HomeMy WebLinkAboutMandeville
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Lanette Windemaker, AICP, Contract Planner
SUBJECT: City of Bozeman Mandeville Major Subdivision Pre-application, #P-07026,
opened and continued from August 20, 2007
MEETING DATE: Monday, September 10, 2007
RECOMMENDATION: The City Commission provides advice and recommendation on
application #P-07026 in preparation of the preliminary plat application for City of Bozeman
Mandeville Major Subdivision.
BACKGROUND: On August 20, 2007, this item was opened and continued until September 10.
This is pre-application review for City of Bozeman Mandeville Major Subdivision to subdivide ~
25 acres into 25 industrial lots. The property is located between I-90, U.S. 10 and North Seventh
Avenue at Redwing Drive and Reeves Road extended. The subject property is zoned M-2
(Manufacturing and Industrial District).
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: As discussed in staff report.
1. Safety concerns at intersection of Reeves Road, railroad tracks, Redwing (Wheat) Drive, and
the proposed railroad spur.
2. Redwing Drive disposition.
3. Block length in excess of 1,320 feet. Bisecting street or streets and/or pedestrian rights of way,
or is block length necessary due to access control for the proposed rail spur.
4. Block width in excess of 400 feet. Rights of way for pedestrians or is block width essential to
overcome specific disadvantages of orientation due to the proposed rail spur.
5. Potential alternative location for Fire Station #7.
FISCAL EFFECTS: Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time, but will include increased
property tax revenues from new development, along with increased costs to deliver municipal
services to the property.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission.
CONTACT: Please email Lanette Windemaker at lwindemaker@bozeman.net if you have any
questions prior to the public hearing.
APPROVED BY: Andrew Epple, Planning Director
Chris Kukulski, City Manager
38
PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT #P-07026
COB MANDEVILLE MAJOR SUBDIVISION PREAPPLICATION
Item: Application #P-07026 – Preapplication review for advice and
comment in preparation of the preliminary plat application for COB
Mandeville Major Subdivision.
Owners: City of Bozeman, P.O. Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230.
Representatives: Great West Engineering, 12140 Gooch Hill Road, Gallatin Gateway,
MT 59730.
Date/time: Before the Planning Board on Tuesday, July 17, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in
the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West Main
Street, Bozeman, MT; and
Before the Bozeman City Commission on Monday, August 6, 2007, at
6:00 p.m. in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311
West Main Street, Bozeman, MT.
Report by: Lanette Windemaker, AICP; Contract Planner, Planning and
Community Development Department.
Recommendation: Review and provide advice and comments.
PROPERTY LOCATION
The property is located between I-90, U.S. 10 and North Seventh Avenue at Redwing Drive and
Reeves Road extended. The subject property is zoned M-2 (Manufacturing and Industrial
District). Please refer to the vicinity map below.
39
PROPOSAL & BACKGROUND
Application has been made for a Subdivision PreApplication review of COB Mandeville to allow
the subdivision of ~ 85 acres for the development of 25 industrial lots.
The purpose of the Subdivision Preapplication review is for discussion of the applicant’s
proposal with the designated review committees in order to identify any requirements and
applicable standards and policies, as well as offers the applicant the opportunity to identify major
problems that may exist and identify solutions prior to making formal application.
ZONING DESIGNATION & LAND USES
The subject property is zoned M-2 (Manufacturing and Industrial District). The intent of the M-
2 manufacturing and industrial district is to provide for heavy manufacturing and industrial uses,
servicing vocational and employment needs of Bozeman residents. In addition, the subject
property is located with Entryway Corridor Overlay Districts for I-90 and U.S. 10. These are
Class I corridors, therefore all development that is partially or wholly within 660 feet of the
centerline of these roadways is subject to design review. The following land uses and zoning are
adjacent to the subject property:
North: M-2; Railroad right of way and US 10.
R-O; Office.
R-O, County Donut Zoning District; office.
AS, County Donut Zoning District; residential.
South: M-1; Vacant – State lands.
East: M-2; US 10.
M-1; business uses.
AS, County Donut Zoning District; East Gallatin Recreation Area.
West: M-2; Interstate-90.
M-1; business uses.
# P-07026 COB Mandeville Major Subd Preapp Staff Report 2 of 4
40
ADOPTED GROWTH POLICY DESIGNATION
The property is currently designated as Industrial in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. The
M-2 (Manufacturing and Industrial District) zoning designation is consistent with the Industrial
land use designation of the property.
Industrial. This classification provides areas for the heavy uses which support an urban
environment such as manufacturing, warehousing, and transportation hubs. Development within
these areas is intensive and is connected to significant transportation corridors. In order to protect
the economic base and necessary services represented by industrial uses, uses which would be
detrimentally impacted by industrial activities are discouraged. Although use in these areas is
intensive, these areas are part of the larger community and should meet basic standards for
landscaping and other site design issues and be integrated with the larger community. In some
circumstances, uses other than those typically considered industrial have been historically
present in areas which were given an industrial designation in this growth policy. Careful
consideration must be given to public policies to allow these mixed uses to coexist in harmony.
(Bozeman 2020 Plan; page 6-25 and 6-26.)
DISCUSSION ITEMS
The City Commission reviews the submittal, and provides conceptual advice and comment. Key
areas of discussion may include but are not limited to, the following issues:
1. Safety concerns. Reeves Road, railroad tracks, Redwing (Wheat) Drive, and the proposed
railroad spur intersection all interact within close proximity. Care must be taken in the design
of this area to ensure that vehicular traffic is well controlled.
2. Redwing Drive. It appears that Redwing Drive from the southeastern property line to where
it becomes (or intersects with) Wheat Drive is intended to be eliminated. Even though the
intersection of Redwing Drive with North Seventh Avenue might be substandard, care must
be taken to ensure adequate connectivity with the State lands.
3. Block length. This block length is in excess of 1,320 feet. An additional street needs to be
located to bisect the block length (approximately along the property line of Lots 7 and 19). In
addition, rights of way for pedestrians should be provided to further bisect each half. This
block length might be considered to be necessary due to access control for the proposed rail
spur.
4. Block width. This block width is in excess of 400 feet in width. Rights of way for
pedestrians should be provided. This block width might be considered to be essential to
overcome specific disadvantages of orientation due to the proposed rail spur.
5. Alternative location for Fire Station #7. This property is not located within the fire service
area of Fire Station #1 or #2 as indicated on Figure 11-1 of the Bozeman 2020 Plan. It is
indicated as being within 6 minute current deployment travel time of Fire Station #1 on
# P-07026 COB Mandeville Major Subd Preapp Staff Report 3 of 4
41
Figure 16 of the 2006 – Fire Protection Master Plan. According to Figure 61, it is located
within the 4 minute response time of the future Fire Station #7. This subdivision is in
relatively close proximity to the preferred location of Fire Station #7. It might be advisable
for the Fire Department to obtain one of the lots along Wheat Drive as a back-up site.
Attachments: DRC comments
cc: City of Bozeman, P.O. Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230
Great West Engineering, 12140 Gooch Hill Road, Gallatin Gateway, MT 59730
# P-07026 COB Mandeville Major Subd Preapp Staff Report 4 of 4
42
1
** MINUTES **
CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD,
TUESDAY, JULY 17TH, 2007
7:00 P.M.
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
President JP Pomnichowski called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM and directed the secretary to record
the attendance.
Member Present: Members Absent:
JP Pomnichowski, President & Chair Kaaren Jacobson, Commission Liaison (excused)
Dave Jarrett, Vice President Caren Roberty (excused)
Randy Carpenter Bill Quinn (excused)
Ed Sypinski
Erik Henyon
Brian Caldwell (arrived 7:03PM)
Staff Present:
Andrew C. Epple, Director of Planner & Community Development
Lanette Windemaker, Contract Planner
Kimberly Kenney-Lyden, Recording Secretary
Guests Present:
Terry Threlkeld, Great West Engineering
0:01:28 [18:45:36] ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (0-15 MINUTES)
{Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Planning Board and not scheduled on this
agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.}
Seeing there were no members of public present to give comment, JP Pomnichowski closed this portion
of the meeting.
0:01:37 [19:00:24] ITEM 3. MINUTES OF JUNE 5TH, 2007
Seeing there were no corrections, changes, or additions to the minutes, Dave Jarrett moved to recommend
approval of the minutes of June 5th, 2007. The motion was seconded by Erik Henyon. All in favor, motion
passed 6-0.
0:01:54 [19:01:19] ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW
Subdivision Pre-Application, #P-07025 (City of Bozeman - Mandeville). A Major Subdivision Pre-
Application on behalf of the owners, City of Bozeman, and the representatives, Great West
Engineering, to receive advice and direction in preparation of the preliminary plat application for
the City of Bozeman Mandeville Major Subdivision to allow 25 industrial lots on 85.35 acres legally
described as Tracts 1A, 2A, 3A, & 4A of COS 2153, T1S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin
County, Montana. (Windemaker)
43
2
0:01:59 [19:01:44] Staff Report
Seeing there were no conflicts of interest or board disclosures on this project, President Pomnichowski
opened the item to staff presentation.
Planner Windemaker gave the detailed staff report. She noted the purpose of this Subdivision Pre-
application review is for discussion of the applicant’s proposal with the designated review committees in
order to identify any requirements and applicable standards and policies, as well as offers the applicant
the opportunity to identify major problems that may exist and identify solutions prior to making formal
application.
