Cost Construct lower meander and floodplain $ 39,850 Construct cobble revetment $ 20,250 Revegetation $ 38,100 Install access area $ 20,250 Relocate utilities and irrigatin $ 34,000 Modify park playground and trails $ 47,610 Total $ 200,060 10%Contingency $ 20,006 Subtotal $ 220,066 42 The second option would be to do all the streamwork, revegetation, and utilities in the first phase,then the footbridge,trails, access site and playground in the second phase: Option 2 -Streamwork First Phase 1 Tasks Cost Final design and permitting $ 54,000 Construct upper meander and floodplain $ 39,850 Install bank toe along west bank $ 14,000 Construct lower meander and floodplain $ 39,850 Construct cobble revetment $ 20,250 Revegetation $ 76,200 Relocate utilities and irrigation $ 34,000 Total $ 278,150 10%Contingency $ 27,895 Subtotal $ 305,965 Phase 2 Tasks Cost Install bridge $ 140,000 Install access area $ 20,250 Modify park playground and trails $ 47,610 Total $ 207,860 10%Contingency $ 20,786 S u biota I $ 228,646 43 FINANCIAL DOCUMENTATION 1. Cost estimates (from Preliminary Design Report, Confluence Consulting Inc.) Task 1-Channel and Flood lain Construction Excavate new channel and€loodpiain alignment 3500 CY $ 5A0 $ 17,500 Install cobbles on new point bars 340 CY $ 25.00 $ 7,500 Install topsoil on riew point bars 300 CY $ 35.00 $ 10,500 Bicengineered bank stabilization on west bank 140 FT $ 100.00 S 14.000 Install stone revetment along east hank 450 FT $ 45.00 $ 20,250 Install coir encapsulated soils lifts along outside banks 400 FT $ 40.00 $ 16,000 Fool and riffle shaping 400 Fl- S 6.00 $ 2,400 Construction dewatedng and erosion control 1 LS $ 15,000.00 S 15,D00 Construction Oversight 120 HR $90 $ 1 Q 800 Task Subtotal: $ 113,950 Ta k 2-Utillti an Irri ation P:.. w:r "" - - I c Irrigation main,Valve,and drain relocation 700 LF $ 4D.00 $ 28,000 Connect to existing irrigation system 3 EA S 500.00 $ 1,500 Repair and reconnect irrigation laterals 1 LS $ 1,500.00 S 1.500 Remove and reset existing power pole W 1 EA $ 3,000.00 $ 3,OOD Task Subtotal: S 34,0007 Task 3-PI round Trails Access W- Playground Swingset 1 EA $2,000 $ 2,000 Benches 4 EA 51,100 $ 4,400 Directional Signage 2 EA $250 $ 500 Educational Sign Display 1 EA $1,000 $ 1,000 Ptayground edging 165 LF $7 s 1,155 Subtotal S 9,0ss Trails and paths 10'wide paths,crushed fines 425 LF $12 $ 5,100 8'wide paths,crushed fines 280 LF S10 $ 2,800 6'wide sidewalk 130 LF $6 $ 780 Subtotal: $ 8,680 Access Areas Frontier Step Treads 16 EA $350 $ 5,600 Frontier Stone Blocks 40 EA $350 $ 14,000 Sanset Flagstone 26 EA $25 $ 650 Subtotal: $ 20,254 Labor and Materials Eartl�workallowance 1 LS $5,500 $ 5,500 General Labor allowance 1 LS $5,000 $ 5,000 Topsoil 100 CY S35 S 3,500 Mulch 25 CY S35 $ 875 Irrigation allowance 1 LS $15,000 $ 15,000 Subtotal: $ 29,875 Task Subtotal: $ 67,860 Task 4-Revegetation P e 5 gallon shrubs-installed 245 EA $50 S 12,250 10-T plant plugs-installed 2800 EA $6 $ 16,800 1.5"cal.trees-installed 84 EA $400 $ 33.600 1 gallon perennials-installed 100 EA $14 $ 1,400 44 Seeding 16200 SQ FT $076 $ 12 150 Task Subtotal: $ 76,200 Tasks—Rrid e r• o Installlbridge with"eddy' feature for viewing 'I EA $ 140,000 $ 140,000 Task Subtotal: $ 140,000 Task 6-Final DeslQ n and Permittin Final Design Final channel and floodplain design 1 LS $15,000 $ 15,000 Final playground,trails,access and revegetation design 1 LS $10,500 $ 10,500 Final utility and irrigation design 1 LS $3,500 $ 3,500 Final structural and bridge aesthetics design 1 LS $12,800 $ 12,600 Prepare bid package 1 LS $1,700 $ 1;700 Project metings with City,BCEC 1 LS $3,600 $ 3,500 Subtotal: $ 47,000 Permitting Prepare and submitjoint regulatory permits 1 LS $4,000 $ 4,000 Prepare and submit SWPPP permit 1 LS $2,000 $ 2,000 Permitting fees-(floodplain,318,S VPPP) 1 LS $1,000 $ 1.000 Subtotal: $ 7,000 Task Subtotal: $ 54,000 Total Cost of Project(Tasks 1-6): $ 486,010 101/6 Contingency $ 48,601 Total Cost*Contingency $ 534,611 45 2. Funding sources information — decision dates Funding Source Amount Decision date DNRC RRGL Program-grant $100,000 April,2013 City of Bozeman,Open Space Bond Fund - grant $250,000 May,2013 City of Bozeman, Capital Improvement Fund - grant $40,000 June,2013 City of Bozeman, Park Improvement Fund- grant $20,000 March,2013 Recreational Trails Program, Iar a grant $90,000 November,012 Friends of Bogert Park- grant $20,000 February,2013 MT Trout Foundation-grant $6,600 March,2013 46 3. Letter of financial commitment from Gallatin Valley Land Trust 4y Montana DNRC Resource Development Bureau P.O.Box 201601 Helena,MT 59620-1601 May 3,2012 Dear Ivlontana DNRC, Please accept this letter of support for the City of Bozcman's request for a$100,000 Renewable Resource grant to help fund the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement project.Since 1940, the Gallatin Valley L and frust(GV LI)has been working around the community of Bozeman to conserve our heritage of open landscapes,working farms and ranches,healthy rivers,and wildlife habitat;and to create trails to connect people,communities and the land,GVL.T strongly supports this project and the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Pr'oject's efforts to collaboratively work toward enhancing the ecological function of Bozeman Creek and toward improving the public benefit of this fantastic and underserved resource. This projectproposes to enhance the creek's structure and ecological function,improving water, soil,Fishery,and wildlife resources.The community will benefit from enhanced recreational enjoyment of the creek,improved safety,community vitality,an urban fishery,and outdoor educational opportunities. Tl-is project is timely and essential,as Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park is highly degraded. Unstable banks,a channelized creek,lack of tloodplain,and poor aquatic habitat in the City park are unsightly,ecologically unsustainable,and a poor example for the community.By improving the fishery,stream function,and improving the public's access to and enjoyment of the Greek,this project will create an exciting new resource for Bozeman.This project is strongly supported by a community groups,businesses and neighborhoods.Beyond improving the Function of Bozeman Creek,it will provide important trail connections,educational opportunities,and recreation amenities. The Gallatin Valley Land Trust is committed to this project as a partner and willing to contribute in- kind.We will help with the design and construction of trails and trail infrastructure like signage,dog stations and the pedestrian bridge.Our staff time on the project may be considered match,at a rate of$60{hour we estimate$2,400 labor.We are also committing to installing four benches at the site as in-kind match,Fora total of$8,000, Thank you for your consideration of this project, Yours sincerely, Kelly Pohl Program Director •P.O.Box 7D21•3513.Wikon,Suire Fs•Bwermn,MT 59771 •4066-587-8494-Fax 406.582-1135•www.gsit. mg•infoa?eclt.org 47 3c. Use of DNRC RRGL grant funds DNRC RRGL grant funds will provide partial funding for the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project. The estimated total project cost is $534,610. RRGL funds of$100,000 will provide approximately 19% of the project cost. Project costs broken into 6 categories are as follows: Tasks Cost Professional services (design completion, permitting,bid package prep, $64,800 construction oversight Channel and flood lain construction $103,150 Reve etation $76,200 Relocate utilities and irrigation $34,000 Playground,trails, access site $67,860 Footbridge $140,000 Subtotal $486,010 10% Contingency $48,600 Total project cost $534,610 RRGL funds will be used as follows: Professional services: $64,800 Channel and floodplain construction: $35,200 48 C) 0 0 0 o rn U U � a� .o �-D- (L d) N O L O m a0 0 W) 3 d LL 41 _ 0 > � h- C L 'p OS 4" Q1 m L N LL O a. L O LL C co +' O m v � i= aL r+ O E c 7 L o i O Q W Q' CL U) a E 0 L e V fl1 — m _ > O G �q R9 O D Q ° n c L N E E Li d) N L U � O � c V C y 0 © D r r c L d m° U N O E1: Z +-' � L D +- .L C CL 4-A p CD N 0 O 0 to ++ 00 00 00 O cD CD CD .� d O d Fw li _d = .Q R N r C � F- C O � y G1 L � Q1 m L it o a cc L r_ D m cc y i... U 0 m li �. r o E E AD C o O L CL !6 G li L e m N E v r- > 0 O O. r%r O N O m R t d r C W (, O M CL C ±� D O a. cn m V M Q 0 O = 000 0c0 000 O Z i 69- &} 69- E O O of Z .N N U) D �to} O O n Q y v Cy1 Ov ,y .a N CD +' 2 C � U L +0 p f- d 0 C C ) VJ N N tD 00 Lf? V r ' m (3 �O F+ CN �(N Irr CO L H a c o � o. as r o c o to co (0 co _T LO F O a LL y "C N co 03 00 c L EA 69 {f} C7 � -j d? C) 0 p O C SG o 0 d LF G1 L w N �CN C%4 LL oma L 0 o a LL to o 0 O u C 0 m C Qom] d O i ff} 69, -� 0. m Co a o L m o o C) 4 v N m o C7 O O O ` G ' L Q. f6 Q- N CL C/! a.9 8 ° ° CD CD a L o o C7 E (D C a 6�4 � ~ O O Q co v U. CD CD CD Co N 't 4t co C) L v !d C6 6 d C u- N N � N O 0 Oa rL 0 5Ft b9 d N S103 N U N ° C) ° a 0 N Lei N C w rz E O 0 _ o v o v V = d L Ui° CL 0 Q c� v -1 2 w v ° vavv — 1-0 cv �o o � � L a a� C C o i O C) L `!� Q 1 � C 644 64 N 3 Q O �i LL M ❑ C O O 4 cc (D -0 N 0 4 ��ccRy R SC V > CD 0 (D C) CD L � � Q i N N Ca LL O a CD L 0 U. ies 4 p -W C 0 Co O E W m 64 tp, m Q1 `O H a. r+ O c O 4 CD 0 U N m m C] C 41 C 7 U. N C�[ 0 O y ° c 6# 6g a co 0. F�; 0 4 L 0 4 E o C7 a c B � '0 O R ° 0 64 6L} i... CL E a cn € LL 0 a o m L Cl° o p m c w ti U') c° CNI � CL Q O U a � �� 0 4 0 0 4 0 4 N 0 E a.+ Z L 64 64 r4 2 0 ❑ 01 [ �+ C Q O 4 O ,U CO V ca N U yQ O -- O O E I ? co � co w tfi U U QQm UU I Step 7: Environmental Evaluation Environmental Narrative 'l. Potential environmental impacts Four designs (the preferred, inset floodplain, wider meanders, and secondary channel alternatives)were assessed during project development, along with a no-action alternative. Significant environmental impact has resultcd from the creek's degradation to its existing condition. Each of the four alternatives evaluated would have improved the condition of renewable resources. Each would incur only short-term impacts, with the possible exception of the secondary channel alternative, as described below. The preferred alternative provides the best combination of benefits to renewable resources and to the public and at a reasonable cost. Preferred alternative The Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project design calls for realignment of the stream channel to create two new channel meanders, construction of an inset floodplain, riparian enhancements, and recreational improvements. The project will cause no significant environmental impacts. The project is being undertaken because it will have positive affects upon renewable resources and the park environment, as well as user experiences of those renewable resources. During construction,there will be transient, short-term impacts to the stream and to park visitors. Best management practices will be used to control impacts to environmentally sensitive areas, to minimize disturbance and sedimentation, and to limit duration of construction activities, dust and noise. In order to improve stream channel morphology, the stream channel in the upper reach of the project will be disturbed during construction and some riparian vegetation will need to be removed. Recovery of the aquatic environment will be rapid and to a much higher functioning condition. Tree loss will be more than offset by planting of many more trees and shrubs and a significant improvement in the extent and quality of the riparian zone. Inset Floodplain This alternative called for leaving the channel in its existing alignment and adding a floodplain bench along the right bank. Riparian improvements would have been less extensive and recreational features would have been similar to the preferred alternative. This alternative would have required the removal of fewer trees along the stream,with less disruption of the stream channel. Construction impacts to park users would have been similar. While short-term impacts would have been less than the preferred, the benefits to renewable resources would have been far less,yet costs would have been significant. . Wider Meanders This alternative is very similar to the preferred, except the meanders would have extended farther into the park,requiring the expensive relocation of a sewer line. Very similar vegetation and recreation features. Environmental impacts would have been similar to the preferred,but with a wider area of disturbance,including the new alignment for the re-routed sewer line, and a Ionger 53 construction period. Secondary channel A sinuous,low-flow secondary channel would have been constructed to the east of the existing channel, creating a% acre island in the southwest corner of the park and a new recreational opportunity for children. Environmental impacts would have been similar to the `wider meanders' alternative, with one potentially significant addition: Diverting flows to the secondary channel would have reduced main channel flows during the summer,when low flows sometimes reach a critical condition for fish. Even if the City was able to obtain necessary permits to divert the water,the potential environmental impact, as well as this alternative's cost, advised against its selection. 2. Affected environmental resources, The environmental resources, or renewable resources, of the project area are extensively described in the "Existing Condition" section of Step 4: Technical Presentation. (Beneficial) affects upon these resources is also described in detail in Step 3: Resource and Citizen Benefits. No previous environmental assessments or analyses have been conducted. An environmental checklist has been completed for the preferred alternative and the three other alternatives that were evaluated. 3. Sources consulted for the environmental evaluation Resource professionals consulted in completing the environmental evaluation include staff from the National Park Service's Rivers and Trails Program; City of Bozeman Parks,Engineering, and Planning Departments; Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks; Gallatin Local Water Quality District; Greater Gallatin Watershed Council; Gallatin Valley Land Trust; and Bogert Park neighbors. Documents consulted in completing the environmental evaluation include: -Preliminary Design Report, Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project at Bogert Park, Confluence Consulting Inc. 2012 -Bozeman Creek Hydraulic Model from Story Street to Mendenhall Street, Allied Engineering Services Inc.,2012 Sourdough Creek Watershed Assessment, Bozeman Watershed Council, 2004 -Bogert Park Master Plan,Intrinsik Architecture, 2010 54 Environmental Checklists Preferred Alternative Key Letter: N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— Approval/Permits Required M—Mitigation Required PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT Key 1. Soil Suitability, Topographic andlor Geologic Constraints (e.g., soil slump,steep B slopes, subsidence, seismic activity) Comments and Source of Information: Eroding banks will be regraded to sustainable slopes and vegetated. A formal stream access site will be designed to withstand heavy use. Key 2. Hazardous Facilities (e.g., power lines, EPA hazardous waste sites, acceptable N distance from explosive and flammable hazards including chemical/petrochemical storage tanks, underground fuel storage tanks, and related facilities such as natural gas storage facilities &propane storage tanks) Comments and Source of Information: None Key 3. Effects of Project on Surrounding Air Quality or Any Kind of Effects of Existing Air N Quality on Project(e.g., dust, odors, emissions) Comments and Source of Information: None Key 4. Groundwater Resources &Aquifers (e.g., quantity, quality, distribution, depth to B groundwater,sole source aquifers) Comments and Source of Information. Improved filtration and infiltration of floodwaters and overland runoff due to inset floodplain and additional riparian vegetation. Key 5. Surface Water/Water Quality, Quantity& Distribution (e.g.,streams, lakes, storm B runoff, irrigation systems, canals) Comments and Source of Information: Major project benefits to surface water from changes in channel morphology and improvements in aquatic habitat. Minor improvement to water quality. Beneficial impacts to summer flows. Key 6. Floodplains &Floodplain Management(Identify any floodplains within one mile of the B boundary of the project.) Comments and Source of Information: A floodplain would be constructed along Bozeman Creek for the length of the project reach where now there is none. Key 7. Wetlands Protection (Identify any wetlands within one mile of the boundary of the N, B project.) Comments and Source of Information: The project will not adversely impact any existing wetlands. Newly constructed point bars and floodplain surfaces will be planted with wetland species and will develop wetland characteristics, creating a beneficial impact. 55 Key Letter: N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— A roval/Permits Required M—Mitigation Required Key 8. Agricultural Lands, Production, & Farmland Protection (e.g., grazing,forestry, N cropland, prime or unique agricultural lands) (Identify any prime or important farm ground or forest lands within one mile of the boundary of the project.) Comments and Source of Information: None Key 9. Vegetation &WildIife Species & Habitats, Including Fish (e.g., terrestrial, avian and B aquatic life and habitats) Comments and Source of Information: Significant improvements to fish and wildlife habitat and species due to reconfiguration of channel form,addition of a floodplain, and expansion of the riparian area. Key 10. Unique, Endangered, Fragile, or Limited Environmental Resources, Including N Endangered Species (e.g., plants,fish or wildlife) Comments and Source of Information: None Key 11. Unique Natural Features (e.g., geologic features) N Comments and Source of Information: None Key 12. Access to, and Quality of, Recreational&Wilderness Activities, Public Lands and B Waterways (including Federally Designated Wild & Scenic Rivers), and Public Open Space Comments and Source of Information: Improved access to Bozeman Creek on existing city- owned land HUMAN POPULATION Kerr 1. Visual Quality—Coherence, Diversity, Compatibility of Use and Scale, Aesthetics B Comments and Source of Information: The more-sinuous shape of Bozeman Creek coupled with new floodplain areas and an expanded riparian zone will make the stream corridor through Bogert Park far more visually interesting and pleasing to park users.The new footbridge will add a pleasing architectural note. Key 2. Nuisances (e.g., glare,fumes) N Comments and Source of Information: Key 3. Noise--suitable separation between noise sensitive activities (such as residential B areas) and major noise sources (aircraft, highways&railroads) Comments and Source of Information: Additional riparian vegetation will screen sights and sounds of park users from adjacent west-side landowners. Key 4. Historic Properties, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources 56 N Comments and Source of information: Key Letter. N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— Approval/Permits Required M—Mitigation Required Key 5. Changes in Demographic(population) Characteristics (e.g., quantity,distribution, N density) Comments and Source of Information: Key 5. Environmental Justice-- (Does the project avoid placing lower income households in N areas where environmental degradation has occurred, such as adjacent to brownfield sites?) Comments and Source of Information: Key 7. General Housing Conditions -Quality, Quantity,Affordability N Comments and Source of information: Key 8. Displacement or Relocation of Businesses or Residents N Comments and Source of information: Key 9. Public Health and Safety B Comments and Source of information: Existing hazardous springtime high water flows will be slowed through construction of an inset floodplain and greater hydraulic resistance. Floodplain bench will provide a zone of shallower water for safety. Key 10. Lead Based Paint and/or Asbestos N Comments and Source of information: Key 11• Local Employment&Income Patterns-Quantity and Distribution of Employment, Economic Impact N Comments and Source of information: Key 12. Local &State Tax Base& Revenues N Comments and Source of Information: Key 13. Educational Facilities-Schools, Colleges, Universities N Comments and Source of Information: Key 57 N 14. Commercial and Industrial Facilities - Production&Activity, Growth or Decline Comments and Source of information: 58 Key Letter; N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— A rovallPermits Required M—Mitigation Required Key 15. Health Care—Medical Services N Comments and Source of Information: Key 16. Social Services--Governmental Services (e.g., demand on) N Comments and Source of Information: Key 17. Social Structures &Mores (Standards of Social Conduct/Social Conventions) N Comments and Source of Information: 18. Land Use Compatibility(e.g., growth, land use change, development activity,adjacent Key land uses and potential conflicts) B Comments and Source of Information: B. Additional vegetation will screen adjacent landowners from Bogert Park better than the existing situation. Key 19, Energy Resources-Consumption and Conservation N Comments and Source of Information: Key 20, Solid Waste Management N Comments and Source of Information: Key 21. Wastewater Treatment-Sewage System N Comments and Source of Information: Key 22. Storm Water—Surface Drainage B Comments and Source of Information: A rain garden will treat runoff from Bogert Park's parking lot. Additional riparian vegetation and the inset floodplain will treat runoff from the park's grassy terrace. Key 23. Community Water Supply N Comments and Source of Information: Key 24. Public Safety—Police N Comments and Source of Information: Key 25. Fire Protection—Hazards 59 N Comments and Source of Information: Key Letter: N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— Approval/Permits Required M —Mitigation Required Key 26. Emergency Medical Services N Comments and Source of Information: Key 27. Parks, Playgrounds, &Open Space B Comments and Source of Information: Great improvement to the Bozeman Creek corridor as an amenity at Bogert Park. Additional improvements in park amenities include an attractive,well-designed stream access site, additional trails, and a visually interesting footbridge. Key 28. Cultural Facilities, Cultural Uniqueness R Diversity N Comments and Source of Information: Key 29. Transportation Networks and Traffic Flow Conflicts (e.g., rail; auto including local traffic; airport runway clear zones-avoidance of incompatible land use in airport N runway clear zones) Comments and Source of Information: Key 30. Consistency with Local Ordinances, Resolutions, or Plans (e.g., conformance with N local comprehensive plans,zoning, or capital improvement plans) Comments and Source of Information: Key 31. Is There a Regulatory Action on Private Property Rights as a Result of this Project? (consider options that reduce, minimize, or eliminate the regulation of private N property rights.) Comments and Source of Information: 60 Inset Floodplain Alternative Key Letter: N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— Approval/Permits Required M—Mitigation Required PHYSICAL.ENVIRONMENT Key 1. Soil Suitability,Topographic and/or Geologic Constraints (e.g., soil slump,steep B slopes, subsidence, seismic activity) Comments and Source of Information: Eroding banks will be regraded to sustainable slopes and vegetated. A formal stream access site will be designed to withstand heavy use. Key 2. Hazardous Facilities (e.g., power lines, EPA hazardous waste sites, acceptable N distance from explosive and flammable hazards including chemical/petrochemical storage tanks, underground fuel storage tanks, and related facilities such as natural gas storage facilities &propane storage tanks) Comments and Source of Information: None Key 3. Effects of Project on Surrounding Air Quality or Any Kind of Effects of Existing Air N Quality on Project(e.g.,dust, odors, emissions) Comments and Source of Information. None Key 4. Groundwater Resources&Aquifers (e.g., quantity, quality, distribution, depth to B groundwater,sole source aquifers) Comments and Source of lnformation: Improved filtration and infiltration of floodwaters and overland runoff due to inset floodplain and additional riparian vegetation,though to a lesser extent than the other 3 action alternatives. Key ^ 5. Surface WaterlWater Quality, Quantity& Distribution (e.g., streams, lakes, storm B runoff, irrigation systems, canals) Comments and Source of Information: Benefits to surface water from addition of a floodplain bench on the east bank and minor improvement to water quality. Key 6. Floodplains & Floodplain Management(Identify any floodplains within one mile of the B boundary of the project.) Comments and Source of Information: A floodplain would be constructed along Bozeman Creek for the length of the project reach where now there is none. Key 7. Wetlands Protection (Identify any wetlands within one mile of the boundary of the N project.) Comments and Source of Information: The project will not adversely impact any existing wetlands. 