Ms. Windemaker stated the subject property is zoned M-2 (Manufacturing and Industrial District). The intent
of the M-2 manufacturing and industrial district is to provide for heavy manufacturing and industrial uses,
servicing vocational and employment needs of Bozeman residents. In addition, she noted the subject property
is located with Entryway Corridor Overlay Districts for I-90 and U.S. 10. These are Class I corridors,
therefore she added all development that is partially or wholly within 660 feet of the centerline of these
roadways is subject to design review.
Lanette Windemaker noted there are several key areas of discussion:
1. Safety concerns. Reeves Road, railroad tracks, Redwing (Wheat) Drive, and the proposed railroad
spur intersection all interact within close proximity. Care must be taken in the design of this area to
ensure that vehicular traffic is well controlled.
2. Redwing Drive. It appears that Redwing Drive from the southeastern property line to where it
becomes (or intersects with) Wheat Drive is intended to be eliminated. Even though the intersection of
Redwing Drive with North Seventh Avenue might be substandard, care must be taken to ensure
adequate connectivity with the State lands.
3. Block length. This block length is in excess of 1,320 feet. An additional street needs to be located to
bisect the block length (approximately along the property line of Lots 7 and 19). In addition, rights of
way for pedestrians should be provided to further bisect each half. This block length might be
considered to be necessary due to access control for the proposed rail spur.
4. Block width. This block width is in excess of 400 feet in width. Rights of way for pedestrians should
be provided. This block width might be considered to be essential to overcome specific disadvantages
of orientation due to the proposed rail spur.
5. Alternative location for Fire Station #7. This property is not located within the fire service area of
Fire Station #1 or #2 as indicated on Figure 11-1 of the Bozeman 2020 Plan. It is indicated as being
within 6 minute current deployment travel time of Fire Station #1 on Figure 16 of the 2006 – Fire
Protection Master Plan. According to Figure 61, it is located within the 4 minute response time of the
future Fire Station #7. This subdivision is in relatively close proximity to the preferred location of Fire
Station #7. It might be advisable for the Fire Department to obtain one of the lots along Wheat Drive
as a back-up site.
44
3
Planner Windemaker closed her presentation by stating there has been no public comment received to date as
pre-applications are not noticed in the Daily Chronicle.
Questions for Staff:
Brian Caldwell noted he was hoping to further understand the minimum lot length and width requirement
because this project seems like the block length is four times in excess of the standard. He asked Planner
Windemaker if she could clarify the ranges of width and lot lengths. She responded this is going to be an
unusual subdivision with large lots and it already has access issues. Ms. Windemaker noted the city is
currently dealing with the issues of having the trail corridor and railroad running through this property.
Erik Henyon asked if the 12 inch water main going to be adequate pressure to satisfy the needs of these
large industrial lots and added that in looking at the typical industrial square footage for a building, these
lots look too small to accommodate an industrial sized building. Mr. Henyon asked Planner Windemaker
where the lots are on this pre-application that the new jail would be located on. She responded the jail is
south of this property on state lands. She added city staff is in discussion with Montana Rail Link and
noted it is never easy changing the use of the railroad.
Director Andy Epple stated there have been numerous meetings with which he attended including Bob
Murray and Terry Threlkeld. After several of these meetings they were able to develop a pre-application
that the city was ready to come forward with.
Dave Jarrett asked if the City is going to build the railroad spur. Ms. Windemaker concurred. Mr. Jarrett
asked who the owner of the property was and Mr. Epple replied it is owned by the City of Bozeman and
added there is a complaint in district court regarding ownership. He noted this is the site where the
transfer station was going to be located at.
Mr. Jarrett asked if the City has a real estate department and Mr. Epple replied they do not. Mr. Epple
added he was sure a real estate agent will be retained to handle the sale of these industrial lots on this
property. He stated the City is trying to do something with this land so the tax payers get a return on their
investment. Mr. Jarrett responded the owner of this property should come clean and tell us what they are
going to do with these lots like other applicants do when they come forward with a pre-application. He
continued by stating he was of the opinion that it is a big mistake for the City of Bozeman to be involved
in the real estate business with the public sector.
Randy Carpenter asked if the City has given any thought as to what the uses could be for these lots. Andy
Epple responded the city has been in negotiations with a couple of heavy industrial users that need
railroad access. He noted there have been inquiries over the years of developing this property with the rail
spur. Railroad access is critical and becoming more important as transportation costs increase. Mr. Epple
stated it is industrial users that need the rail road access. These lots are platted in a way to allow people to
buy multiple lots.
Erik Henyon asked if a user could have a single building cross a lot line. Mr. Epple responded the city
approves plans like this for developers who own more than one lot on a monthly basis.
JP Pomnichowski noted she researched the UDO and found nothing that addresses rail road right of way.
She added it is usually really wide. She stated she would like to see how that right of way is going to
work with the rail line. She noted she is curious to see how the right of way is going to work with the rail
line and rail spur. Ms. Pomnichowski added this will eat some of the land.
Lanette Windemaker responded this issue will have to be engineered to work and they will have to get a 45
4
great plan together before they file for preliminary plat. She closed by stating the city is in discussion with
Montana Rail Link.
President Pomnichowski noted she would expect hazardous materials in this industrial area and is glad to
see there is the possibility there is going to be another fire station located on this property. This would be
a good site for a fire station especially because there could be heavy industrial users in this area. She
asked if there will be access to this property from Wheat and those properties facing Reeves would have
access from Reeves. Planner Windemaker concurred and added they are all local roads. President
Pomnichowski replied she is concerned because if these roads are labeled as local, the truck access would
be difficult since local roads don’t have the standards to allow for turning radius and weight. Ms.
Windemaker noted these standards will need to be addressed.
JP Pomnichowski asked what the City’s plans are for these lots and if the City will retain some lots and
sell others. Ms. Windemaker responded these lots are too narrow for their depth to be subdivided,
however if someone bought multiple lots, those lots could be aggregated. Ms. Pomnichowski asked if this
will be it's own SILD. Planner Windemaker noted this has not been determined yet. She added that how
lighting is handled is currently up in the air and stated this does have the potential of becoming an SILD.
Ms. Pomnichowski asked if this site host the new City Shops Complex. Director Epple replied it was
talked about earlier, but the City picked up a buy/sell agreement with Cardinal distributing. The problem
the City has now is that part of the Cardinal property lands on Railroad right of way.
President Pomnichowski was concerned that there was a lack of floodplain delineation on this proposal
and asked when it would be done. Ms. Windemaker responded there has been no floodplain delineation
done and city engineer, Sue Stodola has requested this be done. She added there needs to be further
design work on this project. JP Pomnichowski noted that with the Yellowstone Pipeline going right
through there and with all the industrial uses of this property, the City will need to apply for 310 and 44
permits. Director Andy Epple noted the Planning and Engineering departments are reviewing this pre-app
just as any other projects that come through here.
0:31:29 [19:02:35] Applicant Presentation:
Terry Threlkeld, representing Great West Engineering noted the intent of this project was for a
commercial development. There seems to be a need for this kind of property in the City. There are a
number of businesses that have talked about having a site that is in close proximity to a railroad spur. Mr.
Threlkeld added most of these businesses have shown interest in the fairly large lots. One of the issues
that Bob Murray was looking for feedback on is the desire to have pedestrian facilities in an M-1 Zoned
area. He noted they want paved parking areas facing the railroad tracks. He was not sure if they can
provide for pedestrian safety. Mr. Threlkeld stated these facilities will not use all that much water unless
there is a bottling plant on the premises in the future. He added the water main sizing is in accordance
with the City’s water utility plan. A single family home would use 300 gallons a day. A manufacturer
would you 13 gallons per day per employee.
Mr. Threlkeld noted they will do a wetlands delineation once they get feedback on this pre-app. He added
there has been some hydrology done. They first met with Montana Rail Link and sat down with a
gentleman who does track design. What the City has envisioned is they might give an easement for this
railroad spur line. We need to so this railroad spur will not be owned by Montana Rail Link. It gives us a
little more control on how we want to handle it.
He added they had the highway design crew look at this and there will be improvements to highway 10,
possibly a signal. There has already been a traffic study done from the DNRC property to the south.
He closed by noting he has no idea how the sale of the property will work. 46
5
Questions for Applicant:
Ed Sypinski asked if there had been a traffic study done for Griffin. Mr. Threlkeld responded there has
only been signal studies done at the intersections there. What they have concluded is that the Redwing
access will have to go away for safety issues. Everyone is in agreement that this will go away. Because
there is access out of the south end of the property, the potential buyer would have a second way to get
out. Mr. Sypinski asked how they plan to address and balance the industrial development in a Class 1
Entryway Corridor district. Mr. Threlkeld replied they actually have two entryway corridors, North 7th
and the Entryway. There has been several discussions on which way the front of the buildings should be
facing and because there is a double corridor, we’ve concluded the building fronts would face the
highway and other streets. There is a setback along the west side of the property line that needs to be
landscaped.
Dave Jarrett noted that if they do plan on putting in a railroad spur, there would no access by pedestrians,
bicyclists, or sidewalks. There would only be truck traffic. Mr. Threlkeld stated they haven't discussed the
sidewalks yet. Mr. Jarrett responded there should be no sidewalks located anywhere near a railroad. He
added he feels this is a mistake, to commercialize this property and the purchase was a mistake by the
City Commission. Mr. Threlkeld replied he is of the strong opinion the City will not do that again.
Brian Caldwell stated they have touched on block length and width. He noted that projects with 600 foot
block length usually get stuck with a road. This could be a concern. Mr. Caldwell noted he feels this
would be a poor reflection of consistency and does not think the City should come anywhere close to
maximums under any regard. He asked if the roads will be constructed in a way that can really satisfy
access to all these lots. Mr. Threlkeld concurred and added the City does not usually get subdivision
applications that are industrial in nature so this project will need quite a bit more work.
Lanette Winmaker noted there is about 200 feet from railroad track to railroad track on Reeves. Mr.
Threlkeld noted it would be easy to synchronize signals in this area to decrease the board’s concern and
there would also be an escape route down to Wheat Drive. If someone was in between these two tracks,
he noted they do have a way out.
0:49:03 [19:02:06] Discussion
Director Andy Epple noted there was one design feature regarding the I-90 Entryway Corridor that he
fought for succeeded to get the roadway and property line landscaped instead of having the backs of
buildings being seen by the public. The building fronts will be facing the streets and railway instead of
looking at the backs. He added this will be a challenge and noted this area was always designated as
industrial land. He closed by noting industry is consistently located close to rail lines.
Brian Caldwell noted only one street bisecting this property is not enough. There needs to be one to three
roads. He added there should be no additional trails and stated this proposal as is, is inappropriate as an
indicator for block length. It's important from a planning standpoint and important for others who get
forced into building roads that the City remains consistent. Mr. Caldwell asked the City to avoid any
additional undue attention to this unique circumstance the City is in. The block length and width should
be a City Standard. The short of the block in the front and long in the back is a good design feature. He
added they will inevitably learn about the dog park, so eventually pedestrian access will come forward
and be an issue. Mr. Caldwell noted the City was able to burn their historic barn structure that was on this
site
when any other property owner would have been restricted from doing that. He added there have been 47
6
Mr. Epple responded that bonding could be a way to deter this outcome. Structurally, the City’s Fire
a few steps that are not in keeping with the City's standards and in the interest of fair play, it would be
important for the community to know that if this route is taken, it's done in the most ethical way possible.
Erik Henyon stated he would not like to see a jail or transfer station in our entryway corridor. He added it
makes very little sense to lay out a preliminary plat for this type of project without knowing the types of
businesses moving in there. His recommendation would be to take the land south east of Mandeville
Creek and keep those lots for the City and make them public lands and use it for City purposes. The rest
to the north west should be sold and the City should wash their hands of this and let a developer buy it so
the market can do what it will. Mr. Henyon noted he is in agreement with the comments about pedestrian
traffic and noted there should be no pedestrian traffic back there.
Ed Sypinksi noted that in regards to selling off this property, he would like to see the land delineation
first. He agreed with Mr. Henyon and noted since the City owns the property, it seems appropriate that the
City of Bozeman keeps what it needs before they go and sell off the property.
Randy Carpenter stated he likes the idea of the spur going down the middle of this property. He likes the
west side of this project and added the south east side is bit troublesome with the easements already there.
He closed by stating he is hopeful the City uses this as an opportunity to show how well an industrial area
can be designed and developed in terms of landscaping and protecting water resources already there. The
City should be able to raise the bar higher and he’ll be looking forward to see how that develops.
Dave Jarrett noted the City should put the property on the market before they get any deeper. The city
does not need to cut corners and government should get out of this business.
JP Pomnichowski noted the industrial facilities will be provided with cross streets, but she fully expects
the City will complete it's section of the Main Street to the Mountains Trails, just as long as this is not an
island to itself. She likes the connectivity of this project. President Pomnichowski noted Mr. Threlkeld
made the comment that most M-2 facilities will not fit on one of these lots and suggested these be better
used at a larger scale. She did not think larger scale buildings are an option, but added the City should just
aggregate these lots and sell them in 4 acre parcels. Ms. Pomnichowski stated she has spoken to many
people and everyone is in agreement that the land the City owns should be used by the City because the
City needs land too. She added there is a lot of expectation with this project and noted she did not think
we have a great need for a rail spur. Ms. Pomnichowski closed by noting she would like the City to talk to
GVLT about the sidewalk issues. She added these lots should not be aggregated until the City is aware of
where the floodplain is.
1:10:39 [19:32:14] ITEM 5. NEW BUSINESS
Erik Henyon asked Director Epple about the hotel on North 7th, right across from Murdocks and noted it
is a City eyesore because it is deteriorating. He asked if the City can condemn it and could it be used for a
great homeless shelter. Mr. Epple noted this is a huge problem and shows a weakness in the building
permit program. He noted the City does not require bonding as a condition for building completion. He
added this hotel is still in private ownership and our certified building inspectors have notified us that this
building is structurally, not a safety hazard. We had another hotel/motel interest come forward about
finishing this project. He closed by stating this project is on everyone's radar screen and he'll keep the
board advised as he learns.
Mr. Henyon stated he is worried about the safety factor because there could be a fire in this building.
48
7
Marshall and Chief Building Official has informed him this building is sound.
JP Pomnichowski reminded all present of the joint County/City Planning board meeting on July 31st. She
informed everyone that Tim Davis is lined up to speak and discuss the new SB201 recently passed. Mr.
Carpenter concurred. Andy Epple stated this will be an opportunity to discuss the City's long range
planning & the County's long range planning.
President Pomnichowski advised the board about the 2020 Community Plan Update meeting at the Stiff
Professional building on July 24th and asked that if any board member can spare the time, they should be
present.
Erik Henyon noted he received a letter from the Water Coalition and there is a tour on the 31st that will
look at all the irrigation issues and all the water issues in the Gallatin Valley. He added he will e-mail the
board members of the information.
President Pomnichowski announced the departure of recording secretary, Kimberly Kenney and added
this would be her last meeting. She and the other board members thanked her for her service.
1:18:23 [19:50:09] ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT
President Pomnichowski adjourned the meeting of the Planning Board at 8:20PM.
___________________________________ ____________________________________
JP Pomnichowski, President & Chair Andrew Epple, Director
Planning Board Planning & Community Development
City of Bozeman City of Bozeman
*City of Bozeman Planning Board meetings are open to all members of the public.
If you have a special need or disability, please contact our
ADA Coordinator, Ron Brey, at 582-2306 (voice) or 582-2301 (TDD).
49
MEMORANDUM
To: Development Review Committee
From: Lanette Windemaker, AICP; Contract Planner
Date: July 11, 2007 – Final Week Review
Re: COB Mandeville Subdivision PreApplication #P-07026
Scheduled for reviewed by Planning Board on July 17, 2007, and by City Commission on
August 6, 2007.
Supplemental Submittal Information Waivers:
• None requested.
Growth Policy:
• The property is designated as Industrial in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan.
Industrial. This classification provides areas for the heavy uses which support an urban
environment such as manufacturing, warehousing, and transportation hubs. Development
within these areas is intensive and is connected to significant transportation corridors. In
order to protect the economic base and necessary services represented by industrial uses, uses
which would be detrimentally impacted by industrial activities are discouraged. Although use
in these areas is intensive, these areas are part of the larger community and should meet basic
standards for landscaping and other site design issues and be integrated with the larger
community. In some circumstances, uses other than those typically considered industrial
have been historically present in areas which were given an industrial designation in this
growth policy. Careful consideration must be given to public policies to allow these mixed
uses to coexist in harmony. (Bozeman 2020 Plan; page 6-25 and 6-26.)
• State Highway 10 (aka North 7th / Frontage Road) is indicated as a major arterial on Figure
11-6 and 11-7 of the Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2001 Update.
• Reeves Road, Redwing Drive and Wheat Drive are local streets.
• One future trail corridor is indicated on Figure 6.5 of the Bozeman Area Transportation Plan
2001 Update. That trail corridor runs north / south along the Mandeville Creek alignment.
• The property lies within the 20-year sewer service study area boundary as depicted in the
2007 Bozeman Wastewater Facilities Plan.
• This property is not located within the Capital Facilities Overlay District.
• This property is not located within the fire service area of Fire Station #1 or #2 as indicated
on Figure 11-1 of the Bozeman 2020 Plan. It is indicated as being within 6 minute current
deployment travel time of Fire Station #1 on Figure 16 of the 2006 – Fire Protection Master
Plan. According to Figure 61, it is located within the 4 minute response time of the future
Fire Station #7.
• Bozeman 2020 Community Plan goals that should be of consideration in the project include;
Goal 4.9.1 Community Design–Create a community composed of neighborhoods designed
for human scale and compatibility in which services and amenities are convenient, visually
1
50
pleasing, and properly integrated and designed to encourage walking, cycling, and mass
transit use.
Objective 3. Continue the entryway overlay design review programs to ensure
aesthetically pleasing development on major entrances into the community.
Objective 5. Achieve an environment through urban design that creates, maintains,
and enhances the City’s industrial, commercial, and institutional areas.
Objective 7. Achieve an environment through urban design that maintains and
enhances the City’s visual qualities within neighborhood, community, and regional
commercial areas.
Goal 7.6.1 Promote and encourage the continued development of Bozeman as a vital
economic center.
Objective 3. Foster a positive economic climate through a well managed and
aesthetically pleasing built environment and by maintaining a beautiful and healthy
natural environment to promote and attract businesses with a desirable impact on the
community.
Zoning:
• The subject property is zoned M-2 (Manufacturing and Industrial District). The intent of the
M-2 manufacturing and industrial district is to provide for heavy manufacturing and
industrial uses, servicing vocational and employment needs of Bozeman residents.
• The subject property is located with Entryway Corridor Overlay Districts for I-90 and U.S.