61 Key Letter: N--No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— A roval/Permits Required M—Mitigation Required _Key-_ 8. Agricultural Lands, Production, & Farmland Protection (e.g., grazing,forestry, N cropland, prime or unique agricultural lands) (Identify any prime or important farm ground or forest lands within one mile of the boundary of the project.) Comments and Source of Information: None Key 9. Vegetation &Wildlife Species & Habitats, Including Fish (e.g.,terrestrial,avian and B aquatic life and habitats) Comments and Source of Information: Some improvement to fish and wildlife habitat and species due to addition of east-bank floodplain shelf and expansion of the riparian area. Key 10. Unique, Endangered, Fragile, or Limited Environmental Resources, Including N Endangered Species (e.g., plants,fish or wildlife) Comments and Source of Information; None Key 11. Unique Natural Features (e.g., geologic features) N Comments and Source of Information: None Key 12. Access to, and Quality of, Recreational &Wilderness Activities, Public Lands and B Waterways(including Federally Designated Wild &Scenic Rivers), and Public Open Space Comments and Source of Information: Improved access to Bozeman Creek on existing city- owned land HUMAN POPULATION Key 1. Visual Quality—Coherence, Diversity, Compatibility of Use and Scale,Aesthetics B Comments and Source of Information: The new floodplain area and an expanded riparian zone will make the stream corridor through Bogert Park more visually interesting and accessible to park users.The new footbridge will add a pleasing architectural note. Key _ 2. Nuisances (e.g., glare,fumes) N Comments and Source of Information: Key 3. Noise--suitable separation between noise sensitive activities (such as residential B areas) and major noise sources (aircraft, highways &raiiroads) Comments and Source of Information: Additional riparian vegetation will screen sights and sounds of park users from adjacent west-side landowners. Key 4. Historic Properties, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources 62 N Comments and Source of Information: Key Letter: N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— A roval/Permits Required M —Mitigation Required W Key 5. Changes in Demographic (population) Characteristics (e.g., quantity, distribution, N density) Comments and Source of Information: Key 6. Environmental Justice— (Does the project avoid placing lower income households in N areas where environmental degradation has occurred, such as adjacent to brownfield sites?) Comments and Source of Information: Key ?. General Housing Conditions-Quality,Quantity,Affordability N Comments and Source of Information: Key 8. Displacement or Relocation of Businesses or Residents N Comments and Source of Information: Key 9. Public Health and Safety B Comments and Source of Information: Existing hazardous springtime high water flows will be slowed through construction of an inset floodplain. Floodplain bench will provide a zone of shallower water for safety. Key 10. Lead Based Paint and/or Asbestos N Comments and Source of Information: Key 11. Local Employment&income Patterns-Quantity and Distribution of Employment, Economic Impact N Comments and Source of Information: Key 12. Local&State Tax Base& Revenues N Comments and Source of Information: Key 13. Educational Facilities -Schools, Colleges, Universities N Comments and Source of Information: Key 63 N 14. Commercial and Industrial Facilities- Production&Activity, Growth or Decline Comments and Source of Information: 64 Key Letter: N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A--Potentially Adverse P— A roval/Permits Required M -- Mitigation Required Key 15. Health Care—Medical Services N Comments and Source of Information: Key _ 16. Social Services—Governmental Services (e.g., demand on) N Comments and Source of Information: Key 17. Social Structures &Mores(Standards of Social Conduct/Social Conventions) N Comments and Source of Information: 18. Land Use Compatibility(e.g., growth, land use change, development activity, adjacent Key land uses and potential conflicts) B Comments and Source of Information: B. Additional vegetation will screen adjacent landowners from Bogert Park better than the existing situation. Key 19. Energy Resources-Consumption and Conservation N Comments and Source of Information: Key 20. Solid Waste Management N Comments and Source of Information: Key 21. Wastewater Treatment-Sewage System N Comments and Source of Information: Key 22. Storm Water--Surface Drainage B Comments and Source of Information: A rain garden will treat runoff from Bogert Park's parking lot. Additional riparian vegetation and the inset floodplain will treat runoff from the park's grassy terrace. Key 23. Community Water Supply N Comments and Source of Information: Key 24. Public Safety—Police N Comments and Source of Information: Key 25. Fire Protection—Hazards 65 N Comments and Source of Information: Key Letter: N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— Approval/Permits Required M—Mitigation Required Key 26. Emergency Medical Services N Comments and Source of Information: Key 27. Parks, Playgrounds, &Open Space B Comments and Source of Information: Improvement to the Bozeman Creek corridor as an amenity at Bogert Park. Additional improvements in park amenities include an attractive, well-designed stream access site, additional trails, and a visually interesting footbridge. Key 28. Cultural Facilities, Cultural Uniqueness & Diversity N Comments and Source of Information: Key 29. Transportation Networks and Traffic Flow Conflicts (e.g., rail; auto including local traffic; airport runway clear zones -avoidance of incompatible land use in airport N runway clear zones) Comments and Source of Information: Key 30. Consistency with Local Ordinances, Resolutions, or Plans(e.g., conformance with N local comprehensive plans,zoning, or capital improvement plans) Comments and Source of Information: Key_ 31. Is There a Regulatory Action on Private Property Rights as a Result of this Project? N (consider options that reduce, minimize, or eliminate the regulation of private property rights.) Comments and Source of Information: 66 Wider Meanders and Secondary Channel Alternatives (identical impacts except for physical environment#5 and human population#18) Key Letter: N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— Approval/Permits Required M —Mitigation Required PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT Key 1. Soil Suitability,Topographic and/or Geologic Constraints(e.g., soil slump, steep B slopes, subsidence, seismic activity) Comments and Source of Information: Eroding banks will be regraded to sustainable slopes and vegetated. A formal stream access site will be designed to withstand heavy use. Key 2. Hazardous Facilities (e.g., power lines, EPA hazardous waste sites, acceptable N distance from explosive and flammable hazards including chemical/petrochemical storage tanks, underground fuel storage tanks, and related facilities such as natural gas storage facilities&propane storage tanks) Comments and Source of Information: None Key 3. Effects of Project on Surrounding Air Quality or Any Kind of Effects of Existing Air N Quality on Project(e.g., dust, odors,emissions) Comments and Source of Information: None Key 4. Groundwater Resources &Aquifers (e.g., quantity, quality, distribution, depth to B groundwater,sole source aquifers) Comments and Source of Information: Improved filtration and infiltration of floodwaters and overland runoff due to inset floodplain and additional riparian vegetation. Key 5. Surface WaterlWater Quality, Quantity& Distribution (e.g., streams, lakes, storm B, P runoff, irrigation systems, canals) Comments and Source of Information: Major project benefits to surface water from changes in channel morphology and improvements in aquatic habitat. Minor improvement to water quality. Wider Meanders alternative would provide a beneficial impact to summer flows. The Secondary Channel alternative's potential beneficial impact on summer flows might have been offset by the water diversion out of the main channel (a permit for a water withdrawal would have been required). Key 6. Floodplains &Floodplain Management(Identify any floodplains within one mile of the B boundary of the project.) Comments and Source of Information: A floodplain would be constructed along Bozeman Creek for the length of the project reach where now there is none. Both of these alternatives would provide additional floodplain area, and therefore slightly greater benefit, than the preferred. Key 7. Wetlands Protection (Identify any wetlands within one mile of the boundary of the N, B project.) 67 Key Letter: N--No Impact/Not Applicable B— Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— Approval/Permits Required M—Mitigation Required Comments and Source of Information: The project will not adversely impact any existing wetlands. Newly constructed point bars and floodplain surfaces will be planted with wetland species and will develop wetland characteristics, creating a beneficial impact. 68 Key Letter: N--No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— A roval/Permits Required M—Mitigation Required Key 8. Agricultural Lands, Production, & Farmland Protection (e.g., grazing,forestry, N cropland, prime or unique agricultural lands) (Identify any prime or important farm ground or forest lands within one mile of the boundary of the project.) Comments and Source of Information: None Key 9. Vegetation&Wildlife Species& Habitats, Including Fish (e.g.,terrestrial, avian and B aquatic life and habitats) Comments and Source of Information: Significant improvements to fish and wildlife habitat and species due to reconfiguration of channel form, addition of a floodplain, and expansion of the riparian area. Benefits slightly greater than the preferred. Key 10. Unique, Endangered, Fragile, or Limited Environmental Resources, Including N Endangered Species (e.g., plants,fish or wildlife) Comments and Source of Information: None Key 11. Unique Natural Features (e.g.,geologic features) N Comments and Source of Information: None Key 12. Access to, and Quality of, Recreational &Wilderness Activities, Public Lands and B Waterways (including Federally Designated Wild &Scenic Rivers), and Public Open Space Comments and Source of Information: Improved access to Bozeman Creek on existing city- owned land HUMAN POPULATION Key 1. Visual Quality—Coherence, Diversity, Compatibility of Use and Scale,Aesthetics B Comments and Source of Information: The more-sinuous and complex shape of Bozeman Creek coupled with new floodplain areas and an expanded riparian zone will make the stream corridor through Bogert Park far more visually interesting and pleasing to park users. The new footbridge will add a pleasing architectural note. Key 2. Nuisances (e.g., glare,fumes) N Comments and Source of Information: Key 3. Noise--suitable separation between noise sensitive activities (such as residential 13 areas) and major noise sources (aircraft, highways &railroads) Comments and Source of information: Additional riparian vegetation will screen sights and sounds of park users from adjacent west-side landowners.. Key 4. Historic Properties, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources 69 N Comments and Source of Information: Key Letter: N—No ImpacUNot Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— Approval/Permits Required M —Mitigation Required Key 5. Changes in Demographic(population) Characteristics (e.g., quantity, distribution, N density) Comments and Source of Information: Key 6. Environmental Justice— (Does the project avoid placing lower income households in N areas where environmental degradation has occurred, such as adjacent to brownfield sites?) Comments and Source of Information: Key 7. General Housing Conditions-Quality, Quantity,Affordability N Comments and Source of Information: Key 8. Displacement or Relocation of Businesses or Residents N Comments and Source of Information: Key 9. Public Health and Safety B Comments and Source of Information: Existing hazardous springtime high water flows will be reduced and slowed through construction of an inset floodplain and greater hydraulic resistance. Floodplain bench will provide a zone of shallower water for safety. Key 10. Lead Based Paint and/or Asbestos N Comments and Source of Information: Key 11. Local Employment&Income Patterns -Quantity and Distribution of Employment, Economic Impact N Comments and Source of Information: Key 12. Local &State Tax Base& Revenues N Comments and Source of Information: Key 13. Educational Facilities -Schools, Colleges, Universities N Comments and Source of Information: Key 70 N 14. Commercial and Industrial Facilities- Production &Activity, Growth or Decline Comments and Source of Information: 71 Key letter: N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— A roval/Permits Required M—Mitigation Required Key 15. Health Care—Medical Services N Comments and Source of Information: Key 16. Social Services—Governmental Services (e.g., demand on) N Comments and Source of Information: Key 17. Social Structures &Mores (Standards of Social Conduct/Social Conventions) N Comments and Source of Information: 18. Land Use Compatibility(e.g.,growth, land use change,development activity, adjacent Key land uses and potential conflicts) B,A Comments and Source of Information: B,A. Additional vegetation will screen adjacent landowners from Bogert Park better than the existing situation. Wider Meanders alternative may have created a conflict between park users and some adjacent landowners by creating new park space on the west side of creek, against private property. Key 19. Energy Resources-Consumption and Conservation N Comments and Source of Information: Key 20. Solid Waste Management N Comments and Source of Information: Key 21. Wastewater Treatment-Sewage System N Comments and Source of Information: Key_ 22. Storm Water—Surface Drainage B Comments and Source of Information: A rain garden will treat runoff from Bogert Park's parking lot. Additional riparian vegetation and the inset floodplain will treat runoff from the park's grassy terrace. Key 23. Community Water Supply N Comments and Source of Information: Key 24. Public Safety—Police 72 N Comments and Source of Information: Key 25. l=ire Protection—Hazards N Comments and Source of Information_ Key Letter: N—No Impact/Not Applicable B—Potentially Beneficial A—Potentially Adverse P— Approval/Permits Required M—Mitigation Required Key 26. Emergency Medical Services N Comments and Source of Information: Key 27. Parks, Playgrounds, &Open Space B Comments and Source of Information: Great improvement to the Bozeman Creek corridor as an amenity at Bogert Park. Additional improvements in park amenities include an attractive,well-designed stream access site, additional trails, and a visually interesting footbridge. _ Key 28. Cultural Facilities, Cultural Uniqueness& Diversity N Comments and Source of Information: Key 29. Transportation Networks and Traffic Flow Conflicts (e.g., rail; auto including local traffic; airport runway clear zones-avoidance of incompatible land use in airport N runway clear zones) Comments and Source of Information: Key 30. Consistency with Local Ordinances, Resolutions,or Plans (e.g., conformance with N local comprehensive plans,zoning, or capital improvement plans) Comments and Source of Information: Key 31. Is There a Regulatory Action on Private Property Rights as a Result of this Project? N (consider options that reduce, minimize, or eliminate the regulation of private property rights.) Comments and Source of Information: 73 Appendices A. Letters of Support B. Preliminary Design Report—Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project at Bogert Park, Confluence Consulting Inc.,May, 2012 C. Bozeman Creek Hydraulic Model from Story Street to Mendenhall Street,Allied Engineering Services Inc.,March 2012 D. Excerpt from Sourdough Creek Watershed Assessment, The Bozeman,Watershed Council, April 2004 74 Appendix A: Letters of Support 75 04T OF T United States Department of the Int. NATIONAL NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 'ERY'e o INTERMOUNTAIN REGION ` b 4030 Sourdough Road d���. Bozeman,Montana 59715 Montana DNRC Resource Development Bureau P.O. Box 201601 Helena, MT 59620-1601 May 8, 2012 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing in support for the City of Bozeman's request for a$100,000 Renewable Resource grant to help fund the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project. For the past year and a half,I have been acting as the coordinator for the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee, a group of agencies, organizations and landowners striving to improve the ecology and value of Bozeman Creek as a community amenity. The creek enhancement project at Bogert Park has been our top priority for an on-the-ground enhancement project due to its degraded condition,public ownership, location close to downtown, and very strong public support. The City's RRGL grant application does an excellent job describing the current degraded condition of this reach of Bozeman Creek, and the benefits that will accrue to the stream corridor and to the citizen's of Bozeman. The planned stream enhancements will create a much more ecologically productive environment while creating a suite of community benefits, including recreational enjoyment of the enhanced creek, improved safety, community vitality,an urban fishery, and outdoor educational opportunities. The value of this enhancement project extends far beyond the benefits at Bogert. As the first of a series of creek enhancement projects we are planning for the downtown area,the Bogert project will create the upstream anchor for a 1-mile greenway corridor that will connect neighborhoods and parks to the central business district, weaving a restored Bozeman Creek into the fabric of Bozeman life. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, doo�l Gary Weiner National Park Service Rivers and Trails Program Coordinator,Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee Bozeman,Montana 59715 406-587-1667 TAKE PRIDE 4 INM EJCA Montana DNRC May 7,2012 Resource Development Bureau P.O. Box 201601 Helena, MT 59620-1601 To whom it may concern; I am writing in support of the City ofBozeman's request for a$100,000 Renewable Resource grant to help fund the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project. The stretch of Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park is significant feature that is valued by the community. Unfortunately, the creek is highly degraded. It has been channelized and entrenched resulting in vertical and unstable banks. There is no floodplain,which contributes to flooding and bank erosion. The aquatic habitat is very poor and there are few fish. The riparian zone is thin, Iacks vegetative diversity, and provides poor wildlife habitat. In its current state, this section of Bozeman Creek provides minimal value to park users and is a significant safety hazard during annual spring high flows. This project will enhance the creek's structure and ecological function as well as its value to the community. Renewable resources that will benefit include;water, soil, aquatic and riparian habitat, fish and wildlife. Benefits to the community include; recreational enjoyment of the enhanced creek, improved safety, community vitality, an urban fishery, and outdoor educational opportunities. The City has been working in partnership with a number of other agencies, community organizations, the general public, and adjacent landowners to develop a long-term enhancement plan for the creek while simultaneously working on high-priority early-action projects. A creek enhancement project at Bogert Park was identified early on in the public process as a very high priority project, and is strongly supported by the community. For the reasons listed above, I urge you to give favorable consideration to this grant request. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Ron Dingman Parks and Recreation Director, City of Bozeman cNorttaia ` iskq %We (& s �C. May 9,2012 Montana DNRC Resource Development Bureau P.O. Box 201601 Helena, MT 59620-1601 To Whom It May Concem, I would like to voice my support for the City of Bozeman's request for a$100,000 Renewable Resource grant to help fund the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project. Bozeman Creek is an example of an urban stream that has suffered from many indignities by the hand of man. The reach through the City of Bozeman been straightened, channelized and bank armored to the extent that much of its natural function has been severely compromised, physically, biologically and aesthetically. This project will improve the streams aquatic and terrestrial wildlife habitat, riparian vegetation, hydraulic function, and allow it access to a floodplain. I have surveyed the fish population in the creek through the park and while this reach should be capable of producing wild trout in the 20 inch class, it is currently well below its potential not only in size but numbers of fish, both sport and non-game. Bogert Park is heavily used by families with children.The creek currently has few areas where the public may access it safely, especially small children. Part of the enhancement plan will provide safe areas for the public to interact with the creek,from my perspective an important 'hook'to foster in kids an interest in the outdoor world that can last a lifetime. Planning for this project has energized a diverse group of citizens,governmental agencies and non-profit organizations to work for the betterment of Bozeman Creek and the Bozeman community. This stream enhancement project in Bogert Park will be a great'first step'to enlisting further public interest and support for restoring other reaches of Bozeman Creek in the future. Sincerely, Mike Vaughn Madison/Gallatin Fisheries Biologist Montana Fish,Wildlife and Parks 1400S. 19th Bozeman, MT 59718 406.994-6938 mvaughn @mt.gov Montana DNRC Resource Development Bureau P.O. Box 201601 Helena,MT 59620-1601 1 May 3, 2012 Dear Montana DNRC, Please accept this letter of support for the City of Bozeman's request for a$100,000 Renewable Resource grant to help fund the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project. Since 1990, the Gallatin Valley Land Trust (GVLT) has been working around the community of Bozeman to conserve our heritage of open landscapes,working farms and ranches,healthy rivers,and wildlife habitat;and to create trails to connect people, communities and the land. GVLT strongly supports this project and the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project's efforts to collaboratively work toward enhancing the ecological function of Bozeman Creek and toward improving the public benefit of this fantastic and underserved resource. This project proposes to enhance the creek's structure and ecological function,improving water, soil, fishery,and wildlife resources.The community will benefit from enhanced recreational enjoyment of the creek,unproved safety, community vitality,an urban fishery,and outdoor educational opportunities. This project is timely and essential,as Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park is highly degraded. Unstable banks,a channelized creek,lack of floodplain,and poor aquatic habitat in the City park are unsightly,ecologically unsustainable,and a poor example for the community. By improving the fishery, stream function,and improving the public's access to and enjoyment of the Creek,this project will create an exciting new resource for Bozeman.This project is strongly supported by a community groups,businesses and neighborhoods.Beyond improving the function of Bozeman Creek,it will provide important trail connections, educational opportunities,and recreation amenities. The Gallatin Valley Land Trust is committed to this project as a partner and willing to contribute in- kind.We will help with the design and construction of trails and trail infrastructure like signage, dog stations and the pedestrian bridge. Our staff time on the project may be considered match,at a rate of$60/hour we estimate$2,400 labor.We are also committing to installing four benches at the site as in-kind match, for a total of$8,000. Thank you for your consideration of this project. Yours sincerely, Kelly Pohl Program Director •P.O.Box 7021 •25 N.Willson,Suite E•Bozeman,MT 59771 •406-587-8404•Fax 406-582-1136•www.gvlt.org•info a p■vlt.or�v Gallatin Local Wester Qualit y District 215 W.Mendenhall,Suite 300—Courthouse Annex—Bozeman,MT 59715 (406)582-3168 www.gallatin.mt.gou/GLWQD April 27, 2012 Montana DNRC Resource Development Bureau P.O. Box 201601 Helena,MT 59620-1601 Re: Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project—RRGL Application To Whom It May Concern: I am writing in support for the City of Bozeman's request for a$100,000 Renewable Resource Grant to assist in funding the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project. Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park is a highly degraded stream. There is no floodplain and the stream is cliannelized and entrenched with unstable banks posing a significant safety hazard during annual spring high flows. The thin to almost non-existent riparian zone is lacking vegetative diversity resulting in poor wildlife habitat. Water quality is also impaired due to excess nutrients and sediment. All of these issues combined have led to very poor aquatic habitat with few fish and have left the stream and park of minimal value to park users. This project will enhance the stream's structure and ecological function, and its value to the community. Renewable resources that will benefit include: water, soil,aquatic and riparian habitat, fish and wildlife. Benefits to the community include recreational enjoyment of the enhanced stream, improved safety, community vitality, an urban fishery, and outdoor educational opportunities. The mission of the Gallatin Local Water Quality District{GLWQD} is to protect,preserve and improve the quality of ground water and surface water within the District. This includes using a holistic approach to enhance water resources in the watershed. GLWQD has been working in partnership with the City of Bozeman, other agencies, community organizations and landowners to develop a long-term enhancement plan for Bozeman Creek while simultaneously working on high-priority, early-action projects. A stream enhancement project at Bogert Park was identified early in the public process as a high priority project and is strongly supported by the community. I encourage the RRGL committee to fully fund the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Enhancement Project. Sincerely, Tammera Crone Our mission is to protect,preserve and improve the quality of surface water and groundwater k Gallatin T ocal Waster Qnaclitj]mgtrict 215 W.Mendenhall,Suite 300—Courthouse Annex—Bozeman,M7 59715 (446)582-3168 www.aliabn.mt.gov/GLWQD Water Quality Specialist Our mission is to protect;preserve and improve the quality of surface Boater and ground mater Appendix B: Preliminary Design Report — Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project at Bogert Park 76 �n Prepared for: City of Bozeman Suite 102,City Hail 121 North Rouse Avenue Bozeman Montana Submitted by: l DESIGN5 Engineering"� z: yg inur:nsili CONFLUENCE i�9al��ii1 lnoorporased � �9NI�� AR CHITfCTURE Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 Preliminary Design Components.................................................................................2 Bozeman Creek Stream Channel.................................................................................2 Hydrology................................................................................................. ..........3 Channel Alignment.............................................................. Channel Dimensions................................................................ StreamHabitat..................................................................... -- 6 Lateral Stability and Bank Treatments ................................. ....7 Vertical Stability and Stream Bed Composition............................................................ 8 100-year Floodplain through Bogert Park.................................................................... 8 Inset Floodplain Development......................................................................................9 Vegetation................................................................ ...... 10 Additional Park Design Elements.............................................................................. 11 StreamAccessibility................................................................................................... 11 Paths/ Circulation............................................................................ .. 12 Playground................................................................................................................. 13 Signage....................................................................... ... 13 Bridge ................................................................................. ............ 13 Utilities ........................................................................................ ................. 14 IrrigationLine............................................................................................................. 15 Construction Dewatering, Storm water and Erosion Control...................................... 15 Permitting .................................................................................... .. 15 ProjectCosts............................................................................. ....................... 1 6 ProjectPhasing........................................................................................................... 18 Option 2— Construct one meander at a time ............................................................. 18 Option 3— Construct stream channel first followed by playground and trails............. 18 i Introduction Originating in the Gallatin Mountains,Bozeman Creek flows north through the Gallatin Valley before running through the heart of Bozeman, Montana. The creek is one of the largest tributaries to the East Gallatin River and provides an excellent enhancement and restoration opportunity within an urban setting. Historic manipulations of Bozeman Creek, particularly near downtown, have reduced the once meandering channel into a straightened ditch with several culverts and pipes conveying the stream beneath streets and parking lots. Much of the ecological value of the creek has been lost as the riparian and floodplain corridors have largely been developed. In-stream habitat has also been severely compromised by the simplification of the channel into a nearly straight alignment throughout nearly all of its length within the city limit. The Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee(BCEC)formed to identify community-supported actions that could be taken to improve water quality, habitat, recreation and access, and other aspects of the creek corridor. The group is spearheaded by a working group of community organizations and individuals, in collaboration with the Bozeman Parks Division and the National Park Service's Rivers &Trails Program. A creek enhancement project at Bogert Park was identified as a high-priority by the BCEC due to the site's primary ownership by the city, high visibility and proximity to the center of town, strong public support, and value as a demonstration project. A Bozeman Creek enhancement at Bogert Park will assist in attaining the goals of the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project including: • Improve Bozeman Creek channel,floodplain,and riparian structure and function • Enhance habitat for fish and wildlife • Minimize non-point source pollution of surface and ground water from sediment, biological pathogens, excess nutrients, urban pollutants and hazardous wastes • Provide additional open space, greenways, and public parks along the creek • Construct new trails that integrate the creek corridor into community life,while improving connectivity within the"Main Street to the Mountains"trail system • Foster a recreational fishery emphasizing opportunities for kids as aquatic habitat and water quality improve • Provide or improve desirable amenities at existing and new creekside parks • Inform residents about the natural resource values of the creek corridor,the ecological services it provides, its past and present importance to the Bozeman community,and the work of the BCEC. The BCEC performed an alternative analysis with substantive public involvement for improving Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park in 2011. The preferred alternative included creating meanders and an inset floodplain to re-establish a more naturally functioning and safer stream channel that provides a more significant and appreciated amenity to park users. Preliminary surveys indicated an opportunity to create two full meander bends through the park and adjusting park infrastructure to complement the creek. 1 The City of Bozeman contracted Confluence Consulting,TD&H Engineering, Design 5, Intrinsik Architecture, Inc. and Nishkian Monks to prepare preliminary plans for enhancing Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park based on the selected alternative. Preliminary designs include plans for routing the creek through two new meanders, constructing an inset floodplain, revegetation of the riparian corridor, altering the park's playground and trail system, creating an improved creek access area, moving existing utilities as necessary to accommodate the stream enhancement, and replacing the existing bridge spanning Bozeman Creek. This report describes and illustrates each of these park enhancement components in further detail. Preliminary Design Components The preliminary design for Bozeman Creek includes altering the stream channel alignment and adjusting the park's playground,trails,footbridge, and utilities to complement the creek. Primary design components include: Bozeman Creek Stream Channel • Realignment of Bozeman Creek including two meander bends to allow for additional habitat complexity, • Providing an inset floodplain for Bozeman Creek to provide additional flood capacity, • Increasing habitat diversity by creating pool and riffle complexes, • Enhancing the riparian corridor along Bozeman Creek through the park. Bogert Park Infrastructure • Replacing the existing bridge spanning Bozeman Creek from Koch Street, • Altering the existing park trail system to better accommodate the new bridge alignment, traffic patterns, and allow for mixed use of pedestrians and bikers, • Altering the playground layout to accommodate a new stream alignment, stream access areas, and revised trail system, • Improving recreational access to the stream in specified areas while discouraging access in other areas, • Moving power and irrigation lines to accommodate a new stream alignment, This design report is accompanied by a set of design sheets illustrating details for each of these primary design components. A master plan for the enhancement of Bozeman Creek in Bogert Park illustrating the channel alignment, and revised playground,trails, and bridge is shown on Sheet 2 of the drawing set. The following narrative sections provide details on the proposed approaches,analyses performed, and design criteria established for each component of the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project. Bozeman Creek Stream Channel The overall vision for enhancing Bozeman Creek through the park involves altering the alignment of the channel, expanding floodplain capacity, and establishing a vegetated riparian corridor adjacent to the channel. Pursuing this approach requires an analysis of several factors 2 to ensure the newly constructed channel segment will provide ecological and recreational benefits over the long term. The following analyses were performed and design criteria established as part of the preliminary design process for Bozeman Creek: Hydrology Bozeman Creek has almost no available gage data records available to assist in predicting typical flood discharges. A USGS gage installed in Sourdough Canyon recorded flows from May 1, 1951 to September 30, 1953, but does not provide sufficient data to predict peak flows. A typical method for estimating peak flows in un-gaged streams is the use of USGS regional regression equations. For this region, regression equations factor drainage area and the percentage of the drainage above 6,000 feet elevation. The following table provides predicted discharges at various return intervals for Bozeman Creek at the project site using regression equations. Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park Upper Yellowstone Region Return Drainage Area>6000'=32.6 sq.mi(63.1%) I nterva I r 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 Drainage Area<6000'=19 sq.mi(36,9%) (y } Total Drainage Area=51.6 sq.mi Q(Cfs) 233 419 574 803 994 1198 1414 1732 A hydrologic analysis was performed by Allied Engineering as part of a hydraulic modeling effort on Bozeman Creek through downtown Bozeman. The draft of this report dated March 2, 2012 described a methodology for predicting a surrogate bankfull flow for Bozeman Creek as it flows through downtown. The surrogate bankfull flow in this report utilized data from other gaged streams in the Gallatin Valley, an estimate of the natural slope of Bozeman Creek prior to it being channeiized, and channel widths measured from UDAR data upstream of the city limits. The estimated bankfull flow reported using this methodology is 208 cfs. This method may slightly underestimate bankfull flows at Bogert Park, as the estimate of 208 cfs was partially based on an analysis of channel widths 3.5-4.5 miles upstream. Prior to factoring in existing channel widths upstream,the Allied report estimated a natural bankfull width of 28 feet, which corresponds to the average channel width in Bogert Park during a 2-year return interval. It is important to note that the analyses performed do not provide substantial input as to what the geomorphically relevant bankfull discharge should be at the project site. Final design efforts should consider additional analyses such as installing continuous flow monitoring devices and measuring discharge during a bankfull event at reference locations where floodplain connectivity is unaffected by channel alterations. A proper reference reach for Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park is not available due to urbanization and channel modifications in the vicinity of the project. An alternative approach would include measuring bankfull discharges in Bozeman Creek and Matthew Bird Creek upstream of the project site where natural floodplain characteristics exist. After factoring in the hydrologic analysis performed by Allied Engineering, conducting at-a- station hydraulic modeling of surveyed cross sections, and performing regression equations, a bankfu[I design discharge of 230 cfs was chosen for the purposes of preliminary design. This discharge closely resembles the 2-year return interval flow as predicted by regional regression equations, but does not necessarily correspond to a naturally occurring bankfull discharge. 3 Most regional snowmen driven streams exhibit bankfull discharges that fall between a 1.5 and 2.5-year return interval; therefore the use of a 2-year return interval discharge as a surrogate for bankfull discharge is appropriate at this stage in design. . Channel Alignment Bozeman Creek is currently channelized for approximately 800 feet through Bogert Park and has been largely armored along the left(west) bank with rock, concrete, and debris. Several constraints including residential property boundaries, park infrastructure (band shell, pavilion, irrigation, utilities, large trees, and playground) limit opportunities for re-establishing a naturally meandering channel through the park. The Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee performed an alternative analysis with substantive public involvement for improving Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park. The preferred alternative included establishing meanders to provide a more naturally functioning stream channel that also provides a more significant amenity to the park.The proposed channel alignment and resulting channel profile are illustrated in plan view on Design Sheet 3. Specific design criteria for the new channel alignment include: 1. Meander bends will be designed to allow the existing municipal sewer line to remain undisturbed. 2. Meander bends must be designed to minimize removal of existing trees, except where specific trees have been identified as decadent or otherwise expendable by the Bozeman Forestry. 3. Channel alignment will maximize opportunity for channel enhancement and habitat diversity associated with meander bends, while maintaining all other design criteria. Channel Dimensions All natural stream channels exhibit variability in width, depth as sediment erodes and deposits. Incorporating variability in stream channel designs creates a more naturally appearing and aesthetically pleasing project. In addition, incorporating variability along the stream bed allows for habitat complexity in the form of shallower riffles and deeper pools. Each of these habitat features contributes important ecological components necessary for healthy fisheries and other aquatic life. The reconstructed portion of Bozeman Creek through the park includes two meander sequences, which include riffle and pool components. Factors considered and criteria developed for riffle and pool dimensions are described below. Reconstructing stream channel segments often relies on developing a suite of"reference" channel conditions, and designing the new channel to mimic those conditions. Reference channel conditions should be applied in settings where streams are truly being restored to their historic or naturally occurring state. Due to numerous constraints(private property boundaries, park infrastructure, acceptable level of channel migration), this project is considered an "enhancement" of Bozeman Creek rather than true restoration.As such, the use of a reference reach to base channel dimensions is not an appropriate method for design. A more appropriate mechanism for developing channel dimensions includes integrating cross sectional shapes, channel bed slope,and the estimated bankfull discharge into an at-a-station hydraulic model 4 (WinXSPro)to derive an appropriate channel dimension that provides adequate conveyance during typical discharges. Appropriate channel dimensions also need to factor in the size of the existing channel upstream and downstream, so as not to create too radical a departure in channel shape within the project reach. In using this approach, the general shape of the existing channel,although over-simplified in habitat complexity, offers some guidance for design of the newly constructed channel segment. Although the channel is overly narrow near the upper end of the project reach due to bank armoring, and overly wide in other areas where the channel has eroded,the use of reach averages in this approach provide a means for generating preliminary design cross section dimensions Five cross sections were surveyed across the existing channel at riffles to allow analysis of various cross sectional parameters. Parameter values for each cross section,as well as average values for all cross sections are provided in the table below. Cross Max Cross Section Top Width Mean Width/Depth Section Depth (ft) Area(sq ft) (ft) Depth (ft) Ratio 1 2.52 38.2 21.88 1.75 12.50 2 2.19 45.64 34.9 1.31 26.64 3 2.01 44.05 31.93 1.38 23.14 4 2.36 42.52 29.09 1.46 19.92 5 2.23 39.97 24.75 1.61 15.37 Average 2.26 42.08 28.51 1.50 19.52 Riffle Design Surveys of the existing channel indicate an average top width of 28.5 feet, average mean depth of 1.5 feet, and average width/depth ratio of 19.5 at 230 cfs. These dimensions were used as the average riffle dimensions for the relocated channel segment. In order to incorporate variability in riffle dimensions, a variety of cross sections using top widths within 10% of 28' were imported into hydraulic software (WinXSPro)to determine the adjusted mean depths at a bankfull discharge of 230 cfs. Pool Design Design of pool habitat in the relocated channel segment involves an analysis of scour depth and professional judgment in depicting the variety in channel width and depth. In meandering stream channels, pool dimensions are typically narrower and deeper than riffles and subsequently exhibit lower width/depth ratios. Hydraulic analyses predict a scour depth of 3.0 feet belowthe bed elevation at bankfull flows; however, each pool will partially backfill with stream sediment as the hydrograph drops to base flows. Given an average pool width of 25', width/depth ratio of 11 and an estimated scour depth of 3', the average maximum bankfull pool depth will be around 3.75 feet at base flows (average mean channel depth is 2.25'). 5 The table below provides dimension results of the existing channel and a range of channel dimensions proposed for pool and riffle cross sections within the relocated segment of Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park. Chanel Segment Parameter Average(ft) Minimum (ft) Maximum (ft) Existing channel Bankfull width 28.5 22 35 dimensions Mean bankfull depth 1.5 1.3 1.7 W/D ratio 19.5 12.5 26.6 Bankfull width 28 25 31 Riffles in relocated Mean bankfull depth 1.5 1.4 1.6 channel segment Max bankfull depth 1.75 1.6 1.9 W/D ratio 19 15.2 21.6 Bankfull width 25 23 27 Pools in relocated Mean bankfull depth 2.25 2.1 2.35 channel segment Max bankfull depth 3.75 3.25 4.25 W/D ratio 11.2 9.8 13 Cross section dimensions for riffles and pools within the new meanders are illustrated in Cross Section 1 and 2, respectively on Design Sheet 4. Cross Section 3 on Design Sheet illustrates a typical treatment for reaches of the channel where it will remains in its existing alignment. Specific design criteria for channel dimensions include: 1. Riffle dimensions will convey a bankfull discharge of 230 cfs. 2. Riffle widths will vary by up to 10%from the average width of 28' 3. Pool widths will vary by up to 10%from the average width of 25' Stream Habitat The creation of meander bends within the park provides an excellent opportunity for diversifying stream habitat. The existing channel is straight and is considerably more simplified in habitat complexity than a more sinuous and naturally meandering channel. A meander bend sequence typically includes altemating riffle and pool formations that develop as a result of scour and depositional processes. Riffles typically develop along the straight segments of the channel where the flow is laminar and scours the stream bed and banks evenly. Pools typically form along the outside of meander bends where the channel scours the stream bed. New meanders proposed along Bozeman Creek will be designed with bed and bank features suitable for pool and riffle formation(see criteria for bed and stream bank composition)to provide additional habitat complexity for fish, macro invertebrates, and other aquatic life in the creek. Locations of proposed pool habitat features in the new meanders are illustrated on Design Sheet 3. Typical cross sections illustrating riffle and pool dimensions and shapes are included on Design Sheet 4. 6 Specific design criteria for habitat features in Bozeman Creek include: 1. The stream bed and banks will be designed to allow for scouring and depositional processes to occur, thereby forming sustainable pool and riffle habitats. 2. Riffle habitat will be developed in straight channel segments that transition between meander bends 3. Pool habitat will be developed to correspond with and extend just downstream of the apex of each meander bend. Lateral Stability and Bank Treatments Altering the stream alignment will redirect flows throughout the course of each new meander. The downstream extent of each meander will direct flows toward the west bank and privately owned properties along this bank. The upstream extent of each meander will direct flows toward the east bank and park infrastructure. Various bank treatments are proposed based on the position along the stream, whether the bank is against the park boundary vs. private property boundary, and ability to install appropriate stabilizing materials. Each bank treatment scenario is described in more detail below. Bank construction along affected reaches on the west side of the channel The new meanders will create additional scour forces where the bend of the creek abuts the west bank. The existing banks of the creek in these areas are relatively steep and have well- rooted, mature shrubs and trees growing on the upper banks. A stone toe will be placed along these banks to prevent undercutting of the banks and reduce lateral scouring. The stone toe will extend from the bankfull elevation to below the depth of scour. Vegetation along the upper bank will not be disturbed. The eastern side of the bankfull channel may need to be extended further east and may require mature tree removal to ensure a capacity of 230 cfs is maintained. A typical illustration for stabilizing banks in these areas is included in typical cross section details on Design Sheet 4. The extent of these toe treatments is shown in plan view on Design Sheet 3. Specific Design Criteria for lateral stabilization of these banks include: 1. The stone toe will be installed to the bankfull elevation and extend below the depth of scour 2. The stone toe will be sized to withstand lateral erosion up to a 100-year flood event. Bank construction along new channel meanders. Newly constructed channel segments will be at risk of erosion immediately following construction, as they will not have a well-established riparian vegetation corridor to provide natural erosional resistance. Given the channel flows through private property and a city park, it will need to remain in a relatively static location. As such,the banks of the creek will be designed to retain their shape to the extent possible while allowing for the establishment of a natural riparian corridor. Banks along the outside bends of the channel will be constructed of cobble material and a biodegradable coir fabric soil lift. The cobble materials will provide a foundation for the soil lifts, and will provide a medium for vegetative growth in the upper bank. 7 Banks along the inside bends of the channel will be constructed of cobble and gravels.A typical cross section view of this approach is presented in cross section on Design Sheet 4. Specific design criteria for lateral stability in the new meanders include: 1. On outside meaner bends, the banks will be designed to withstand lateral erosive forces up to the 25-year flood event. 2. The channel will be armored in the vicinity of the footbridge to protect bridge abutments and channel from scour for flows up to the 100-year flow. Vertical Stability and Stream Bed Composition The Bozeman Creek channel bed is vertically controlled on both the upstream and downstream ends by culverts. The upstream culvert flows underneath Story Street,while the downstream culvert flows underneath Olive Street. These culverts act as grade controls and prevent vertical migration in the stream bed beyond the project reach. As a result, there is no need to establish additional grade control within the project reach to prevent grade adjustments or head cutting. Within the new meanders,grade will be maintained by constructing riffles at the straight segments between each meander bend. Riffles will be constructed using cobbles,and will provide habitat for macroinvertebrate production. Pools will also be constructed along the downstream extent of each meander bend, but will be allowed to scour and establish deeper water habitat. Specific design criteria for stream bed composition include: 1. In new meanders, riffles will be constructed using cobbles sized to withstand the 25-year flood event to provide grade control at these features 2. In new meanders, pools will be constructed using gravels that will scour during the 2- year flood event to encourage deeper water habitat. 3. Newly constructed point bars will be designed to withstand a 25-year flood event to prevent excessive lateral migration. 100-year-Floodplain through Bogert Park Hydraulic modeling efforts performed by Allied Engineering through downtown Bozeman provide an "existing conditions" scenario of water surface elevations at various return intervals. Cross sections surveyed in Bogert Park were revised to include"proposed conditions"that incorporate a new footbridge, meandering channel and inset floodplain. A comparison of existing and proposed conditions indicates an average drop in the 100-year flood water surface elevation by 1.2 feet in areas proposed for channel meanders and inset floodplain development. This drop in elevation may be attributed to the expansion of floodplain capacity during flood events X230 cfs. It is important to note the proposed conditions hydraulic modeling incorporated preliminary grading plans that are subject to change during the final design process. A preliminary 100-year water surface elevation in the vicinity of the new footbridge was generated for planning and design purposes and is included on Design Sheet 5. 8 Specific design criteria for the 100-year floodplain include: 1. The project will not increase the 100 year flood elevation (FEMA FIRM maps, effective 2011)within or upstream of Bogert Park within the project area. Inset Floadplain Development The existing, channelized configuration of Bozeman Creek has resulted in vertical migration of the stream bed downward from its original elevation. As a result, this reach of Bozeman Creek is disconnected from its historic floodplain,which likely extended well beyond the channel margins and into areas that are currently residential and park development. Approximate extents of the current 100-year floodplain are shown in FEMA floodplain maps on Design Sheet 5 which indicate flooding will occur along the downstream end of the park in the vicinity of the pavilion. Estimated 100-year flood discharges are contained within the existing channel in the upstream end of the park. The containment of flood discharges within the channel prevents natural sediment deposition and overbank flooding processes typical in a naturally functioning stream system. The preliminary design includes constructing an inset floodplain along the project reach to allow discharges>230 cfs to escape the channel and spread out a across a wider area. This inset floodplain will provide additional area for sediment deposition and will slow stream velocities in flooded areas. In areas where the channel will remain in-place,the inset floodplain will be constructed along the eastern side of the channel, and will include a flat,floodplain bench and a resloped bank to meet the top of the bank in the park. In areas where the channel meanders, the inset floodplain will include point bars on the inside of each bend and a narrow, flat floodplain bench on the outside of each meander. A cobble revetment will be installed along the east side of the inset floodplain to prevent lateral erosion of the channel further east into the park. This revetment will use cobble as opposed to angular rock, as it will be much more aesthetically pleasing and safer to walk on should the channel migrate laterally against it. The use of rounded cobble requires installing larger stone as compared to angular rock in order to resist 100-year flood events. Design Sheet 5 illustrates the estimated extent of the 100-year floodplain (FEMA map), and the anticipated 100-year flood elevations of the proposed project following construction of the new meanders and inset floodplain. Design Sheet 3 illustrates the extent of the inset flood plain, while cross sections on Design Sheet 4 provide a typical scenario of inset floodplain development within the project. It is important to note that although the project proposes to construct an inset floodplain along the entire project reach,this expanded floodplain will not contain the estimated 100-year flood event in areas near the pavilion, as shown by the extent of flooding. It should also be noted the results of the hydraulic modeling and the estimated flood elevations are preliminary and should not be used for regulatory or permitting purposes. The hydraulic model will need to be refined once a final grading plan is generated during final design. 9 Specific design criteria for the inset floodplain include: 1. The inset floodplain will be designed at an elevation to allow discharges X230 cfs to escape the bankfull channel and spread across the inset floodplain. 2. The inset floodplain will be designed to the extent possible to minimize mature tree removal. 3. The eastern bank of the inset floodplain will be sloped at a 5:1 ratio up to the existing elevation of the park wherever possible. 4. The eastern bank of the inset floodplain will be sloped at a ratio steeper than 5:1 in select areas to reduce mature tree removal to the extent possible. 5. Alterations to the channel and floodplain within the project reach will not cause an increase in 100-year flood (FEMA)water surface elevations. 6. A buried cobble revetment installed along the east side of the inset floodplain will resist lateral erosion up to the 100-year flood event. Vegetation Although a large amount of vegetation will be removed for the stream channel realignment, an even greater amount of native vegetation will replace it. The banks of the existing creek are characterized by mature cottonwood trees and shrubs and a sporadic, younger understory. Unrestricted access to the stream adjacent to the pavilion has left the stream banks and riparian vegetation in degraded condition. By managing storm water runoff, restricting stream access and heavily planting the new stream channel,Bozeman Creek will become a greater asset to the City of Bozeman. The vegetation goal for this project is to establish permanent, self- sustaining native plant species along the Bozeman Creek corridor that are appropriate for a broad range of hydrologic fluctuations. The topography of the project reach creates a variety of bank slopes and elevations relative to the water table,and requires developing a planting plan that incorporates these factors into species selection. The stream channel and inset floodplain are divided into three vegetative zones, including transition, saturated, and emergent. Design Sheets 6 and 7 illustrate the extent of each planting zone in plan view, while Design Sheet 8 illustrates the spatial extent of each zone in cross section. The Transition Zone(Zone 1) extends from the park uplands to the inset floodplain. This zone will include a mix of upland grasses,forbs, scattered trees and shrubs. The purpose of this zone will be to enhance and protect the stream channel by establishing a grassy buffer with scattered trees and shrubs around the perimeter of the project site. To discourage people from accessing the stream at non-designated spots, a dense barrier of thorny shrubs that deter access will be planted. Shrub and tree density in Zone 1 will be much greater than in Zone 2 to account for heavily planted areas where stream access will be discouraged_ The Saturated Zone(Zone 2) is the area characterized by semi-saturated soils that can be seasonally inundated. These areas will be vegetated grasses and scattered shrubs that are normally found in a fluctuating water regime and can be inundated for short periods of time (1 to 3 months). 10 The Emergent Zone(Zone 3) includes the saturated to inundated stream edge that can tolerate submersion to three feed deep for a limited period of time. Plants in this community include native wetland and riparian rushes, sedges and grasses. Specific design criteria for the revegetation of the creek's corridor include: 1. Newly constructed banks of the stream channel and floodplain will be revegetated with native riparian trees, shrubs, forbs and grass species 2. Zone 1 (upland transition zone)will be broadcast seeded with a native upland mix at a rate of approximately 30 Ibs/acre. Trees and shrubs will be installed at a density of 900 plants/acre. 3. Zone 2 (saturated zone)will be broadcast seeded with a native upland/wetland seed mix at a rate of approximately 30 lbslacre. Containerized trees and shrubs will be installed at a density of 770 plants/acre. This area will be augmented with 10-cubic tubelings of riparian species at a density of 10,890 plants/acre, or approximately 2-foot centers. 