10. These are Class I corridors, therefore all development that is partially or wholly within
660 feet of the centerline of these roadways is subject to design review.
Staff Issues:
• This block length is in excess of 1,320 feet. An additional street needs to be located to bisect
the block length (approximately along the property line of Lots 7 and 19). In addition, rights
of way for pedestrians should be provided to further bisect each half.
• This block width is in excess of 400 feet in width. Rights of way for pedestrians should be
provided. This block width might be considered to be essential to overcome specific
disadvantages of orientation to the proposed rail spur.
• Need to insure multi-model connectivity with both streets and trails.
• The trail in the watercourse setback shall be constructed by the subdivider.
• Stormwater facilities shall be located on separate parcels of land held in common ownership.
• Watercourse setback planting plan shall be prepared by a qualified professional, and installed
by the subdivider.
• The subdivider shall install landscaping in the I-90 open space buffer.
• Redwing Drive as shown appears to be an extension of Wheat Drive, and should be named
appropriately.
• Safety concerns have been raised about the Reeves Road, railroad tracks, Redwing (Wheat)
Drive, and proposed railroad spur intersection.
• The disposition of Redwing Drive from Wheat Drive to North 7th needs to be addressed.
• This subdivision is in relatively close proximity to the preferred location of Fire Station #7. It
might be advisable for the Fire Department to obtain one of the lots along Wheat Drive as a
back-up site.
2
51
• Needs to show city limits line and adjacent zoning, including county zoning.
Design / Environmental:
• No wetlands have been delineated. Wetlands are commonly found along watercourses.
Please have a wetland professional determine if there are any wetlands that need to be
delineated in the subdivision. If there are any wetlands, the watercourse setback will need to
be increased by the width of the wetlands.
• While stormwater facilities may be located within Zone 2 of a watercourse setback, they
have to be located to allow construction and use of the trail within Zone 2 of the watercourse
setback.
• No floodplain has been delineated.
Standard Preliminary Plat Conditions:
1. Water rights, or if water rights are not available cash-in-lieu thereof, as calculated by the City
Engineer, is due with the final plat.
2. Notes shall be included on the plat describing ownership and maintenance responsibility for
all parks, open space and/or other common facilities and areas, e.g.: public park, dedicated to
the city and maintained by the property owners association; and open space, public access,
owned by the property owners, maintained by the property owners association, etc. Park
land, open space areas and storm water facilities shall not be described as lots or tracts but
shall be numbered.
3. A property owners association shall be established and incorporated to provide for operation
and/or maintenance of the common facilities and/or areas (e.g. open space, stormwater
facilities).
4. Street lighting shall be installed by the subdivider. Street light locations and specifications
shall be provided to the City Engineer for review and approval with the public improvements
plans and specifications.
5. Street lighting SILD information for operation and/or maintenance shall be submitted to the
Clerk of Commission directly after Preliminary Plat approval in hard copy and digital form.
The final plat will not be deemed complete until the resolution to create the SILD has been
approved by the City Commission.
6. Applicant shall provide a soils report, along with building plans, to the Building Division,
recommending types of foundations. If development shall occur in phases, the soils report
may address those lots within the proposed phase.
7. Buildings proposed for construction with crawl spaces or basements shall include Engineer
Certification regarding depth of ground water and soil conditions and proposed mitigation
methods to be submitted with each Building Permit. The Final Plat shall include a notation
that due to high ground water conditions full or partial basements are not recommended.
3
52
8. All plans and specification shall comply with the current version (including all addenda) of
the City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy and the City of Bozeman
Modifications To Montana Public Works Standard Specifications Fifth Edition that have
been adopted at the time of approval of the plans and specifications.
9. The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in Title 18 of the
Bozeman Municipal Code. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code
provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way,
create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal
Code or state law.
Standard Code Provisions:
a. Per Chapter 18.72 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, covenants, restrictions, and articles of
incorporation for the creation of a property owners’ association shall be submitted with the
final plat application for review by the Planning Department. Per Section 18.72.030 of the
Bozeman Municipal Code, covenants shall include a common area and facility maintenance
plan and guarantee providing for the permanent care and maintenance of all common areas
and facilities, including but not limited to open space areas, public parkland/open space
corridors, recreational areas, stormwater facilities, streets, trails, community centers and
parking lots, street lights and other areas and facilities common to the association.
b. The Final Plat shall conform to all requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code and the
Uniform Standards for Final Subdivision Plats and shall be accompanied by all required
documents, including certification from the City Engineer that as-built drawings for public
improvements were received, a platting certificate, and all required and corrected certificates.
The Final Plat application shall include four (4) signed reproducible copies on a 3 mil or
heavier stable base polyester film (or equivalent); two (2) digital copies; and five (5) paper
prints.
c. Pursuant to Section 18.06.040.D.6, conditional approval of the Preliminary Plat shall be in
force for not more than one calendar year for minor subdivisions, two years for single-phased
major subdivisions and three years for multi-phased major subdivisions. Prior to that
expiration date, the developer may submit a letter of request for the extension of the period to
the Planning Director for the City Commission’s consideration. The City Commission may,
at the written request of the developer, extend its approval for no more than one calendar
year, except that the City Commission may extend its approval for a period of more than one
year if that approval period is included as a specific condition of a written subdivision
improvements agreement between the City Commission and the developer, provided for in
§18.74.060, BMC.
d. If it is the developer’s intent to file the plat prior to installation, certification, and acceptance
of all required improvements by the City of Bozeman, an Improvements Agreement shall be
entered into with the City of Bozeman guaranteeing the completion of all improvements in
accordance with the Preliminary Plat submittal information and conditions of approval. If
the Final Plat is filed prior to the installation of all improvements, the developer shall supply
4
53
the City of Bozeman with an acceptable method of security equal to 150% of the cost of the
remaining improvements.
e. The applicant shall submit with the application for Final Plat review and approval, a written
narrative stating how each of the conditions of preliminary plat approval has been
satisfactorily addressed, and shall include a digital copy (pdf) of the entire Final Plat
submittal. This narrative shall in sufficient detail to direct the reviewer to the appropriate
plan, sheet, note, covenant, etc. in the submittal.
5
54
July 11, 2007
To: Development Review Committee
From: Sue Stodola, Project Engineer
Re: Mandeville Subdivision, MaSub Pre-App #P-07026
(Windemaker/Stodola)
The following comments on the above referenced Pre-Application Plan should be addressed during
preparation of the Preliminary Plat for this subdivision:
GENERAL:
1. The Preliminary Plat submittal and supplements shall correctly depict the requirements of
Sections 020, 040, 050 and 060 of Chapter 18.78 of the Bozeman Unified Development
Ordinance.
2. All infrastructure plans and specifications shall comply with the current version (including
all addenda) of the City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy and the
City of Bozeman Modifications to Montana Public Works Standard Specifications Fifth
Edition that have been adopted at the time of approval of the plans and specifications.
STORMWATER:
3. A Stormwater Master Plan for the subdivision for a system designed to remove solids, silt,
oils, grease, and other pollutants from the runoff from the private and public streets and all
lots must be provided to and approved by the City Engineer.
The master plan must depict the maximum sized retention/detention basin location, and
locate and provide easements for adequate drainage ways within the subdivision to transport
runoff to the stormwater receiving channel. The plan shall include sufficient site grading and
elevation information (particularly for the basin sites, drainage ways, and lot finished
grades), typical stormwater retention/detention basin and discharge structure details, basin
sizing calculations, and a stormwater maintenance plan.
Any stormwater ponds located within park or open space shall be designed and constructed
so as to be conducive to the normal use and maintenance of the park or open space. Storm
water ponds shall not be located on private lots.
Detailed review of the final grading and drainage plan and approval by the City Engineer
will be required as part of the infrastructure plan and specification review process.
55
Mandeville Subdivision MaSub Pre-App # P-07026 (Windemaker/Stodola)
July 11, 2007
Page 2 of 3
4. The floodplain for Mandeville Creek is to be delineated on the preliminary plat.
5. Stormwater detention/retention ponds may not be located over water and sewer mains.
WATER AND SEWER:
6. The location of and distinction between existing and proposed sewer and water mains and all
easements shall be clearly and accurately depicted, as well as all nearby fire hydrants and
proposed fire hydrants.
7. The Developer's engineer will be required to prepare a comprehensive design report
evaluating existing capacity of water and sewer utilities which must be provided to and
approved by the City Engineer. The report must include hydraulic evaluations of each utility
for both existing and post-development demands. The report findings must demonstrate
adequate capacity to serve the full development. The report must also identify the proposed
phasing of water and sewer construction.
If adequate water and/or sewer capacity is not available for full development, the report must
identify necessary water system and sewer system improvements required for full
development. The Developer will be responsible to complete the necessary system
improvements to serve the full development.
8. Any easements needed for the water and sewer main extensions shall be a minimum of 30
feet in width. In no case shall the utility be less than 10 feet from the edge of the easement.
All necessary easements shall be provided prior to final plat approval and shall be shown on
the plat. Wherever water and/or sewer mains are not located under or accessed from
improved streets, a 12 foot wide all weather access drive shall be constructed above the
utilities to provide necessary access.
STREETS, CURB & GUTTER AND SIDEWALKS:
9. All street names must be approved by the Gallatin County GIS Office and City Engineering
Department prior to preliminary plat and final plat approval.