4. Zone 3 (emergent zone)will be broadcast seeded with a native wetland seed mix at a rate of approximately 30 lbs/acre. This zone will be planted with 10-cubic tubelings of wetland species at a density of 10,890 plants/acre, or approximately 2-foot centers. Additional Park Design Elements Stream Accessibility The existing configuration of Bozeman Creek offers poor accessibility to the stream. The majority of banks are steep and tall, creating an uninviting scenario and potentially dangerous conditions during high flows. The restoration of Bozeman Creek affords the opportunity for greater public interaction with the stream. To encourage the use of this natural resource, a designated"public access" area will be developed in close proximity to the playground and pavilion facilities. Having one access area close to established facilities will allow for better supervision by adults and will focus the use to one small area of the restored stream. A plan view map illustrating the proposed stream access area is included on Design Sheet 9. The access point is designed to attract people by placing sandstone blocks (2'x2'x4'TYP.), frontier stair treads(3'x W" TYP.)and flagstone(2" Min Thickness). The material will be installed to resist erosion up to a 25 year flood and blend with native vegetation. Each sandstone block typically weighs 1,200 pounds. The access area features a dual staircase and larger"beach" area that extends onto an inside meander point bar of the stream. The construction of each will allow users to descend to the stream via stairs or the stone block, creating a sense of adventure for kids accessing the stream. The entrance to the stream access will be subtle and discourage kids from simply running from the playground directly to the stream. The stone and vegetation should blend seamlessly and create a sense of discovery when arriving at the access point entrance. Two benches will be located at the top of the access point to allowfor adult supervision of children at play. 11 Specific design criteria for the access areas include: 1. Materials used to construct the access point will be installed at grade with the resloped banks of the inset floodplain 2. Materials used to construct the access point will be sized to withstand a 25-year flood event. Paths / Circulation Current pedestrian access is characterized by multiple surface types. A concrete sidewalk along the south and east borders of the park connect users to Church Ave. Another small section of concrete connects the parking lot to the "tot lot" play area. The improvements to pedestrian circulation will take in to account the existing Bogert Park Master Plan. The addition of stream access points and the reconfiguration of the playground requires a reconsideration of current circulation patterns. Proposed trail alterations to accommodate park users are illustrated on Design Sheet 2 and include a multi-use trail that extends from Story Street to the Bogert parking lot, a pedestrian trail spur that extends from the multi-use trail near the playground to the pavilion, and extending the sidewalk west of the footbridge. The new circulation plan is designed to slow people down and to encourage some separation of bikers and pedestrians near the playground and pavilion. Bikers and more swiftly moving pedestrians are directed to the east of the playground and pointed towards the parking lot. Pedestrians will have a dedicated, signed trail on the west side of the playground. The location of the trail steers pedestrians to the stream access area and playground. The path will also act as a visual buffer between the stream and larger public spaces. New paths will be composed of crushed fines as a first phase of development and can be upgraded to concrete or paved surfaces in a future phase if desired. Another alteration to the trail system is proposed where the new footbridge enters the park from the west. The new bridge span points southeast into the park recognizing that many pedestrians use the bridge as a link to Pete's Hill. The new trail will intersect with the bridge and allow pedestrians the choice to travel north towards major park amenities or south towards Pete's Hill and E. Story Street. Specific design criteria for the new trail system include: 1. The multi-use trail will be designed for two-directional traffic and will be a minimum of 10'wide. 2. The multi-use trail will be designed for cyclist speeds of 10-15 mph and pedestrian speeds of 2-3 mph. 3. The pedestrian trail will be designed for two-directional pedestrian traffic and will be a minimum of 8' wide. 4. The pedestrian trail will be designed for speeds 2-3 mph. 12 Playground The current playground is a very well used public amenity. The goal of this component is not to significantly change the playground but to recognize that there is a better way to organize the space. The stream channel realignment will require the removal of the existing swing set and code requires that a new swing set replace it. The proposed design plan moves the new swing set directly east of the tot lot. The proposed playground area allows space for six swings at a 9' height. Design Sheet 9 illustrates the proposed layout of playground features and relocated swings. The proposed playground plan includes new seating, paths and features to complement existing playground structures. The arrangement would encourage more interaction with parents and guardians and discourage a direct line of access to the stream. The mulched area of the playground is expanded southwest to increase the area for active recreation. A series of stepping pods creates an interactive edge to the playground. The multiuse path includes a pullout at the southeast corner of the playground with two benches. Line of sight is maintained from the band shell lawn so that concert goers can still observe the playground. Existing playground equipment would be left in place with only the edge of the playground being cleaned up for better definition. Specific design criteria for the playground design include: 1. Playground amenities will be designed with lines of sight to the stream channel and band shell to allowfor improved adult supervision. Signage One of the most important aspects of this project is public education. The improvement and enhancement of Bozeman Creek provides native habitat for fish and wildlife, improves water quality and invites the public to experience nature first hand. To further the public education goal signage will be used. A master display will be located between the two stream access areas adjacent to the playground. Before and after photos, diagrams and some educational verbiage will educate people on the process of stream restoration and the importance of healthy streams in the greater ecosystem. Our daily lives are tied to water and yet so few people know about its function in our environment. Additional smaller signs will point out plant names, indicate directions to adjacent amenities, inform what birds to watch for and talk about the life cycles of the species of fish and plants that make Bozeman Creek and Bogert Park home. Bridge The existing bridge crossing site will change dramatically with the new creek enhancements, creating an opportunity for a new unique, appropriate and code compliant bridge structure. The proposed bridge alignment is show in detail on Design Sheet 10, while typical views of the bridge are illustrated on Design Sheet 11. 13 The west bank of the existing bridge is in the 60' wide East Koch Street right of way, and is at the end of a semi-improved (asphalt millings, no curb, no sidewalk) dead-end street. Currently the bridge alignment starts near the north edge of the right of way with an approach from the west that passes under communication and power line pole guy wires. An electrical panel and meter array, related to a Northwestern Energy gas main cathodic protection rectifier, is present near the center of the right of way. Improving the western approach to this significant neighborhood and park pedestrian connection should be considered with the project. Extending the sidewalk by 130' on the south side of East Koch to the bridge is included in the preliminary plan and costs for this project. The City of Bozeman may choose to complete the street section (full paving and sidewalks, curb &gutter) at a later date. Moving utilities may not be necessary and will be dependent on the final bridge alignment. Relocation of any utilities and improving the Koch street section approaching the bridge is not part of the project plan or budget. The initial concept for a new bridge is one that creates an aperture"eddy" aligned with the watercourse below for viewing, pausing, and experiencing Bozeman Creek as well as views beyond. The alignment crosses perpendicular to the new meander and the eddy would focus down river at the playground, pavilion lawn and the Bridger Mountain backdrop. The eddy is asymmetrical on the bridge, with a shallow bench on one side and a deep standing-only area on the other. This will frame views and place the focus on the creek experience. Construction materials would include round and rectangular steel members for strength and weather resistance with an aesthetic nod to the historic log band shell nearby. Composite decking would be used for the walking surface. Bar grating in the eddy area would allow views straight down to the water. Concrete foundation embankments will be built at both ends and will be protected from stream scour with rock armor. The intersection with the east bank park trail allows for circulation to the playground and central park amenities as well as to the south and towards the Main Street to the mountains trails and Pete's Hill area. This intersection lies just north of an existing well cap and electric panel,which will remain undisturbed. Specific design criteria for the footbridge include: 1. The new footbridge must provide sufficient freeboard to clearthe 100-year water surface elevation by at least 24" 2. The bridge span will be approximately 70' 3. The bridge width will be 8' wide to allow for two-directional traffic 4. The bridge will have a 2 ton weight capacity 5. The bridge will be designed to allow pedestrian and bike traffic, but will encourage bikers to slow down by reducing the entry width from 8' to 6'. Utilities The enhancement plan will require relocating a power pole and overhead power line that extends across Bozeman Creek just southwest of the pavilion. The power pole on the east side of the channel will be relocated away from the new meander bend. All other power related facilities will remain in place. Design Sheet 12 illustrates all proposed utility relocations and areas of disturbance associated with all components of the proposed project. 14 Specific design criteria for utilities include: 1. Minimize the extent and cost of relocating the power line to the extent possible but without compromising channel and inset floodplain design criteria. Irrigation Line A 2" irrigation line currently extends along the east bank of Bozeman Creek and will be rerouted along the new channel alignment. This irrigation line will be installed at its current depth (approximately 2') and further east than the stone revetment installed to prohibit lateral erosion to the east. Design Sheet 12 illustrates the proposed location for the new irrigation line along the west bank. Specific design criteria for the irrigation line include: 1. The new line will be placed to approximately the same depth as the existing line. 2. Irrigation capacity will meet or exceed the capacity required for the park's irrigation requirements, including newly installed vegetation. Construction Dewatering, Storm water and Erosion Control The proposed project entails a significant amount of earthwork within and adjacent to an active stream channel. Therefore, special consideration will be given to prevent potential erosion, storm water, and excessive turbidity as a result of construction. Best Management Practices outlined in the"Montana DEQ Stormwater Management During Construction Field Guide for Best Management Practices"will be utilized in as a guideline for erosion control during construction. It is anticipated that the following categories of BMPs will be applicable to this project and will be addressed in detail during the final design phase of the project: 1. Perimeter Control and Barriers (Silt Fence, Straw Wattles, etc.) 2. Vehicle Track Pads 3. Material Handling, Equipment Management(Equipment management, spill prevention and response) 4. Waste Management(Refuse and Trash, Portable Toilets) In addition to these BMPs, construction dewatering may include installing temporary coffer dams or pumps to divert water away from areas under construction. These efforts will provide a means of ensuring protection of water quality during the project. Permitting Several regulatory permits will be necessary to acquire prior to constructing the proposed project. Permitting requirements for the proposed project include: U.S.Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit(Nationwide 27) Gallatin Conservation District 310 permit City of Bozeman Floodplain permit DEQ 318 permit for temporary increase in turbidity DEQ SWPPP permit for storm water and erosion control 15 The hydrologic and hydraulic analysis for the original flood insurance study(FIS)were performed by the NRCS and was completed in June 1979. A proposed re-study of Bozeman Creek may occur in the near future and may revise the predicted extent of the 100-year flood. The timing of this project with the proposed re-study will determine the need to prepare a Conditional Letter of Map Revision(CLOMR) as a result of the project's intent to revise the extent of areas inundated by a 100-year flood. If required,the CLOMR will necessitate extensive hydraulic modeling in addition to that already conducted for preliminary design purposes to satisfy FEMA requirements. At this point it is unclear as to whether the flood study and CLOMR application are required, and as such, this additional design and permitting task has not been included in the final project budget. Project Costs Estimated costs for final design, permitting, and all phases of construction are included in the following table. These estimated costs are based on preliminary planning for this project and should not be considered final. A 10% contingency has been added to the estimated costs to account for unknown project elements and fluctuations in material and fuel costs. This project may necessitate multiple years or a phased approach for full build-out;therefore a larger contingency(-20%) may be more appropriate for planning and funding purposes. 16 Channel and Flood plain Construction Rm Excavate new channel and fioodpWn alignment 3500 CY $ 5.00 $ 17,500 Install cobbles on new point bars 300 CY $ 25,00 $ 7,500 Install topsoil on new point bars 300 CY $ 35.00 $ 10,500 Bicengineered bank stabilization on west bank 140 FT $ 100.00 $ 14,000 Install stone revetment along east bank 450 FT $ 45.00 $ 20,250 Install coir encapsulated soils Iffts along outside banks 400 FT $ 40.00 $ 16,000 Pool and riffle shaping 400 FT $ 6.00 $ 2,400 Construction dewatering and erosion control 1 LS $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000 Construction Oversight 120 RR $90 $ 10,800 Task Subtotal: $ 113,950 Utilities and Irri ation Irrigation main,valve,and drain relocation 700 LF $ 40.00 $ 28,000 Connect to existing irrigation system 3 FA $ 500.00 $ 1,500 Repair and reconnect irrigation laterafs 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500 Remove and reset existing power pole 1 EA $ 3'000.00 $ 3,000 Task Subtotal: $ 34,000 Play round Trails Access Playground Swingsel 1 EA $2,000 $ 2,000 Benches 4 EA $1,100 $ 4,400 Directional Signage 2 EA $250 $ 500 Educational Sign Display 1 EA $1,000 $ 1,000 Playground edging 165 LF $7 $ 1,155 Subtotal: $ 9,055 Trails and paths 10'wide paths,crushed fines 425 LF $12 $ 5,100 8'wide paths,crushed fines 280 LF $10 $ 2,800 6'widesidewalk 130 LF $6 $ 780 Subtotal: $ 8,680 Access Areas Frontier Step Treads 16 EA $350 $ 5,600 Frontier Stone Blocks 40 EA $350 $ 14,000 Sanset Flagstone 26 FA $25 $ 650 Subtotal: $ 20,250 Labor and Materials Earthwork allowance 1 LS $5,500 $ 5,500 General Labor allowance 1 LS $5,000 $ 5,000 Topsoil 100 CY $35 $ 3,5o0 Mulch 25 CY $35 $ 875 Imga&on allowance t LS $15,000 $ 15,000 Subtotal: $ 29,875 Task Subtotal: $ 67,860 v € n ' Wiz: $ 5 gallon shrubs-installed 245 EA $50 $ 12,250 10-T pram plugs-installed 2800 EA $6 $ 16,800 1.5"cal.trees-installed 84 EA $400 $ 33,600 1 gallon perennials•installed 100 EA $14 $ 1,400 Seeding 16200 SQ FT $0.75 1 12,150 Task Subtotal: $ 76,200 Brid e R p Install bridge with"edd 'feature for vieWng 1 F.A. $ 140,000 140,000 Task Subtotal: $ 140,000 Final Desi n and Pernittin Final Design Final channel and floodplain design 1 LS $15,000 $ 15,000 Final playground,trails,access and revegetation design 1 LS $10,500 $ 10,500 Final utility and irrigation design 1 LS $3,500 $ 3,500 Final structural and bridge aesthetics design 1 LS $12,800 $ 12,800 Prepare bid package 1 LS $1,700 $ 1,700 Project mefings with City,BCEC 1 LS $3,500 $ 3,500 Subtotal: $ 47,000 Permitting Prepare and submit joint regulatory permits 1 LS $4,000 $ 4,000 Prepare and submit SWPPP permit 1 LS $2,000 $ 2,000 Permitting fees-(floodplain,318,SWPPP) 1 LS $1,000 $ 1,000 Subtotal: $ 7 OOO Task Subtotal: $ 54,000 Total Cost of Project(Tasks 1-6): $ 488,010 10%Contingency $ 48,601 Total Cost+Contingency $ 534,611 17 Project]Phasing If funding limitations prevent constructing the entire project in one phase, there are options for splitting the project into two phases. It should be noted that extending the timeframe of the project will likely increase expenditures due to multiple equipment mobilizations and additional project management fees necessary for a lengthier project. Option 2 - Construct one meander at a time Phase 1 Tasks Cost Final design and permitfing $ 54,000 Install bank toe along west bank $ 14,000 Construct upper meander and flood lain $ 39,850 Reve etation $ 38,100 Install bride $ 140,000 Phase 1 Total $ 285,950 10%Contingency $ 28,595 Subtotal $ 314,545 Phase 2 Tasks Cost Construct lower meander and flood lain $ 39,850 Construct cobble revetment $ 20,250 Reve etation $ 38,104 Install access area $ 20,250 Relocate utilities and irrigation $ 34,000 Modify ark playground and trails $ 47,610 Phase 2 Total $ 200,060 10%Contingency $ 20,006 Subtotal $ 220,066 Phase 1 &2 Total $ 486,010 10%Contingency $ 48,601 Subtotal $ 534,611 Option 3 - Construct stream channel first Followed by playground and trails Phase 1 Tasks Cost Final design and permitting $ 54,000 Install bank toe along west bank $ 14,000 Construct upper meander and flood lain $ 39,850 Rev etation $ 38,100 Install bride $ 140,000 Phase 1 Total $ 285,950 10%Contingency $ 28,595 Subtotal $ 314,545 Phase 2 Tasks Cost Construct lower meander and flood lain $ 39,850 Construct cobble revetment $ 20,250 Reve etation $ 38,100 Install access area $ 20,250 Relocate utilities and ird atin $ 34,000 Modify ark playground and trails $ 47,610 Phase 2 Total $ 200,060 10%Contingency $ 20,006 Subtotal $ 220,066 Phase 1 &2 Total $ 486,010 10%Contingency $ 48,601 Subtotall $ 534,611 18 E,,,,,,a��EEEEEEEEEEEEaEEEEEEE;EEEEEEEE� , 1 a h ti Yv,,lye(�.,, �� �a'". _• `,"� p p, ED C)(D A//� i / / �•� - ElG R t o CtI �. w ` a ` ` W < m f -r w W W W W w v a W v w r v - 10 1 50 1 1001- Appendix C: Bozeman Greek Hydraulic Model 77 Project Report Bozeman Creek Hydraulic Model from Story Street to Mendenhall Street, Bozeman, MT March 2, 2012 Submitted to: Gallatin Local Water Quality District c/o Tammy Crone 1709 West College Street, Suite 104 Bozeman, MT 59715 tammy.crone @gallatin.mt.gov Presented by: Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Paul Sanford, PE, CFM —Project Manager 32 Discovery Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 (406)582-0221 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW...................................................••..............................------........................... 1 1.1 Project Overview....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Scope of Project......................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Statement of the Problem...........................................................................................................2 1.4 Purpose of the engineering Study/Analysis...............................................................................2 1.5 Benefits to the Renewable Resource................................................................................... 1.6 How the Study Results Will Be Used........................................................................................3 2.0 DATA COLLECTION.............................................................---......................................................4 2.1 FEMA Flood Insurance Study...................................................................................................4 2.2 FEMA Library Data Request.....................................................................................................4 23 LiDAR Data...............................................................................................................................4 2.4 Existing Survey Data............................. 2.5 Site Reconnaissance.............................................................•--..................................---•-............5 2.6 Cross-Section&Hydraulic Structure Survey............................................................................5 3.0 HYDROLOGY.........---••---•................................................................................................................8 3.1 Flood Insurance Study Peak Discharges....................................................................................8 3.2 USGS Regression Equation Peak Discharges............................................................................8 3.3 Bankfull Surrogate Flow............................................................................................................9 3.4 Mean Daily Flows Developed from USGS Gage Data Synthesis........................................... 10 3.5 Effect of Urbanization on Hydrology...................................................................................... 10 4.0 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS............................................................................................................. 12 4.1 Hydraulic Analysis Procedures................................................................................................ 12 4.2 Topographic Data Processing.................................................................................................. 12 4.3 Profile Basel ine........................................................................................................................ 12 4.4 Boundary Conditions............................................................................................................... 13 4.5 Cross Section Development..................................................................................................... 13 4.6 Hydraulic Structures................................................................................................................ 14 4.6.1 Mendenhall Street Crossing.......................................................................................... 14 4.6.2 Main Street North Alley Crossing............................•...............................----................ 14 4.6.3 Main Street Crossing.........................................................•..................................---..... 15 4.6.4 Babcock Street Crossing............................................................................................... 15 4.6.5 Olive Street Crossing.................................................................................................... 15 4.6.6 Story Street Crossing............................................................................................ .... 15 4.7 Roughness Coefficients........................................................................................................... 15 4.8 Non-Conveyance and Blocked Obstruction Areas.................................................................. 15 4.9 HEC-RAS Plans..............................................................................•........................................ 15 4.10 Model Calibration.................................................................................................................. 16 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................... 17 5.1 Model Application to Permitting............................................................................................. 17 5.2 Model Application to Design...........................•----..................................---.............................. 17 5.3 Recommendations...........................................................•........................................................ 18 6.0 STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION............................................................................................. 19 6.1 People Associated with the Project.......................................................................................... 19 Listof Preparers..................................................................................................................... 19 6.2 Stakeholder Review.............................................................................................. ................. 19 7.0 REFERENCES ......................................•---...........................................................................---........20 i TABLES Table 3-I: Peak Discharges for Bozeman Creek From 2011 FEMA Study.........................8 Table 3-2:Peak Discharges for Bozeman Creek From USGS Regression ..........................8 Table 3-3:Drainage Basin Comparison of Similar Streams..........................................9 Table 4-1:Profile Baseline Key Feature Summary...................................................13 Table 4-2:Comparison of Water Surface Elevations.................................................16 FIGURES Figure 1:Project Area Site Map..........................................................................6 Figure 2:Panel 0816D Firmette..........................................................................7 Figure 3:Estimate of the Mean Daily Flow for Bozeman Creek....................................10 APPENDICES Appendix A: Site Reconnaissance.....................................................................21 Appendix B:Hydrologic Analysis.....................................................................32 Appendix C: Hydraulic Analysis...................................................•...................44 ATTACHMENTS CD FEMA Flood Insurance Study Map Panel 816D Excerpts from the 2011 Flood Insurance Study Report FEMA Data Request Data Request Form and Letter Retrieved Data AESI Extracted Effective Model Data(Excel spreadsheet) City of Bozeman 2007 LiDAR Project Metadata Deliverable#1: Survey Data Survey data point file AutoCAD Civil 3D drawing with survey data points Deliverable#2: Site Reconnaissance Data Annotated ground photographs Site reconnaissance notes Deliverable#3: HEC-RAS Files Parent EEC-RAS files GeoRAS geometry input files HEC-RAS generated report Deliverable#4: Draft Project Report Draft report in PDF format Comments from reviewers Response to comments letter Deliverable#5: Final Project Report Final report in PDF format ii 1 .0 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW Allied Engineering Services,Inc. has completed a hydraulic model of Bozeman Creek in Bozeman,Montana for the Gallatin Local Water Quality District(contract number 2012-129). The Gallatin Local Water Quality District is acting as fiscal agent for the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee. The downstream project limit is Mendenhall Street. The project extends roughly 2,500 feet upstream to Story Street traversing the Main Street commercial area and Bogert Park. A site map of the project area is presented in Figure 1. The hydraulic model utilized ground survey data collected in December 2011 for the channel and LiDAR data collected in 2007 for the overbank area. This report summarizes the survey and hydraulic modeling methods,procedures and assumptions. Funding for this project is provided by a Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation Renewable Resource Grant and Loan Program in the amount of a$10,000 grant. The objective of this project is to develop a hydraulic model to serve as a planning,design and permitting tool for considering opportunities and constraints for any type of channel and habitat enhancement project. The model will benefit all on-going,proposed or considered individual projects initiated by the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee. 1.2 SCOPE OF PROJECT The project consists of three general tasks. These tasks include: Data Collection. Obtain and Review Available Data,including hydrology data and regression equations from the USGS, floodplain data from FEMA,any recent survey data collected within the project reach and LiDAR topographic data from the City. Order the FEMA 1988 Flood Insurance Study effective hydraulic model input and output data and work maps from the FEMA archives. Use the effective hydraulic model to learn about the Manning's n values used by FEMA and to gather data regarding the cross-sections and culverts and bridges.Undertake a Site Reconnaissance to observe the stream channel conditions. Collect Field Survey Data for the creek channel at the proposed cross-section locations. Collect hydraulic structure data such as low-chord,top of deck,opening geometry and other data necessary to characterize the culverts and bridges in HEC-RAS. Establish a Montana State Plane horizontal datum and a 1988 NAVD vertical datum for the project. Establish cross-section locations prior to the survey considering the effective FEMA cross-section locations,on-going and future enhancement projects,hydraulic structures and the need for any supplemental cross- sections. Develop a Basemap utilizing the Bozeman Creek channel cross-section data,bridge/culvert data and existing City of Bozeman GIS data such as the LiDAR contours and aerial photograph. Create composite cross-section data by combining the channel cross-section data with the LiDAR DTM data in the overbank area. Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis. Develop Hydrology including peak discharges for the 50, 10, 2, 1 and 0.2 percent annual chance floods(i.e.the 2, 10, 50, 100 and 500 year floods)utilizing USGS regression equations for Montana. Also develop low flows and a bankfull surrogate flow. Develop an Existing Conditions Hydraulic Model utilizing the US Army Corps of Engineers HEC-RAS computer program. Create a georeferenced model in HEC-RAS by utilizing ArcMap with the HEC-GeoRAS,3D Analyst and Spatial Analyst extensions. Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 1 March Z 2012 Project Report. Develop a Draft Project Report to document the data collection and hydraulic modeling process and results. Compare the results from the Existing Conditions Hydraulic Model to the results from the FEMA hydraulic model. Provide user-friendly maps,profiles and cross-sections to characterize the geometry and estimated flow depths of Bozeman Creek. Following input from DNRC,develop a Final Project Report. 1.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Running through the heart of the City of Bozeman,Bozeman Creek has been narrowed and straightened,its banks armored with rock and concrete, its riparian vegetation removed or reduced to a thin green line. Resource impacts begin as the stream enters the residential areas on the south side of town, and greatly worsen as the stream flows through the urban environment. The creek reach through the downtown area is the most significantly altered and confined,with frequent road crossings,culverts,and channelization,even passing underground beneath the Main Street commercial area.These alterations impair the stream's ability to provide fish and wildlife habitat,filter runoff,pass flood flows,and provide recreational amenities.With restoration,the stream could be a highly valuable community asset running through the heart of town. 1.4 PURPOSE OF THE ENGINEERING STUDY/ANALYSIS This engineering study is focused on the reach from Story Street to Mendenhall Street,including the downtown Main Street commercial area.Restoration plans for this reach of the creek will contemplate daylighting segments now buried in culverts,reconfiguring the planform of other segments,removing hydraulic constrictions(low bridges),and widening the creek corridor to re- establish a floodplain and restore a riparian corridor where feasible. The purpose of the study is to develop a HEC-RAS hydraulic model for this reach of Bozeman Creek. HEC-RAS models inundation,surface water profiles, and velocities at cross-sections along a stream by considering downstream backwater effects. Calibrated with on-the-ground observations, it can be used to predict extent of floodwater and channel inundation at varying flows,stream velocities at varying flows as they relate to habitat,and can be used to model sediment transport and erosion at varying anticipated flows. Hydraulic modeling is the single best planning and design tool for considering opportunities and constraints for any type of channel and habitat enhancement.Creation of a HEC-RAS model for the segment from Story Street to Mendenhall Street will benefit all proposed or considered individual projects, as well as facilitate the coordination of projects.Furthermore,by providing a DEC-RAS of existing conditions,all future efforts at assessment and design will benefit from having the base model established.The cost of creating the existing conditions model will directly reduce the cost of future design efforts for multiple projects by an equivalent amount. 1.5 BENEFITS TO THE RENEWABLE RESOURCE Implementation of creek restoration projects facilitated by this engineering study will yield numerous benefits to the renewable resource,including:restoration of natural stream channel processes,enhancement of riparian vegetation and aquatic habitat, flood hazard mitigation, mitigation of stormwater effects and improved water quality,restoration of a viable fishery,and improved public access to and enjoyment of the creek environment.The restored creek corridor will become a focus for community education and stewardship efforts,and will enhance the economic,public health,cultural and aesthetic qualities of the City,and quality of life for its residents. rallied Engineering Services,Inc. 2 March 2.2012 1.6 HOW THE STUDY RESULTS WILL BE USED The HEC-RAS model will allow the evaluation of the merits,constraints and potential impacts of restoration projects proposed for the modeled reach of Bozeman Creek. Currently,two such projects are in the conceptual design phase,both located on public lands. The first is the Bozeman Creek at Bogert Park project,a project to improve the ecology and recreational value of Bozeman Creek through Bogert Park, a popular city-owned park. The creek in this Iocation has long been confined against the west property line. The channel is artificially straight and deeply entrenched,with turfgrass covering the high terrace to the edge of the high and steep banks. Public enjoyment of the resource is constrained by difficult access and a minimal riparian environment, and the areas that are accessed by the public are severely eroded. The second project in the conceptual design phase is the Downtown Bozeman Creek Park(ing) Project. The three objectives of this project, located at a city-owned parking lot,are to enhance the creek while treating stormwater and improving parking efficiency. As is the case with Bogert Park,this project has channel restoration and habitat enhancement components,is open to the public and located downtown. Once the preferred conceptual designs for these two projects are chosen,the hydraulic model will be instrumental in developing detailed final designs and cost estimates, and understanding the impacts of these projects on upstream and downstream reaches.The modeling also will be a pre- requisite for obtaining required stream alteration permits. There are other potential creek enhancement projects in the modeled reach currently being discussed by stakeholders. The hydraulic model will again be a necessary tool in developing designs and understanding impacts of these projects. Creek improvements in the highly-visible downtown core likely will have a stimulative effect on creek enhancement activities elsewhere in the six-mile Bozeman Creek Enhancement Project,compounding the benefits to renewable resources. Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 3 March Z 2012 2,0 DATA COLLECTION 2.1 FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY The Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)published a Flood Insurance Study(FIS) for Gallatin County and incorporated areas(City of Bozeman)in 2011 (FEMA,2011). The project area sets on Flood Insurance Rate Map(FIRM)Panel 816D(see Figure 2). The Bozeman Creek channel is mapped as"Floodway Areas in Zone AE." The 2011 FIS was produced as part of the FEMA Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map(DFIRM)project. Bozeman Creek was not re- studied as part of the DFIRM project. Rather,the DFIRM project transformed the 1988 FIS into a Geographic Information System format. Excerpts from the 2011 FIS are included on the attached CD. 2.2 FEMA LIBRARY DATA REQUEST An FIS Data Request was submitted to FEMA to obtain data from the 1988 FIS. The data was requested for the entire study length of Bozeman Creek from the confluence with the East Gallatin River to Nash Road. The data requested included: • Hydrologic and hydraulic backup data • Topographic mapping • Survey notes • Letters of Map Revision The only data FEMA retrieved from their archives was hydraulic modeling input and output data. The data was supplied in PDF format and included copies of the W SP2 hydraulic model input and output cards. The attached CD contains a copy of the data request and the retrieved data along with extracted model data for the Bozeman Creek hydraulic model reach. 2.3 LIDAR DATA LIDAR Data was obtained from the City of Bozeman. Merrick and Company acquired topographic Light Detection and Ranging(LIDAR)data for the project area in June of 2007. The LIDAR surface model has an estimated vertical accuracy of 0.05 feet and an estimated horizontal accuracy of 1.06 feet. The LIDAR data was collected with the following datum: Projection: UTM Zone 12N Datum: Horizontal-North American Datum of 1983,meters Vertical-North American Vertical Datum of 1988,meters The LIDAR Data includes a color aerial photograph taken on June 15,2007. Metadata for the LiDAR data is provided on the attached CD. 2.4 EXISTING SURVEY DATA Thomas Dean&Hoskins,Inc.(TD&H)acquired topographic survey data for the reach of Bozeman Creek between Babcock Street and the Main Street south alley in 2011. TD&H provided this survey data in the form of an AutoCAD drawing with a 3-dimensional triangular irregular network(TIN)representing the ground surface. The City of Bozeman hydrant datum was used for the vertical datum and a local datum was used for the horizontal datum. TD&H Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 4 March 2,2012 provided a factor to convert from the hydrant datum to the NAVD 1988 datum. TD&H completed a level loop to tie the survey to NGS Benchmark QX0224. TD&H also collected topographic survey data for the Bogert Park area in 2009 and 2011. The topographic data included the Bogert Park area east of the Bozeman Creek channel and some limited survey data on the west bank of Bozeman Creek. 2.5 SITE RECONNAISSANCE Paul Sanford,PE,CFM of Allied Engineering conducted a site reconnaissance on November 14, 2011. Paul began the site visit at the Story Street bridge and proceeded downstream to the Mendenhall Street culvert using hip waders to gain access to the creek. Paul obtained measurements on the culverts/bridges and ground photographs along the project reach. Select ground photographs and notes from the site reconnaissance are included in Appendix A. The attached CD contains all the ground photographs as well as ground photographs taken before the site reconnaissance and the notes from the site reconnaissance. 2.6 CROSS-SECTION & HYDRAULIC STRUCTURE SURVEY Greg Finck,LS and Kyle Thompson,LS of Allied Engineering acquired channel cross-section survey data and hydraulic structure survey data on December 9 and December 12 of 2011 from Story Street to Mendenhall Street. The one exception is that channel cross-section data was not obtained for the reach of creek between Babcock Street and the south Main Street alley as channel data for this reach is available from the TD&H drawing described in Section 2.4. Survey grade GPS and conventional survey equipment were used to collect the data. Creek bottom survey data was obtained by wading the creek. The data was collected with a horizontal datum of NAD 83,Montana State Plane, International Feet and a vertical datum of NAVD 1988. The attached CD(Deliverable#1)contains the point files and an AutoCAD drawing containing the points. Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 5 March 2,2012 3.0 HYDROLOGY 3.1 FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY PEAK DISCHARGES Peak discharges for Bozeman Creek were obtained from the 2011 FEMA FIS and are summarized below in Table 3-1. These peak discharges will be used for floodplain permitting purposes. At Story Street,Bozeman Creek drains an area of 49.5 square miles according to the 2011 FIS. Table 3-1 Peak Discharges for Bozeman Creek between Interstate Highway 90 and Story Street from the 2011 FEMA Flood Insurance Study. D.A. Percent-Annual-Chance Discharge Flooding Source&Location (mi) cfs 10 2 1 1 1 0.2 Bozeman Creek at Story Street 49.5 600 920 11,070 1,455 3.2 USGS REGRESSION EQUATION PEAK DISCHARGES A USGS gage located in Sourdough Canyon collected flow data on Bozeman Creek from May 1, 1951 to September 30, 1953. Three years of peak flow data is insufficient to complete a statistical analysis to estimate peak flows. As a result, USGS Regression equations were used to estimate peak discharges for the creek. The Bozeman Creek drainage basin sets in the Upper Yellowstone-Central Mountain region according to the USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4308 (Parrett, 2004). For this region, the peak flows for flood events are based on the drainage area and the percentage of the drainage basin above 6,000 feet in elevation. Approximately 64 percent of the drainage basin for the project site is above 6,000 feet. The drainage basin area delineated from 7.5 minute USGS quadrangles is 51.0 square miles at Interstate 90. The peak flows for various flood events are displayed in 'fable 3-2 below. The results from this analysis are provided in Appendix B. Table 3-2 Peak Discharges for Bozeman Creek at Interstate Highway 90 estimated based on the USGS Regression Equations. Flooding Source& D.A. percent-Annual-Chance Discharge(cfs) Location (mil) 50 20 10 4 2 1 0.5 0.2 Bozeman Creek at 51.0 231 414 568 796 983 1,180 1,400 1,710 Interstate Highway 90 A measure of the reliability of the regression equations is the average standard error of prediction (SEP). The average standard error of prediction ranged from 93 percent for the 50%annual chance peak discharge to 63 percent for the 0,2%annual chance peak discharge. "Smaller values of SEP indicate better reliability of the regression equations than do Iarger values of SEP" (Parrett,2004). The SEP for the other percent annual chance discharges as well as the 90% confidence prediction interval for each discharge is provided in Appendix B. A prediction interval is an estimate of an interval in which future observations will fall,with a certain probability, given what has already been observed. Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 8 March 2,2012 3.3 BANKFULL SURROGATE FLOW The Bozeman Creek channel in the project area is significantly altered and confined,presumably a result of past manipulations for development and agriculture. A bankfull surrogate flow was calculated to estimate the bankfull flow under pre-disturbance conditions. To calculate the bankfull flow,the pre-disturbance channel geometry and slope were estimated. The slope was determined by observing the channel south of town where the conditions were considered to be more natural.The sinuosity was estimated by dividing the stream channel length in this reach by the valley length. This procedure was completed for two stretches of Bozeman Creek.The first reach has a straight line distance of 2,216 feet and is located approximately 3.5 miles south of Bozeman.The other reach has a straight line distance of 1,622 feet and is located approximately 4.5 miles south of Bozeman.Both of the reaches produced a sinuosity of approximately 1.4 ft/ft.This value was then used to estimate the natural slope of Bozeman Creek within the study area. The existing vertical drop in the channel from Story Street to Mendenhall Street was divided by the product of the estimated natural sinuosity and the straight line length from Story Street to Mendenhall Street. The resulting estimate of natural channel slope is 0.008 ft/ft. For comparison,the existing channel slope in this reach is 0.011 ft/ft. The next step in the process to estimate a surrogate bankfull flow was to determine the natural bankfull width and depth of Bozeman Creek.The bankfull width was estimated with the use of the USGS regression equations as well as LiDAR contours and high definition aerial imagery. The USGS regression equations based on bankfull width were utilized by the taking the calculated 50 Percent-Annual-Chance Discharge,shown in Table 3-2,and calculating the bankfull width from the regression equation.This procedure gave a bankfull with of 28 feet.The LiDAR and high definition aerials were used by observing the contours of the bank and the observed bank locations south of Bozeman.This observation method gave results that ranged from the high teens to low 20's for bankfull width.After taking both the USGS regression method and the observation method into consideration,a bankfull width of 22 feet was settled upon.The natural bankfull depth of Bozeman Creek was estimated by comparing the bankfull depths of similar streams in the area to Bozeman Creek.Manning's equation was then used to calculate a surrogate bankfull flow of 208 cfs. Table 3-3 shows the drainage basin characteristics and channel characteristics for the USGS stream gages and the estimated natural channel characteristics for Bozeman Creek in the project reach. Table 3-3 Drainage basin comparison of similar gaged steams and the estimated natural channel characteristics of Bozeman Creek in the proiect reach. D.A. Slope BankfulI Bankfull Active Percent Basin> (mi) (ft/ft) Width(ft) Depth(ft) Channel 6,000 feet Width ft Bozeman 51.0 0.008 22 2.5 - 64 Creek Rocky 50.5 0.018 37 2.7 27 55 Creek Bear 17.0 0.048 18 2.0 13 92 Canyon Bridger 62.5 0.017 27 - 22 62 Creek Allied Engineering 3ervr lees,Inc. 9 Marrh 2,2012 3.4 MEAN DAILY FLOWS DEVELOPED FROM USGS GAGE DATA SYNTHESIS A synthesis of the Mean of the Mean Daily Flow data for representative USGS gaged streams was performed to estimate Mean Daily Flow data for Bozeman Creek. Flow data from representative USGS stream gages was pro-rated based on the ratio of the Bozeman Creek drainage area to the gaged drainage area. Figure 3 shows the results of the analysis. As can be seen from Figure 3,Mean Daily Flows are estimated at around 10 cfs during months of low flow and up to around 250 cfs during runoff. The Bozeman Creek USGS gage located in Sourdough Canyon that collected flow data from 1951 to 1953 was not used in this analysis due to the limited number of years of data collected. Figure 3. Estimate of the Mean Daily Flow for Bozeman Creek from synthesis of flow data from nearby USGS steam gages. Mean of Mean Daily Flows for the gaged streams was pro- rated based on the ratio of the drainage basin area of Bozeman Creek to the drainage basin area of the gaged stream. 500 _ 450 °—Rocky Creek Bear Canyon 400 ,.. --Bridger Creek —Average 350 f;. -30 0 :' 2 250 0 200 LL 150 100 50 , 0 . Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Time(months) Hydrologic analysis data and results are provided in Appendix B. 3.5 EFFECT OF URBANIZATION ON HYDROLOGY Characterization of the influence of urban stormwater runoff on the hydrology of Bozeman Creek could prove to be valuable in the analysis and design of enhancements to the creek. A study of this nature does not exist and is beyond the scope of the work for the Bozeman Creek Hydraulic Modeling project. It is presumed that the less probable peak flows such as the I%annual chance peak discharge (I 00-year discharge)are driven by snow melt runoff in the mountainous portion of the basin. It is Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 10 March 2,2012 also presumed that urban stormwater runoff from impermeable and other non-native surfaces would have an effect on the peak flow generated by rain events that do not generally coincide temporally with the peak flows from the mountain runoff. 'Therefore,urbanization may result in more bumps in the hydrograph due to rainfall runoff but the bumps would be less in magnitude and would not generally coincide with the annual peak flow which is snowmelt driven. According to the USGS,there is no study or report that provides a method to adjust the USGS regression equations to account for the effects of urbanization(S.Holnbeck,personal communication,February 15,2012). Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 11 March Z 2012 4.0 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Details of the hydraulic analysis methods and techniques used to complete the hydraulic model for Bozeman Creek from Story Street to Mendenhall Street are presented below. Appendix C contains selected output from the HEC-RAS hydraulic model. The HEC-RAS files and supporting files are included on the attached CD(Deliverable 43). 4.1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS PROCEDURES The hydraulic model begins just downstream of Mendenhall and extends 2,500 feet upstream to a cross-section located upstream of Story Street. One-dimensional steady flow hydraulic analysis procedures along with the U.S.Army Corp of Engineers HEC-RAS modeling software,Version 4.1 A(Army Corp of Engineers,20 10)were selected for the hydraulic model. ESRI ArcMap 9.3 (ESRI,2008)and the HEC-GeoRAS 4.3 (Army Corp of Engineers,2011)were used to establish a georeferenced HEC-RAS geometery input file. 4.2 TOPOGRAPHIC DATA PROCESSING A basemap was created in ESRI ArcMap 9.3 containing the following elements: • LiDAR points,breaklines and digital terrain model truncated to a swath approximately 1,000 feet left and right of Bozeman Creek • LiDAR contours at 1-foot intervals • Building structure polygons from the LiDAR planimetries data set • June 15,2007 color aerial photo • Stream centerline polyline based on the Iocation of Bozeman Creek taken from the aerial photo • Effective 2011 FIood Insurance Study data • Cross-section locations developed by Allied Engineering The GeoRAS extension in ArcMap was used to extract the HEC-RAS geometry input file from the basemap. The resulting HEC-RAS geometry file is referred to as the Existing Conditions geometry. DTM Consulting assisted Allied Engineering in development of the basemap and processing of the LiDAR data. 4.3 PROFILE BASELINE. The stream channel centerline of Bozeman Creek was used to define the profile baseline. River stationing for the modeled reach was established as"Stream distance in feet above the confluence with the East Gallatin River." River station 0 was established at the confluence. The profile baseline was established by referencing:the aerial imagery;the LiDAR contour data; and the field surveyed channel cross-sections. A summary of key features along the model extents including model limits is provided in Table 4-1. Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 12 March Z 2012 Table 4-I Profile Baseline Key Feature Summary River Feature Description/Notes S ta. 0 East Gallatin River Confluence 8698 Downstream Model Location of the 151 cross-section within the hydraulic Limit model 8729 Mendenhall Street Bridge Crossing 8923 Main Street North Bridge Alley Crossing 9128 Main Street Crossing Bridge with entrance just upstream of the Main Street South Alley and exit just upstream of the Main Street North Alle 9505 Babcock Street Bridge with Entrance at the Bozeman Creek Family Crossing Health building and exit on the north edge of Babcock Street 9944 Olive Street Crossing Bridge with entrance on the south edge of Olive Street and exit on the west edge of Rouse Avenue. 11171 Story Street Crossing Bridge 11198 Upstream Model Limit Location of the 25`h and final cross-section with the hydraulic model 4.4 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS The 14IEC-RAS model was run with the assumption of subcritical flow. Starting water surface elevations at the most downstream cross-section were determined using the normal depth option in HEC-RAS with a slope of 0.010 feet/feet. The channel slope at the downstream limit of the model was determined using the field survey data. Flows are continuous throughout the extent of the hydraulic model. This is logical since no tributaries enter Bozeman Creek within the model limits. Four separate Steady State Flow files were utilized in the model corresponding to the 2011 FEMA FIS peak flows(Table 3-1),the USGS regression equation flows(Table 3-2),the bankfull flows(Section 3.3),and low flows (Figure 3). 4.5 CROSS SECTION DEVELOPMENT Cross sections were cut from the LiDAR digital terrain model using the HEC-GeoRAS extension in ArcMap and imported into HEC-RAS. The creek channel field survey data was pasted into HEC-RAS to overwrite the channel data cut through the LiDAR digital terrain model. The TD&H drawing described in Section 2.4 was used to establish a channel cross-section downstream of Babcock Street. HEC-GeoRAS was also used to generate the profile baseline, structure/roadway sections and blocked obstructions. Bank stations were selected manually in HEC-RAS. Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 13 March 2.2012 Cross sections were aligned perpendicular to the direction of flood flow and extended to capture the 0.2 percent-annual-chance discharge inundation boundaries. In some locations, it was not possible to extend the cross sections to capture this boundary because the ground drops in the direction of the cross section extension. The four typical structure cross sections(#1 through 4 as outlined in the HEC-RAS User Manual)were placed at each stream crossing and are discussed further in Section 4.6. Cross sections between hydraulic structures were spaced at distances less than 200 feet. The hydraulic model consists of 25 cross sections along the study reach length of 2,500 feet,beginning at river station 8698 and ending at river station 11198. Ground photographs showing the stream channel and the entrance and exit of each hydraulic structure are included in the HEC-RAS model. 4.6 HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES Field survey data along with measurements taken during the site reconnaissance were used to create the structure geometry at hydraulic structure crossings. The four typical structure cross sections were developed as described in Section 4.5. Contraction and expansion coefficients were set at 0.3 and 0.5,respectively,at structure cross-sections 2, 3 and 4(per standard HEC- RAS labeling). Ineffective flow areas were defined at HEC-RAS standard hydraulic structure cross sections 2 and 3.Ineffective flow areas were input for the top of the road or the water surface elevation which would be required to overtop the roadway. On the upstream end of a hydraulic structure, the area below the roadway can be inundated with flood water but be ineffective flow.When the water surface elevation is greater than the elevation of the roadway,flood water above the roadway elevation is effective flow.On the downstream side of the bridge, flood water outside of the banks is ineffective flow area until the roadway is overtopped. For the hydraulic structures at Babcock and Main Street,ineffective flow areas were utilized to model the buildings on the upstream cross sections.If water was to overtop the structures,the buildings would obstruct the flow path of water causing the area of flow to be ineffective. The road crossing structures were modeled as bridges. ,Several of the hydraulic structures could have been modeled as culverts but bridges were chosen to provide additional functionality in the model. A sensitivity analysis was conducted in the HEC-RAS model by comparing the water surface elevations generated for the 1%annual chance peak discharge using bridges or using culverts. Relatively little difference in water surface elevation(up to about 0.2 feet)resulted from using bridges compared to using culverts. The"lid"tool was used to define the pedestrian bridge just downstream of the Main Street crossing and the pedestrian bridge in Bogert Park. Model results indicate that the roads are overtopped during the high flows(I%annual chance peak discharge or 100-year flow). Therefore,the pressure/weir method was used to model high flows. The road crossing structures are described below beginning with the most downstream structure. 4.6.1 Mendenhall Street Crossing This crossing consists of a 12-foot wide rectangular concrete bridge with an open bottom and a length of 61 feet. At the upstream end of the structure the vertical distance from the thalweg to the low chord is 4.7 feet. 4.6.2 Main Street North Alley Crossing This crossing consists of a 12-foot wide rectangular concrete bridge with an open bottom and a length of 22 feet. At the upstream end of the structure the vertical distance from the thalweg to the low chord is 5.0 feet. Allied Engineering Services.Inc. 14 March 2.2012 4.6.3 Main Street Crossing The upstream end of the crossing is a 12.6-foot wide rectangular concrete bridge with an open bottom.The thalweg is 6.0 feet below the low chord. The distance to the downstream outlet is 323 feet.The outlet consists of a stone arch that is 14.0 feet wide.The low chord at the highest point of the arch is 6.5 feet above the thalweg. 4.6.4 Babcock Street Crossing The Babcock Street Crossing is constructed of concrete and has an open bottom. The upstream end of the bridge has a rectangular opening with a width of 16.0 feet and a distance from the low chord to the thalweg of 5.3 feet. The distance from the inlet to the outlet is 188 feet.The outlet is 12.1 feet wide and has a distance of 5.0 feet from the low chord to the thalweg.The west side of the outlet extends below the sidewalk a distance of 4.4 feet. 4.6.5 Olive Street Crossing The Olive Street crossing is constructed of concrete and extends a distance of 231 feet from the inlet to the outlet.The inlet of the crossing has a width of 12 feet and a distance of 5.0 feet from the low chord to the thalweg.The downstream end has a skewed opening width of 22.6 feet and a distance of 5.5 feet from the low chord to the thalweg. 4.6.6 Story Street Crossing This crossing consists of a 12-foot wide rectangular concrete bridge with an open bottom and a length of 59 feet. At the upstream end of the structure the vertical distance from the thalweg to the low chord is 5.3 feet. 4.7 ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENTS Manning's n values for the project reach were assigned by considering a combination of:field reconnaissance observations; aerial imagery evaluation,evaluation of values used in the Effective Hydraulic Model;experience and professional judgment. A Manning's n value of 0.050 was used for the main channel. For the overbank area,0.040 was used for the Manning's n value.The concrete structures were given an n value of 0.012 for the walls and 0.050 for the bottom of the channel. A sensitivity analysis was conducted using HEC- RAS by varying the main channel n value from 0.040 to 0.060. For the I%annual chance peak discharge,it was found that compared to the main channel n value used in the model,0.050, varying Mannings n by 4:0.010 generally resulting in less than 0.3 feet in change in water surface elevation. 4.8 NON-CONVEYANCE AND BLOCKED OBSTRUCTION AREAS Ineffective flow areas were assigned to non-conveyance areas of cross-sections such as an area just upstream of a building. Refer to the HEC-RAS model for the location of ineffective flow areas. Blocked obstructions were used to represent buildings bisected by the cross sections. The blocked obstructions were generated using HEC-GeoRAS and were raised in height in H GRAS to more accurately reflect the height of standard buildings. 4.9 HEC-RAS PLANS Four plans were developed in HEC-RAS to model different combinations of steady state flow data with the Existing Conditions geometry model. The plans are described below: Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 15 March 2.2012 • Existing Conditions,FIS: This plan is run with the peak discharges reported in the 2011 Flood Insurance Study. • Existing Conditions, USGS: This plan is run with the peak discharges calculated from the USGS regression equations. • Existing Conditions,Bankfull: This plan is run with the bankfull surrogate flow. • Existing Conditions,Mean Daily: This plan is run with the Mean Daily flows developed from the synthesis of Mean of Mean Daily FIows from representative USGS gages. 4.10 MODEL CALIBRATION Water surface elevation records and flow records from historic floods or non-flood Ievels were not identified for the modeled reach. Therefore,calibration was not possible. However,a comparison was made between the water surface elevations in the Effective FEMA hydraulic model and the water surface elevations calculated in this hydraulic model. A summary of the comparison for the one-percent annual chance discharge(also known as the 100-year peak discharge)is provided in Table 4-2. Table 4-2 Comparison of water surface elevations(WSE's)and thalweg(Tha)from the FEMA Effective Hydaulic Model and the Existing Conditions hydraulic model run with the FEMA 1% annual chance peak dischar e. Comparison of Existing Conditions with Effective Existing Conditions Flood Insurance Model WSE for 1% Annual Chance Q (100-year Model River Station Study XS EC Effective Delta EC Effective Delta WSE WSE WSE Tha Tha Tha 11198 26.2 4833.9 48343 -0.8 4825.7 4827.1 1.4 10608 Al-27.1 4826.0 1 4824.0 2.0 4819.7 1 4820.0 0.3 10220 AF-28.1 4821.1 4819.7 1.4 4815.1 4814.8 0.3 9968 28.3 4818.8 4819.0 -0.2 48111 4812.4 03 9666 29.2 4816.3 4815.6 0.7 4808.7 4809.1 0.4 9325 30.1 4813.6 4812.0 1.6 4804.9 4805.3 0.4 8932 31 4808.8 4805.3 3.5 47993 4799.6 0.1 8760 31.3 4804.1 4802.7 1 1.4 1 4798.3 4797.8 1 0.5 Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 16 March 2,2012 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The hydraulic model developed for Bozeman Creek provides a characterization of the flow depths and velocities for flows ranging from seasonal low flow to the estimated 0.2% annual chance peak discharge(500-year peak discharge). The model was developed to serve as a permitting and design tool for on-going and future efforts to enhance Bozeman Creek. 5.1 MODEL APPLICATION TO PERMITTING Since Bozeman Creek is a flooding source mapped by FEMA and the City of Bozeman is a community participating in the National Flood Insurance Program,any proposed work including restoration and enhancements in Bozeman Creek or its floodplain must be permitted by the City of Bozeman through issuance of a floodplain development permit. An applicant is typically required to provide a comparison of the Base Flood Elevations (BFEs or the water surface elevations resulting from the 1%annual chance peak discharge)for the existing conditions and the proposed conditions. The 1%annual chance peak discharge from the 2011 Flood Insurance Study(1,070 cfs)would be used in the hydraulic model for the comparison. The Existing Conditions HEC-RAS model provides BFE's for the existing conditions. A Proposed Conditions MC-RAS model could be constructed using the existing conditions as a base from which to modify the HEC-RAS model to reflect proposed conditions. Proposed modifications occurring within the regulatory floodway require either a certification that proposed BFEs are no higher than existing BFEs("no-rise certification")or submittal of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision(CLOMR)to FEMA. A CLOMR is"FEMA's comment on a proposed project that would,upon construction,affect the hydrologic or hydraulic characteristics of a flooding source and thus result in the modification of the existing regulatory floodway,the effective Base Flood Elevations(BFEs),or the Special Flood Hazard Area(SFHA).The letter does not revise an effective NFIP map,it indicates whether the project,if built as proposed, would be recognized by FEMA"(FEMA, 2010). Once modifications have been made to a regulatory floodway,a Letter of Map Revision(LOMR)submittal to FEMA is required. A LOMB modifies an effective Flood Insurance Rate Map(FIRM)through issuance of a letter from FEMA. The letter is generally accompanied by an annotated copy of the affected portions of the FIRM. Submittal of a CLOMR is advised rather than the use of a"no-rise certification". If a"no-rise certification"is used and through the LOMR process it is determined that a project has caused a rise in the BFE,the Community can be reprimanded from FEMA. Other permits such as the Montana Stream Protection Act(SPA 124 Permit)and the Federal CIean Water Act(404)permit may require characterization of the existing and proposed hydraulic conditions resulting from work occurring in the channel and/or floodplain of Bozeman Creek. The Existing Conditions HEC-RAS model serves as the basis for characterizing existing and proposed hydraulic conditions. In this case of these permits,the model may be run using flows ranging from seasonal low flow to the surrogate bankfull flow and above. 5.2 MODEL APPLICATION TO DESIGN The design of enhancements to Bozeman Creek will be subject to numerous design criteria specifically tailored to proposed projects. These criteria may include: 1. Infrastructure Protection Criteria .Allred Engineering Services,Inc. 17 March Z 2012 2. Channel Geometry Criteria 3. Vertical Stability Criteria 4. Lateral Stability Criteria 5. Floodplain Criteria 6. Fish Passage Criteria The Existing Conditions HEC-RAS model developed from the Bozeman Creek Hydraulic Modeling project will serve as the basis to evaluate hydraulic characteristics of the creek such as velocity,depth and shear stress for a range of flows. For example,to evaluate fish passage through a proposed reconstructed channel and/or hydraulic structure,estimated seasonal low flow may be used in the model. The model can also be modified to create a Proposed Conditions Model to determine the effect of geometric changes to the corridor on the hydraulic characteristics of the creek. For example,the model may be run using the surrogate bankfull flow to establish an appropriate elevation of a constructed inset floodplain such that the occurrence of floodplain inundation will occur on an annual basis for the desired length of time. Furthermore, a Proposed Conditions Model could be run using the I%chance annual peak discharge to determine the shear stress experienced on a bank for example. The resulting shear stress has implications on the design elements required to provide infrastructure protection and to meet lateral and vertical stability criteria. 