10. Any public street rights of way which are within the boundaries of this subdivision and for
which easements were provided with the Mandeville Farm Annexation Agreement shall be
dedicated to the City on the Final Plat for this subdivision. The applicant shall also dedicate
any public streets within the development.
11. The applicant shall indicate with the preliminary plat submittal the intended typical section
for all streets and alleys, and include paving details, driving lane widths, on-street parking
accommodations, pedestrian facilities and proposed bike lanes and also provide details
56
Mandeville Subdivision MaSub Pre-App # P-07026 (Windemaker/Stodola)
July 11, 2007
Page 3 of 3
regarding utility location, garbage service, drainage, snow removal and maintenance
responsibilities. Streets within the subdivision shall be City standard width. City Standard
curb, gutter and sidewalk shall be provided along all streets in the subdivision. Detailed
review of the street and intersection design and approval by the City Engineer will be
required as part of the infrastructure plan and specification review process.
12. A detailed Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by a qualified Traffic Engineer registered in the
State of Montana shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. The Traffic
Impact Analysis shall address level of service evaluations for the following intersections:
State Highway 10/Reeves Road and N 7th Ave/Mandeville Lane/ Griffin Drive. The Report
shall include recommendations for any necessary off-site roadway improvements.
MISCELLANEOUS
13. If construction activities related to the project result in the disturbance of more than 1 acre of
natural ground, an erosion/sediment control plan may be required. The Montana Department
of Environmental Quality may need to be contacted by the Applicant to determine if a
Stormwater Discharge Permit is necessary. If a permit is required by the State, the
Developer shall demonstrate to the City full permit compliance.
14. The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, SCS, Montana Department of
Environmental Quality and Army Corps of Engineer's shall be contacted regarding the
proposed project and any required permits (i.e., 310, 404, Turbidity exemption, etc.) shall be
obtained prior to Final Site Plan approval.
cc: Project File
ERF
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
DRAFT
Mandeville Creek Restoration Project
Work Plan for Project Development
DRAFT
Prepared by
Tammy Crone, Water Quality Specialist
Gallatin Local Water Quality District
Prepared for
Mandeville Creek Restoration Work Group
June 2006
Updated May 2007, August 2007
64
DRAFT
i
Table of Contents
Page
List of Tables ii
List of Figures and Photos ii
I.INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Purpose 1
1.3 Work Group Members 1
II.ISSUES OF CONCERN 4
2.1 Urbanization and Stormwater Runoff 4
2.2 Agricultural Uses 4
2.3 Riparian Habitat Degradation and Nutrients 4
2.4 Channelization and Entombment 4
III.EXISTING DATA 5
3.1 Historical 5
3.1.a. Biological 5
3.1.b. Chemical 5
3.1.c. Physical 5
3.1.d. Water Rights 9
3.1.e. Irrigation Ditches and Mapping 9
3.2 Data Needs 11
IV.VISION, GOAL AND OBJECTIVES 11
4.1 Vision 11
4.2 Goal and Objectives 12
V.PROJECT FOCUS AREAS 12
5.1 Headwaters Reach –Rural/Agriculture 12
5.2 MSU Campus Reach –Urban 13
5.3 Bozeman Public Schools Reach –Urban 14
5.4 Mandeville Tract Reach (City of Bozeman and State Trust Land)–15
Undeveloped
5.5 Public Education and Outreach 16
VI.PROJECT SCOPE & IMPLEMENTATION 16
6.1 Headwaters Reach –Rural/Agriculture 16
6.2 MSU Campus Reach –Urban 17
6.3 Bozeman Public School Reach –Urban 17
6.4 Mandeville Tract Reach –(City of Bozeman and State Trust Land)-17
Undeveloped
6.5 Timeline 18
VII.RESOURCE NEEDS FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION 18
VIII.REFERENCES 19
65
DRAFT
ii
List of Tables
Table 3-1. Macroinvertebrate metric results for Mandeville Creek in 2004.5
Table 3-2. Fish species present in the East Gallatin River, Gallatin watershed,6
Montana.
Table 3-3. Rosgen classification and estimated bankful discharge for three cross-6
sections of Mandeville Creek on May 2, 2006.
Table 3-4. Water rights on Mandeville Creek also known as “Unnamed Tributary of 9
East Gallatin River” for T2S R5E S26, S25, S24, S23, S13, S12 and
T1S R5E S36.
Table 3-5. Mandeville Creek data needs.11
Table 6-1. Projected timeline for Mandeville Creek Restoration Project.18
Table 7-1. Potential public and private funding sources for stream restoration projects 18
on Mandeville Creek.
List of Figures and Photos
Figure 1-1. Mandeville Creek, Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana.3
Figure 3-1. Location of cross-sections for Spring 2006 physical assessment of 7
Mandeville Creek.
Figure 3-2. Location of culverts, bridges, entombment and photo points on Mandeville 8
Creek from MSU campus to Durston Road.
Figure 3-3.Irrigation System in the Mandeville Creek area of Gallatin County, Montana.10
Figure 5-1. Upstream reach of Mandeville Creek near headwaters (left) and where 13
rural meets urban (right).
Figure 5-2. Urban impacts to Mandeville Creek on the Montana State University 13
campus.
Figure 5-3. Mandeville Creek at Bozeman High School and Chief Joseph Middle 15
School.
Figure 5-4. Mandeville Creek at City of Bozeman property and Montana DNRC State 15
Lands.
Photo Credits:Photos courtesy of Carol Endicott, Brian Iacona, Jake Niles, Peter Brown,
Leo Rosenthal, Leslie Bahn, Ryan Harnish, Amber Steed, and Tammy Crone.
66
DRAFT
1
I.Introduction
1.1 Background
Mandeville Creek is a tributary to the East Gallatin River and is part of the Gallatin watershed
located in southwest Montana. This spring creek originates south of the City of Bozeman. It
flows in a northerly direction where it enters Bozeman’s urban environment and flows through
the Montana State University (MSU) campus. The stream then flows underground for eight city
blocks before emerging near the Bozeman High School and Chief Joseph Middle School. The
stream continues to flow through Bozeman’s urban setting to Interstate 90. North of Interstate
90 it returns to an open field, agricultural setting before its confluence with the East Gallatin
River. This stream is exposed to both rural and urban pressures affecting its biological integrity
and water quality.
In February 2006, several natural resource professionals initiated discussions on the stormwater
runoff impacts to Bozeman’s small urban streams and their desire to conduct further research
and restoration efforts in this regard. The Gallatin Local Water Quality District (GLWQD)
facilitated a brainstorming session in May with a committed group of local stakeholders and the
Mandeville Creek Restoration Work Group was formed.
1.2 Purpose
The Mandeville Creek Restoration Work Group brainstorming session revealed a great interest
in developing a community-based, comprehensive restoration effort on Mandeville Creek, which
could serve as a model for other urban streams like Bozeman Creek. With Mandeville Creek
flowing through two important centers of learning in Bozeman (MSU and Bozeman High
School/Chief Joseph Middle School), the potential for forming collaborative partnerships with
students, teachers, university researchers, natural resource professionals, and community
members who are interested in restoring the physical and biological integrity of Mandeville
Creek is great. As Bozeman continues to experience development pressures, urban stream
restoration is likely to be a high concern.
Through cooperative and voluntary efforts, the Mandeville Creek Restoration Work Group will
identify and prioritize areas for stream restoration as well as community education opportunities.
Using Mandeville Creek as a model, larger-scale efforts can then be applied toward other urban
streams (i.e.,Catron Creek) and, ultimately, Bozeman Creek.
1.3 Work Group Members
The multi-stakeholder, Mandeville Creek Restoration Work Group participants include:
Leslie Bahn*MSU American Fisheries Society
Jim Bauder MSU Extension –Water Quality Program
Joe Bradshaw Teacher –Chief Joseph Middle School
Peter Brown*MSU Montana Cooperative Fisheries Research Unit
Jeff Butler MSU Facilities Services
Joel Cahoon MSU Civil Engineering
Tammy Crone*Gallatin Local Water Quality District
67
DRAFT
2
Jeff Davis MSU Facilities Services
Carol Endicott*Confluence, Inc.
John Ford*MSU Facilities Services
Kiza Gates*MT Coop. Fishery Research Unit -MSU graduate student
Robin Gerlach MSU Center for Biofilm Engineering
Chris Guy MSU Fish & Wildlife Mngmnt, MT Coop. Fishery Research Unit
Sue Higgins*Montana Water Center
Tom Hughes MT Department of Natural Resources & Conservation
Stuart Jennings*MSU Land Resources & Environmental Sciences
Dustin Johnson*Project Engineer, City of Bozeman
Billie Kerans MSU Ecology –Fish and Wildlife Management
Bill Locke MSU Earth Sciences
Jim Lovell Confluence, Inc.
Brian McGeehan Teacher, Chief Joseph Middle School
Clayton Marlow*MSU Animal and Range Sciences
Frances Moore*Montana Watercourse –Education Outreach Coordinator
Duncan Patten*MSU Land Resources & Environmental Sciences
Tom Pike MSU Facilities Services
Leo Rosenthal*MSU Ecology –graduate student
Denine Schmitz MSU Land Resources & Environmental Sciences –Big Sky Institute
Ted Sedell Montana Watercourse –Water Monitoring Coordinator
Otto Stein MSU Civil Engineering
Sandy Sward MSU Office of Sponsored Programs
Joel Tohtz*Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Karen Williams*MSU Earth Sciences –graduate student
Debbie Zarnt*Montana Watercourse –Community Outreach Coordinator
Laura Ziemer Trout Unlimited Western Water Project, Montana Water Project
*Attended work group brainstorming session
Additional potential partners who may be interested in becoming involved in this effort include:
Gallatin Valley Land Trust
Gallatin County Open Space Board
Bozeman School Board
Gallatin Conservation District
Montana Outdoor Science School (MOSS)
Natural Resource and Conservation Service
Greater Gallatin Watershed Council
MSU President’s Office
MSU Animal Biosciences Building Design Committee
68
DRAFT
3
Figure 1-1. Mandeville Creek, Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana.
Stream layer source: USGS 1:24,000 streams.
69
DRAFT
4
II.Issues of Concern
Preliminary observations of Mandeville Creek by several MSU researchers, Confluence, and the
GLWQD have identified multiple issues of concern.
2.1 Urbanization and Stormwater Runoff
The City of Bozeman continues to grow. With that comes an increase in impervious surfaces
(parking lots, roads, driveways). We are a society ruled by our obsession with the automobile.
Studies from across the country show that 55-75% of impervious surfaces are car habitat
(Cappiella 2001;City of Olympia 1994). Research has also consistently shown that as the
amount of impervious surface increases in a watershed, the health of its streams decreases
(Schueler 1994). Studies in the Milwaukee metropolitan area of southeast Wisconsin have
found that fish and insect communities in warm water streams dramatically decline when
impervious surfaces exceed approximately 8-10% of the watershed. Streams with more than
12% imperviousness have consistently poor fish communities (Wang and others 2000 and
2001). While we can more than likely translate these impacts to stream health from the Midwest
to Southwestern Montana, there is little to no data available for analysis.
Toxic chemicals (automotive petroleum products, pesticides, road salt and deicer)are carried by
precipitation and snowmelt across Bozeman’s impervious surfaces into Mandeville Creek via
storm drains or by direct input. These products can severely impair water quality and aquatic
communities.
Sediment from road sanding and construction sites can smother aquatic vegetation and habitat,
reducing spawning and foraging opportunities.
2.2 Agricultural Uses
Livestock grazing, cropping,and irrigation diversions are most likely the biggest impacts to
Mandeville Creek from the headwaters to the MSU campus, with some historical impacts on the
section between Oak Street and Interstate 90. Since Mandeville Creek is a small tributary
spring creek, grazing has the potential to severely compromise stream bank integrity.
Compound that with irrigation diversions, which lower instream flow, and the fluvial dynamics of
the stream are altered resulting in sedimentation issues.However, the headwaters area of
Mandeville Creek is experiencing an increase in suburban pressure, so livestock use and field
crops are likely to cease in this area within several years. Irrigation use will more than likely
continue for the foreseeable future.
2.3 Riparian Habitat Degradation and Nutrients
Native riparian vegetation is virtually non-existent for the entire length of the stream. The
dominant vegetation appears to be shallow root-binding grasses, such as Kentucky Bluegrass,
creating a homogeneous riparian corridor. This results in unstable stream banks and is
exacerbated by mowing down to the stream edge. Nutrient inputs to the stream may be
excessive with the fertilization and intense horticulture management of lawns and grass areas in
an urban environment.
2.4 Channelization and Entombment
Because of the constraints of an urban environment, there is a lack of stream sinuosity and in
many areas the stream has been channelized (i.e., along Bozeman High and Chief Joseph
Middle School).
70
DRAFT
5
The stream has been piped and flows underground for eight full blocks (College Street to Main
Street). In addition, there are numerous culverts along the length of the stream. These, and
other barriers,may be impacting fish migration. It is also unknown if there are any leaking
sewer lines adjacent to the underground, piped section of the stream that may be affecting
water quality.
III.Existing Data
3.1 Historical
Historically, the majority of stream restoration projects in Montana have been focused on mine
and logging reclamation and impairments from agricultural uses; with only a small effort focused
on urban streams and their associated impairments. In the Gallatin watershed, there are 29
stream segments listed as impaired or lacking sufficient data to assess beneficial uses on the
Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) 303(d) and 305 (b)Lists. There are two
total maximum daily load (TMDL) planning areas in the Gallatin watershed. These include: The
Upper Gallatin and the Lower Gallatin Planning Areas. Mandeville Creek is within the Lower
Gallatin TMDL Planning Area. However, the only urban streams in this planning area listed on
the DEQ 303 (d) Impairment List are Bozeman Creek and the East Gallatin River. Bozeman
Creek listed impairments include nutrients, pathogens and sediment. Impairment listings for the
East Gallatin River are nutrients, sediment and ammonia.No water quality data exists for
Mandeville Creek in DEQ’s Clean Water Act Information Center (CWAIC).
3.1.a.Biological
Confluence, Inc. (Bozeman, MT) conducted periphyton and macroinvertebrate sampling and
analyses on a downstream section of Mandeville Creek (below Oak Street) in 2004. This
biological assessment revealed the stream to be severely compromised at that location.
Periphyton results indicated a low abundance of diatoms and numerous abnormal cells
indicative of stream toxicity. “Weedy” species as well as nutrient-tolerant and siltation-tolerant,
motile diatoms dominated samples. Overall, these results indicate impairment due to toxicity,
excess nutrients, and habitat degradation (Confluence, Inc.).
A comparison of the macroinvertebrate metric analysis with that of a “healthy” stream is shown
in Table 3-1. Overall, macroinvertebrate analysis suggests toxic pollution, high nutrients,
sediment and warm temperatures as impediments to healthy macroinvertebrate populations
(Confluence, Inc).
Table 3-1. Macroinvertebrate metric results for Mandeville Creek in 2004.
Metric Healthy Stream Mandeville Creek
EPT richness > 12 2
Number of taxa > 28 13
Number of sensitive taxa > 3 0
Biotic index < 4 7
% of total possible score ≥ 75%33%
Source:Confluence, Inc.
A review of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks MFISH electronic database indicates there have
been no fish surveys conducted on Mandeville Creek. The MFISH database does contain a
listing of fish species for the East Gallatin River. These are listed in Table 3-2. Note the Arctic
71
DRAFT
6
Grayling has been identified as “rare” (extrapolated based on surveys). Montana Fish, Wildlife
and Parks fish surveys of seven Bozeman area creeks (Thompson, Baker, Bozeman,
Limestone, Bear, Hyalite and Camp) have found the following species: Rainbow Trout, Brook
Trout, Brown Trout, Mottled Sculpin, Longnose Dace, Mountain Whitefish, Longnose Sucker,
and White Sucker.
Table 3-2. Fish species present in the East Gallatin River, Gallatin watershed, Montana.
Species Abundance Native / Non-native
Arctic Grayling Rare Native species of special concern
Brook Trout Rare Introduced
Brown Trout Common Introduced
Longnose Dace Common Native
Longnose Sucker Abundant Native
Mottled Sculpin Common Native
Mountain Sucker Common Native
Mountain Whitefish Common Native
Rainbow Trout Common Introduced
White Sucker Abundant to rare Native
Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout Unknown Native species of special concern
Source: MFISH electronic database, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
3.1.b.Chemical
In 2004,water samples collected by Confluence, Inc.were analyzed for total nitrogen (1.7 mg/L)
and total phosphorus (0.30 mg/L). Fecal coliform sampling revealed 400 colonies/ml. This is
the only known water chemistry data for Mandeville Creek.
3.1.c.Physical
A channel assessment was conducted by Brown, Rosenthal, Bahn, Harnish and Steed
(graduate students from the MSU-American Fisheries Unit) in the spring of 2006 as part of a
fluvial geomorphology class (K. Williams, Instructor). Photo documentation was completed
from south of the MSU campus to just upstream of Interstate 90. Stream discharge, modeling of
estimated bankfull discharge (WinXSPRO), and Rosgen classifications were conducted at three
cross sections (Table 3-3) shown in Figure 3-1.
Table 3-3. Rosgen classification and estimated bankfull discharge for three cross-sections of
Mandeville Creek on May 2, 2006.
Parameter
Cross Section 1
(North of Kagy)
Cross Section 2
(North Hedges –MSU)
Cross Section 3
(North of Oak St)
Measured
discharge 0.22 cfs 0.73 cfs 0.47 cfs
Estimated bankfull
discharge (WinXSPRO)12.73 cfs 6.07 cfs 28.14 cfs
Rosgen
classification C6 E3 E3
The recommendations from this project include: restoring natural processes, allow for increase
in sinuosity, restore historic stream flow, plant native riparian vegetation, and restore native fish
species.
72
DRAFT
7
GPS mapping to identify the location of culverts, roads and entombment lengths for Mandeville
Creek was conducted in Spring 2006 by MSU undergraduate students Iacona and Niles in
LRES 357 (D. Schmitz, Instructor) (Figure 3-2). Centerline mapping of the stream was
conducted every 100 feet. Photos were also taken to document vegetation and riparian
condition. The data is available as GIS shapefiles.This project provides initial baseline data for
future mapping projects on Mandeville Creek. Future students in LRES 357 may build upon this
project. Project maps and photos are on file with the Gallatin Local Water Quality District.
Figure 3-1. Location of cross-sections for Spring 2006 physical assessment of Mandeville Creek.
Map by Peter Brown, Leo Rosenthal, Leslie Bahn, Ryan Harnish and Amber Steed -MSU Graduate Students 2006.
73
DRAFT
8
Figure 3-2. Location of culverts, bridges, entombment and photo points on Mandeville Creek
from MSU campus to Durston Road.