5,3 RECOMMENDATIONS To benefit on-going and future Bozeman Creek enhancement projects,the following recommendations related to hydraulic modeling of Bozeman Creek are suggested: 1. Install a gage station and develop a stage vs. flow relationship for the gage. 2. Obtain water surface elevations along Bozeman Creek for a range of flow conditions to use to calibrate the Existing Conditions HEC-RAS model. 3. Consider further the potential effect of urbanization and the associated increased stormwater runoff to Bozeman Creek on the hydrology of Bozeman Creek. 4. Create a Duplicate Effective Model by converting the effective hydraulic model which was completed using the computer program WSP2 to HEC-RAS. The Duplicate Effective Model will be required for a CLOMR or LOMR submittal to FEMA. Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 18 March 2,2012 6.0 STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION 6.1 PEOPLE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT The primary stakeholders in this project are: the Gallatin Local Water Quality District;the Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee(BCEC); and the City of Bozeman. The BCEC is a partnership of organizations,agency staff and individuals,including representatives from the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Dept., Downtown Bozeman Partnership,Friends of Bogert Park, Gallatin Local Water Quality District,Gallatin Valley Land Trust,Greater Gallatin Watershed Council,MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks,Trout Unlimited's Madison-Gallatin Chapter, and several professional firms and landowners.The BCEC receives planning and technical assistance from the National Park Service's Rivers and Trails Program. List ofPreparers Paul Sanford,PE, CFM Allied Engineering Services,Inc. (AESI) Project Manager Rory Romey,El AESI Staff Engineer 6.2 STAKEHOLDER REVIEW Review of the Draft Project Report was provided by the following individuals: • Gary Weiner,National Park Service and Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee • Alan English,Gallatin Local Water Quality District • .Peter Skidmore,Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee • Brian Heaston,City of Bozeman Engineering Division • Bob Fischer,DNRC The attached CD contains a copy of the written comments received and a response to comments letter. Paul Sanford discussed review comments via telephone with Gary Weiner,Peter Skidmore and Brian Heaston. Allred Engineering Services,Inc. 19 March 2,.201.2 7.0 REFERENCES Army Corps of Engineers, (2010). "River Analysis System—HEC-RAS",version 4.1.0,Davis, California. Army Corps of Engineers,(2011). "HEC-GeoRAS", version 4.3,Davis,California. Environmental Systems Research Institute(ESRI),Inc., (2008). "AreMap 9.3". Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA),2010. Retrieved February 10,2012,from http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/floodplain/nfipkeywords/clomr.shtm. Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA),2011. "Flood Insurance Study—Gallatin County,Montana and Incorporated Areas". Parret and Johnson,(2004). "Methods for Estimating Flood Frequency in Montana Based on Data through Water Year 1998: U.S.Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4308" Allied Engineering Services,Inc. 20 March 2,2012 Appendix D: Sourdough Creek Watershed Assessment, excerpt 78 is reach is well buffered against sediment by riparian vegetation,but where riparian vegetation or riprap are lacking, sediment may be entering the stream. Because of the beaver dams and artificial barriers, sediment may accumulate from both upstream and in-reach sources. Fish Habitat Assessment Reach 3 has some good fish habitat due to its diverse substrate and deeper pools resulting from beaver dams and meander formed lateral scours. Woody debris, although present, is limited, as long stretches of LGR limit habitat diversity and integrity. Stream features such as beaver dam formed pools, diverse substrate, and deeper meander pools,provide overwintering pool habitat. Diverse riparian vegetation exists along the reach and most of the reach is well-shaded by forest canopy which provides ample cover for trout. Although the reach contains adequate spawning gravels, spring runoff may not generate sufficient stream velocities to flush the majority of sediment from the stream reach,especially considering the braking influence of beaver darns and other artificial barriers. Fish were routinely observed in the deeper pools formed from lateral scour meanders and woody debris. Rainbow trout and German brown trout over 12" and brook trout over 10" were observed in the vicinity of the deeper beaver dam pools.Near subdivision development the increased use of riprap may help stabilize banks where the stream is more entrenched. However, the riprap may also prohibit the establishment of riparian vegetation and accelerate stream velocity by limiting meandering. (For Summary Stream Habitat Characteristics,please see Tables 3 &S) Limiting Factors Factors limiting the ecological integrity and functioning of Reach 3 include barriers,riprap,and extensive sections of unstable banks which contribute sediment to the stream. Spawning habitat may be hindered by excessive fines and insufficient stream flows and velocities.Woody debris is limited. Recommendations and Rehabilitation Opportuiddes Add woody debris, remove riprap (replace with stabilizing vegetation), report and repair leaking septic system. Educate landowners about dumping into stream and septic systems. Wetlands Wetlands areas within the reach are limited, although some beaver activity seems to provide overflow water to adjacent wetlands areas.The riparian corridor is characterized by an abundance and,variety of willows utilized by the beaver population and therefore needed for the formation and maintenance of the adjacent wetlands. Zone 9__Kagy_Bouleyard to Main Strut (Neighborhood Zone) Zone 9 is includes a mixture of downtown, residential, and suburban Iand-uses as Sourdough Creek flows between Kagy Boulevard and Bozeman's Main Street. Urban land uses have pronounced influences on the stream and its corridor in both Zones 9 and 10.There are no wetlands in the Zone and the stream actually flows under Main Street and several downtown Bozeman buildings. Aquatic Component REACH 2(R2-Kagy Boulevard to Main Street);2510 Meters Reach 2 is characterized by the urban influences of the area it flows through.The stream corridor and stream itself are highly channelized by urban infrastructure and structures. The portion of the reach within the City is heavily riprapped which minimizes riparian vegetation. Thus the size and function of the riparian corridor is severely limited. The south or upper end of the reach has more riparian features and vegetation than the lower, north end, which is more urbanized. 76 Land-use The upper half of Reach 2 has the "linear trail" adjacent to it and people bike, walk, and run along the trail as it threads through backyards.The urban land-use pattern is dominated by commercial and residential use.The north half of Reach 2 provides little recreation except for occasional children playing nearby or fishing in the stream,in contrast to the myriad of recreation uses in the upper watershed Geomorphic Classification Reach 2, similar to other reaches on the valley floor,includes a gently sloping alluvial floodplain.There are some meanders in the alluvium at the south end before the stream enters the highly urbanized portion. Stream Reach Characterization Reach 2 consists primarily of LGR habitat, yet the north third is heavily influenced by urban land-use. Urban infrastructure, residential and industrial development influence the stream corridor. For instance, the stream runs through extensive sections of riprap used to protect buildings and commercial property, leaving it extremely entrenched and linear for long sections and dramatically limiting riparian vegetation. The single-thread stream channel has a sinuosity of 1.09, an entrenchment ratio less than IA and a gradient of 1.7%. Based on channel and floodplain characteristics,Reach 2 is a Rosgen F3 channel.The dominant streambed material consists of 70% sand and silt. The riparian corridor is severely limited or nonexistent through the downtown,residential,and industrial areas due to the narrow and confined nature of the stream corridor under the urban influence.The riparian corridor appears healthy, wider, and more diverse south of the Martel Construction complex along South Church. Cottonwoods and aspen provide overstory with little if any understory, except for willows and herbs from the Martel complex to Kagy Boulevard. Reach 2 has 43 meters of unstable banks, much of it resulting from lateral scouring of outside banks of alluvium where riparian vegetation is lacking or where riprap has accelerated stream velocities toward an exposed bank. Pockets of fine sediments are frequently found at the end of meander formed lateral scours. Insufficient stream velocities in these areas may hinder the ability of the stream to flush Fines further downstream, allowing accumulation. Where lengths of LGR habitat occur, Sediment is flushed downstream until it hits a barrier or meander and accumulates. Fists Habitat Assessment Reach 2 has little good fish habitat due to its lack of habitat diversity, vegetation and cover, especially in the urbanized stretches, Woody debris, although somewhat present on the south end of the reach,is limited as a result of upstream barriers and few streamside recruitment opportunities. Long stretches of LGR limit habitat diversity and integrity. Little riparian vegetation exists along the north end of the reach,although most of the reach is well- shaded by cottonwood canopy and buildings. However, there is little cover for fish due to lack of meanders and vegetated banks. Few fish were observed in Reach 2 although adequate spawning gravels appear on the south end of the reach where there is diverse substrate and riparian cover. The urbanized portion lacks substrate diversity and riparian cover. Riprap may help to stabilize banks where the stream is entrenched, but may also prohibit establishment of riparian vegetation and related fish habitat by accelerating stream velocities and minimizing meandering (For Summary Stream Habitat Characteristics,please see Tables 3 &$) Limiting Factors Limiting factors include long straight and entrenched channels,sediment accumulation from bank erosion and low flow velocities,barriers and riprap from urbanization,and lack of woody debris. Recommendations and Rehabilitation Opportunities Add woody debris, eliminate riprap, stabilize banks, establish vegetation, re-orient storm drain by Bart Manion's residence to direct flow away from bank,report and monitor septic systems. 17 Wetlands Two wetland areas exist adjacent to this reach. One is along the "linear trail" west of the community gardens south of Garfield and north of Mason Street. The other is west of Ice Pond Road along the linear trail where it crosses Sourdough Creek just upstream from Story Stree€, A small spring creek stream parallels the linear trail and flows adjacent to the wetlands near where the spring creek joins Sourdough Creek. These areas provide wildlife and waterfowl habitat. Zone 10 Main Street to Griffin Dr. (North Urban Interface Zane) Zone 10 includes a mixture of downtown, commercial, residential, and fight industrial land-uses between Bozeman's Main Street and E. Griffin Drive, Zone 10, like Zone 9, is highly influenced by urbanization. One major difference is the presence of more wetland areas at the north end of this Zone just above the confluence of Sourdough and Rocky Creek. Aquatic Component REACH 1 RI-Main Street to Griffin •2484 Meters Reach I is characterized by the urban influences of the area it flows through.The stream corridor and stream itself are highly channelized by urban features, infrastructure, and structures like bridges, streets, and the interstate highway bridge.The portion of the reach within the City is heavily riprapped and this prevents establishment of much riparian vegetation.The riparian corridor is thus limited in size and diversity.The north end of the teach has extensive beaver activity and much more riparian vegetation. Land-use The predominant land-use pattern is urban, dominated by commercial, residential, and light industrial uses. Toward the north third of the reach, the stream corridor does provide some wildlife. habitat. In contrast to the upper watershed, Reach I apparently does not provide any recreational use or opportunities with the exception of occasional fishermen,since the adjacent properties are private and limit access. Geomorphic Classification Similar to other reaches on the valley floor, Reach I is a gently sloping floodplain in alluvium. The stream meanders at the north end of the reach after leaving the zone of intense urbanization and its associated confinement. Stream Reach Characterization Reach 1 consists primarily of LGR habitat. The southern two thirds of the reach through Bozeman proper is extremely entrenched and linear for long sections. The north third is heavily influenced by beaver activity, riparian vegetation, and alluvial gravels that promote deep meander pools and associated habitat. Extensive sections of riprap, urban infrastructure, and industrial development illustrate the influence of urbanization on the stream corridor. The stream is highly channelized, confined, and entrenched. Two beaver dams provide barriers and deep backwater pools, as well as expanded riparian and wetland habitat. The single-thread stream channel has a sinuosity of 1.64, an entrenchment ratio less than 1.4 and a gradient of 1.29c'. Based on channel and floodplain characteristics, Reach 1 is a Rosgen classification l~4 channel. The dominant streambed material consists of 60%sand and gravel, yet contains 20% silt/clay fines and 20% cobbles. The riparian corridor is severely limited or nonexistent through the downtown, residential, and industrial areas due to its narrow and confined nature.The riparian corridor appears healthy, wider, and more diverse north of the Barnard Construction complex_ The limited overstory is comprised of cottonwoods and aspen. Little if any understory exists,except for willows and herbs north of the Barnard complex. 78 Reach I contains sections of unstable banks from lateral scouring along outside banks of alluvial material where riparian vegetation is lacking or where riprap has accelerated stream velocities toward an exposed bank. Many of these stretches have been riprapped to protect urban development, Pockets of fine sediments are frequently found at the end of meander formed lateral scours. Insufficient stream velocities in these areas, including the influence of beaver darts, hinder the ability of the stream to flush fines downstream and allow accumulation. Where lengths of LGR habitat occur, sediment is flushed downstream until it hits a barrier and accumulates. The urban interface is characterized by long lengths of LGR that are riprapped, devoid of riparian vegetation,and featureless. The culverts under the Interstate accumulate debris and could be considered a hazard where children could be trapped. Fish Habitat Assessment Except for the northern end of the reach,Reach 1 bas little good fish habitat due to lack of diverse habitat,riparian vegetation and cover, especially throughout the urban zone. Woody debris, although present on the north end of the reach, is limited, as long stretches of LGR limit habitat diversity and integrity. Featureless LGR stretches demonstrate little ability to recruit and hold woody debris. Stream features such as beaver dam pools and deep meander pools, provide overwintering pool habitat, albeit otherwise limited in the reach. Little riparian vegetation exists along the reach except on the north end, although most of the reach is well-shaded by cottonwood canopy and buildings.There is little cover for trout due to the lack of stream features other than beaver darns and pools. The north end of the reach has more diverse substrate and riparian cover with adequate spawning gravels as compared to the urbanized section. Fish were routinely observed in the deep pools formed from lateral scour meanders and the beaver dams. Rainbow trout and German brown trout over 12" and brook trout over 10" were observed in the vicinity of the beaver dam pools. Near urban and industrial development the increased use of riprap may help stabilize banks where the stream becomes more entrenched.However the riprap may also prohibit the establishment of riparian vegetation and accelerate stream velocities by minimizing meandering. Beaver activity in the northern third of Reach 1 has created large deep pools in which larger trout congregate. A substantial number of trout greater than 12"inhabit the deeper waters above the dams.This is especially true three quarters of a mile south of E. Griffin Drive where beavers have built two two meter high dams, one 10 meters across, with large holding pools above them where numerous German brown and rainbow trout over 16" were observed. Where the beaver dams have raised the water level above the banks, the flooded adjacent willow populations provide additional trout habitat and cover. Limiting Factors Factors limiting the ecological integrity and functioning of Reach I include barriers, riprap, and sections of unstable banks where sediment delivery is a problem. Riparian vegetation is severely lacking in long urbanized sections.Spawning habitat may be hindered by excessive fines and insufficient stream velocities.Woody debris is limited. Recommendations and Rehabilitation Opportunities Add woody debris,eliminate riprap,establish vegetation, stabilize banks.Monitor the storm drain near Kwik Way at Peach and the outflow pipe near house on Rouse. Wetlands The confluence area between Sourdough Creek and Rocky Creek supports abundant wetlands because of the area- wide high water table due to proximity of the two streams and because of beaver dams. Amphibian Component Observation of boreal toads within and adjacent to the Bozeman City Limits implies that there is a breeding ,79 population along the lower reaches of Sourdough Creek. A search of the marsh complex along the Linear Trail did not find boreal toads, Furtber efforts should be undertaken to identify and protect this exurban population. Lower Watershed Additional Findings And Discussion Aquatic Component USFS Fisheries Biologist Scott Barndt summarizes fish habitat in Sourdough Creek,stating, Habitat quality was generally lower in urbanized areas (reaches 1-3) than in the more rural and forested reaches (Tables 3 & 8). These lower reaches were entrenched (F Channel Types), generally lacked pool habitats, and were characterized by high levels of fine sediments. These attributes result from floodplain development adjacent to the stream, deliberate stream confinement to reduce flood hazard to properties adjoining the stream, receipt of storm drain effluent, and lack of opportunity for LWD recruitment due to urban forest :management. These factors may directly impact the fish populations present (White et al., 1983). White et al. (1983) found significantly lower fish biomass and populations in the urbanized reaches of Bozeman Creels than in non-urbanized reaches. One section of stream in Reaches 1 and 2 flows beneath streets and buildings, and is an effective barrier to fish passage under some low-flow conditions. In this case, biological oxygen demand removes oxygen from the water sufficiently to impede passage of fish through the de-oxygenated stretch of stream. The increase in pool frequency in Reach 1 is partly due to beaver colonization of the reach as it leaves urban areas.Beaver dams are very productive fish habitats, particularly important for overwintering, stabilizing flows, improving riparian productivity and assisting recovering of degraded channels and riparian areas (Finnigan and Marshall, 1997). Although LWD frequency and fine sediment levels in Reaches 5, 6, and 1 are suboptimal to borderline, pool frequencies are similar to reference conditions. LWD is important in providing cover for fish, as well as forming pools and retaining spawning gravel (Lassetre and Harris, 2001). Therefore, less LWD may result in reduced fish densities (White et al., 1983). Beaver activity is present in Reaches 5 and 6, providing important benefits as noted above. Although the high amount of fines are potentially limiting in these reaches,the reaches likely provide important spawning habitat for the stream downstream of the municipal water diversion. The municipal water diversion at the upper end of Reach 7 is a fish passage barrier, effectively isolating the upper watershed from the lower.and removing possibility of genetic interchange from the lower watershed to the upper. The lack of LWD in these reaches is partially determined by upstream land management actions. Both irrigation and municipal water diversions serve to stop the downward migration of LWD. The low frequencies of LWD in upstream reaches indicates a reduced supply. Fish were not sampled in this study; only visual observations were made. Therefore, even in s reaches in which habitat conditions appeared optimal for salmonids, actual populations may be limited by factors we did not identify or measure. However, this study does provide a broad overview of habitat conditions and a point of reference against which future work, including restoration;may be compared.