74
DRAFT
9
3.1.d.Water Rights
MSU American Fisheries Unit graduate students (Brown, et al) conducted a search for water
right holdings on Mandeville Creek. This proved difficult, as the stream is not listed by name,
rather as an “Unnamed Tributary of East Gallatin River” and required identifying the rights by
legal description (township, range, and section). The results of their research efforts are listed
in Table 3-4.
Table 3-4. Water rights on Mandeville Creek also known as “Unnamed Tributary of East
Gallatin River” for T2S R5E S26, S25, S24, S23, S13, S12 and T1S R5E S36.
Owner Priority
Date Location Source
Type
Max
Flow
(cfs)
Comments
Shady Lane Ranch
Lp 6/18/1925 T2S R5E S26
NESENE G-HG 0.38 Depends on source location;
by “splitter box”.
Ray Kraft Trust 8/20/1953,
1/31/1921 T2S R5E S26 NE G-HG, DM N/A Depends on source location.
MSU Ag Experiment
Station 6/30/1906 T2S R5E S13
SESWNW S-HG 2.5
Eva A. Kenney 12/30/1963 T1S R5E S12
NESW G-DS 0.02
John Mandeville 12/31/1895 T1S R5E S36
SESESW S-HG 1.88 Could be Manley Ditch
MT Board of Land
Commissioners 6/30/1973 T1S R5E S36
SWSESW S-HG 4.32 Could be after confluence
with Farmer’s Canal
Anita Saunders,
Riverside Acres 12/31/1895 T1S R5E S36
NWNENW S-PM 0.17 Could be before confluence
with Farmer’s Canal
MT Fish, Wildlife and
Parks 9/1/1934 T1S R5E S36
NWSWNE GS-PM 0.35 Could be after confluence
with Farmer’s Canal
Aniko Reeves Trust 5/28/1903 T1S R5E S36
NWNW S-HG 3.75 Could be Jackson-Luce
Ditch
3.1.e Irrigation Ditches and Mapping
There are potential discrepancies in the stream data layers that exist as to where the
headwaters to Mandeville Creek originate.Figure 3-1 shown above,depicts Mandeville Creek
originating from a spring source west of South 19th Avenue on property currently owned by the
First Evangelical Lutheran Church. This is consistent with data from the United States
Geological Survey (USGS).The 1953 Water Resources Survey for Gallatin County, Montana,
shows Mandeville Creek originating from that same location, then there is a disconnect before
showing the stream channel again on the east side of South 19th Avenue (Figure 3-3).
Middle Creek Ditch originates south of Mandeville Creek. There are several laterals to the
Middle Creek Ditch that bisect Mandeville Creek with at least one lateral appearing to provide
return flow to the stream further north. See Figure 3-3.
75
DRAFT
10
Figure 3-3.Irrigation System in the Mandeville Creek area of Gallatin County, Montana.
Source: Water Resources Survey, Gallatin County, MT, January 1953.
Mandeville Creek
headwaters (blue lines)
76
DRAFT
11
3.2 Data Needs
Limited data exists for Mandeville Creek. What data does exist indicates the stream is probably
experiencing impacts from increased urbanization. There is an obvious need for further
physical, chemical and biological data collection and analysis efforts on Mandeville Creek from
the headwaters to the confluence with the East Gallatin River (Table 3-5). This information is
needed as a critical first step to restore water quality, biological integrity and overall stream
health.
Table 3-5. Mandeville Creek data needs
Physical Chemical Biological
riparian habitat assessment inorganics macroinvertebrates
stream channel analysis
(sediment loading,etc.)metals (dissolved, total recoverable)periphyton
stormwater discharge sites
(point sources)nutrients fish (see below)
Fish.In April 2007, members of the MSU-AFS Chapter conducted a fish survey on Mandeville
Creek with the following results:
Headwaters Reach –In a 100-meter stretch along South 19th Avenue, 14 brook trout were
collected.No fish were collected in a 100-meter stretch north of Kagy Boulevard.
MSU Campus Reach –No fish were found on the MSU campus reach. However, because the
streambank is deeply undercut in many areas,it is possible fish may be present but were
unable to be collected because of their locations in the undercut bank areas.
Bozeman Public Schools Reach –Two white suckers and two longnose dace were collected in
a 100-meter stretch in front of Chief Joseph Middle School.
Mandeville Tract Reach –Two longnose dace were collected in a 500-meter stretch south of
Frontage Road.
This survey provides good baseline information. And it is suggested that fish surveys continue
as restoration projects are implemented on the stream.
IV.Vision, Goal and Objectives
4.1 Vision
The vision for Mandeville Creek is to have a fully functioning stream with compatible land uses,
sufficient water supply for beneficial uses,and where stream habitat and water quality are
protected and enhanced.
77
DRAFT
12
4.2 Goal and Objectives
Goal: Restore Mandeville Creek to a form and function that allows for aesthetic,
hydrologic and biological function characteristic of an alluvial valley spring creek.
Objective 1: Eliminate, mitigate, remove or exclude pollution discharges to Mandeville Creek
including sediment loading from parking lots, nutrient loading from fertilizer and septic sources,
and trace levels of organic compounds.
Objective 2: Restore hydrologic function by providing a channel and floodplain appropriate for
maintaining geomorphic integrity and protecting urban infrastructure.
Objective 3: Restore native vegetation to provide stream stabilization, water temperature
control, songbird habitat and as a vegetation buffer to filter adjacent inputs to the creek.
Objective 4: Improve aesthetics and recreational opportunities along Mandeville Creek.
Objective 5: Construct amenities allowing for public appreciation and conservation of
Mandeville Creek with connectivity to City streets and area trails.
Objective 6: Provide information and educational capacity to improve watershed and water
quality understanding and opportunities for community involvement in stream restoration.
V.Project Focus Areas
5.1 Headwaters Reach –Rural
Restoring the headwaters reach is key to the overall success of restoration efforts on
successive downstream reaches. Working with the local landowners, state and county
agencies could provide technical and financial assistance to implement best management
practices and other simple on-the-ground projects to improve water quality in this reach.
Projects here could be done relatively quickly and is an ideal place to begin implementing
restoration efforts.
It is imperative that discrepancies in the true location of the stream channel headwaters be
rectified prior to implementation of any stream restoration project. In addition, work must be
done in cooperation with the agricultural irrigators to insure their water rights are protected.
This area is rapidly urbanizing with multiple subdivision projects in the preliminary plat stages
(City of Bozeman, 2007). Efforts to initiate stream restoration could be conducted in conjunction
with development projects.
Potential Partners:Gallatin Conservation District, Natural Resource and Conservation
Service, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Montana Fish, Wildlife
and Parks, Association of Gallatin Agricultural Irrigators, City of Bozeman.
78
DRAFT
13
Figure 5-1. Upstream reach of Mandeville Creek near headwaters (left) and where
rural meets urban (right).
5.2 MSU Campus Reach –Urban
This portion of the restoration of Mandeville Creek could provide a national example of how a
university can restore stream health while creating an aesthetically pleasing and healthy stream
through an urban setting.
The opportunity exists here to tap into the expertise of multiple scientific experts in riparian
ecology, aquatic biota, wetlands, land rehabilitation, water chemistry, and others to develop a
multi-disciplinary restoration effort on the portion of Mandeville Creek that flows through MSU
campus.
A new Animal Bioscience Complex is scheduled to be constructed across 11th Avenue near the
Plant Science and Plant Growth Center and will span both sides of Mandeville Creek. Two
buildings will anchor the complex;one building will house the USDA-ARS Research Facility and
the other will be a teaching/outreach facility for MSU College of Agriculture. The Mandeville
Creek Restoration Work Group needs to move quickly to establish sufficient critical mass and
participate in design discussions of this large construction project at MSU.
Figure 5-2. Urban impacts to Mandeville Creek on the Montana State University campus.
79
DRAFT
14
The Plant Growth Center to College Avenue reach of Mandeville Creek is a good candidate for
a pilot project. Additional work at MSU includes an immediate need to map and mitigate direct
parking lot and other storm drain discharges to the stream. This may be a good partnership
between MSU Facilities Services, the City of Bozeman, and one or more academic instructors
using the stream as a basis for student learning through hands-on project work.
This reach can be broken down into several interest groups and tasks:
Clayton Marlow (riparian class)
Duncan Patten (NSF proposal)
Otto Stein (treatment wetlands)
Joel Cahoon (stream hydraulics)
Earth Science Graduate Students/Karen Williams (fluvial geomorphology)
John Ford (Facilities Services)
Kiza Gates/Peter Brown (MSU American Fisheries Society/MT Cooperative Fishery
Research Unit)
Restoring Mandeville Creek through MSU campus could reduce MSU Facilities Services
maintenance costs (reduce mowing, fertilizer and herbicide application reduction), provide
educational opportunities for the community (as well as existing and prospective students and
their families) by erecting signage and information kiosks on the merits of the project as well as
stream restoration.
Potential Partners:MSU Researchers and associated undergraduate and graduate students,
MSU Facilities Services, U.S. Department of Agriculture-ARS, MSU College of Agriculture, MSU
President’s Office, MSU American Fisheries Society/Montana Cooperative Fishery Research
Unit, MT Fish Wildlife and Parks, Montana Watercourse,City of Bozeman, Gallatin Local Water
Quality District, Greater Gallatin Watershed Council, Gallatin Valley Land Trust.
Updates –August 2007:
The MSU Tomorrow Plan, which will consist of long-term plans for how the MSU campus will
look in the future has incorporated Mandeville Creek as a featured amenity.
Joel Cahoon, Associate Professor in the Department of Civil Engineering at MSU
communicated that the MSU BREN Student Club will be monitoring flows at the MSU
property boundaries and are working on creating a web site to post the information.
Students in Dr. Cahoon’s Open Channel Hydraulics class (Fall 2007) and Dr. Otto Stein’s
students in his Wetlands and Hydrology courses (Spring 2008) will be using Mandeville
Creek as the centerpiece for several design projects.This will help to build a working
database for the stream system.
5.3 Bozeman Public Schools Reach –Urban
Restoration efforts in this reach could be multi-faceted. Involving Bozeman High School
teachers and their students from the beginning is crucial. The stream is a virtual natural
laboratory right outside their door. Students could develop mentoring relationships with MSU
graduate and undergraduate students working on stream restoration components. They could
also assist professional scientists and researchers with data collection efforts before, during and
after the restoration process. Ideally, the teachers could be trained in appropriate monitoring
techniques and incorporate monitoring into their classroom activities. This could provide long-
term data collection at this site that would be beneficial in determining long-term stream
restoration success.
80
DRAFT
15
Figure 5-3. Mandeville Creek at Bozeman High School and Chief Joseph Middle School.
The Bozeman School District is planning a high school building remodel and expansion at this
site. Partnering early with the Bozeman School Board is crucial to incorporating the stream into
their site plan and ensuring future restoration efforts will be successful. Mandeville Creek
should be an amenity to the school design.
Potential Partners:Bozeman High School teachers and their students, Bozeman Public
School Board, Montana Watercourse, Montana Outdoor Science School, City of Bozeman,
Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks, Gallatin Local Water Quality District, Greater Gallatin
Watershed Council, Gallatin Valley Land Trust.
5.4 Mandeville Tract Reach (City of Bozeman and State Trust Land)–Undeveloped
Known as the Mandeville Farm, this tract of land has historically been farmed and ranched.
Recently, the property was purchased by the City of Bozeman. Adjacent to this tract is an
undeveloped tract of State Land owned by the Montana Department of Natural Resources and
Conservation (DNRC). Both the City and DNRC have plans to develop this land into a
commercial technology park. Restoration of Mandeville Creek and associated wetlands through
this reach could serve as a model for successful stream restoration prior to planned
development and encourage development activities to incorporate the natural resource into their
plans without altering it.
Figure 5-4. Mandeville Creek on City of Bozeman property and Montana DNRC State Trust Lands properties.
Efforts are already underway to implement stream and wetland restoration on this reach by the
Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (personal communication,Tom
Hughes). Some delineation and ground-truthing work have already been conducted and
peizometers have been installed at various locations to monitor local hydrology. Plans include
restoring native vegetation and meanders as well as wetland enhancement. Preliminary
observations point to severe sedimentation load problems on this reach.For restoration efforts
81
DRAFT
16
to be successful here, identification of sediment sources upstream and implementation of
sediment reduction will need to occur on the upstream reaches of Mandeville Creek.
Potential Partners:Montana Department of Natural Resources, City of Bozeman, Montana
Fish Wildlife and Parks, Gallatin Conservation District, Gallatin Local Water Quality District,
Greater Gallatin Watershed Council, Gallatin Valley Land Trust.
Updates April 2007:
DNRC, City of Bozeman Forestry Division and GLWQD organized a willow planting on this
stream segment. Volunteers, including Longfellow School students, planted sandbar willows.
5.5 Public Education and Outreach
Raising public awareness and incorporating opportunities for public education are key to each
individual activity as well as the overall success of the entire stream restoration effort and will be
incorporated into every facet of this project. The Montana Watercourse has the capabilities and
expertise to assist with developing and implementing a community-wide education campaign.
They can also assist with development of publications and media communications.
Any successful stream restoration project needs to incorporate monitoring to gage success of
restoration efforts. Volunteer water quality monitoring is a great way to build community
stewardship, raise the level of knowledge on stream health, and connect individuals to their
community creating a sense of place. Volunteer monitors could include: teachers and their
students, community members, etc.). The Montana Watercourse can provide Volunteer Water
Quality Monitoring Training to these audiences to achieve this goal.
Potential Partners:Montana Watercourse, Montana Outdoor Science School, Gallatin Local
Water Quality District, Montana Water Center, Greater Gallatin Watershed Council, MSU
American Fisheries Society, City of Bozeman.
VI.Project Scope & Implementation
The overall scope of this project is the stream restoration of Mandeville Creek from the
headwaters to the East Gallatin River confluence. Project implementation remains dependent
upon acquiring sufficient funding. For each project reach area described above, a listing of
potential tasks is provided below.
6.1 Headwaters Reach –Rural/Agriculture
Potential Tasks:
Identify landowners with Mandeville Creek flowing through their property
Conduct fish and habitat survey pre-restoration
Conduct macroinvertebrate and periphyton study pre-restoration
Collect water quality baseline samples pre-restoration
Conduct riparian habitat and stream channel surveys
GPS project sites/identify project areas for restoration
Implement appropriate BMPs
Conduct post-restoration monitoring
Immediate Needs:
Identify willing landowner participants
Conduct baseline data collection of pre-restoration conditions
82
DRAFT
17
6.2 MSU Campus Reach –Urban
Potential Tasks:
Conduct macroinvertebrate, periphyton and fish survey study of pre-restoration
conditions
Water quality sampling of pre-restoration conditions
Mapping of storm sewer connections
Identification of point sources for sedimentation.
Identification of Animal Biosciences Building Design Committee members
Presentation of Mandeville Creek Restoration Project to Building Design Committee
Geomorphology study
Detailed topographic survey
Immediate Needs:
Identify multiple interested MSU collaborators and multiple distinct tasks
Develop schedule with student data collection to begin as early as summer of 2006
MSU students trained in macroinvertebrate collections (or other tasks) teach the high
school students how to do the same work on the reach along the high school.
6.3 Bozeman Public School Reach –Urban
Potential Tasks:
Contact and work with interested teachers.
Develop student participation and monitoring programs with interested teachers –
coordinate with MSU students for mentoring opportunities
Presentation of Mandeville Creek Restoration Project to Bozeman Public School Board.
Geomorphology study
Detailed topographic survey
Mapping of storm sewer connections
Water quality sampling pre-restoration conditions
Macroinvertebrate study pre-restoration conditions
Identify point sources of sedimentation
Immediate Needs:
Collect baseline data for pre-restoration (water quality, macroinvertebrates, periphyton)
Contact teachers to identify interest.
6.4 Mandeville Tract Reach (City of Bozeman and State Trust Land)–Undeveloped
Potential Tasks:
Conduct macroinvertebrate and periphyton study of pre-restoration conditions
Water quality sampling of pre-restoration conditions
Identification of point sources for sedimentation
Geomorphology study
Detailed topographic survey
Immediate Needs:
Collect baseline data for pre-restoration (water quality, macroinvertebrates, periphyton,
geomorphology study, etc.)
Identify upstream sedimentation sources
83
DRAFT
18
6.5 Timeline
It is difficult to determine the overall restoration project timeline without knowing details about
restoration activities identified for each project area reach.Ideally, baseline data collection
efforts should begin as soon as possible.
Table 6-1. Projected timeline for Mandeville Creek Restoration Project.
Activity 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Identify Work Group Partners
Develop Work Plan for Project Development
Collect Baseline Data Pre-restoration
Conduct restoration activities on all four project area
reaches
Public Education and Community Awareness
Post-restoration Data Collection
VII.Resource Needs for Project Implementation
To capitalize on project financing, the Mandeville Creek Restoration Work Group will need to
identify funding opportunities and communicate these to the Work Group partners so specific
project development and grant writing can take place. In-kind services and match will be
necessary for any funding. Success in obtaining grant funding will be partially dependent upon
the level of in-kind match and services Work Group partners can provide as well as the diversity
and number of stakeholders involved in the project.
Funding will be needed for baseline data collection and analysis, on-the-ground restoration
activities and best management practices implementation, post-project monitoring and data
collection, and public education and awareness.
A partial list of potential public and private funding sources is provided below and is meant to
serve as a starting point for identifying grant opportunities.
Table 7-1. Potential funding sources for stream restoration projects on Mandeville Creek.
Grant Program Application
Deadline
Funding
Source
Web Site/ Contact Brief Description
319 Program Fall 2007 DEQ www.deq.mt.gov
Robin Rung Nonpoint source pollution
Ed Mini-Grants 2 x/year DEQ www.deq.mt.gov
Andrew Jakes
Nonpoint source issues, workshops, ed
materials, outreach activities
Environmental
grants July 31st PPL Montana www.pplmontana.com
Lisa Perry
Natural resources, environmental
education, watershed groups
Future Fisheries ??FWP www.fwp.mt.gov Stream habitat improvement
??EPA www.epa.gov
EQIP ??NRCS
84
DRAFT
19
VIII.References
Cappiella, K. and K. Brown. 2001. Land Use and Impervious Cover in the Chesapeake Bay
Region.Watershed Protection Techniques,3(4): 835-840.
City of Olympia, 1994. Impervious Surface Reduction Study: Technical and Policy Analysis –
Final Report. Public Works Department, Olympia, Washington. 83 pp.
Schueler, T.R. 1992. Mitigating the Adverse Impacts of Urbanization on Streams: A
Comprehensive Strategy for Local Government. In Watershed Restoration Sourcebook.
Publication #92701 of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, edited by P.
Kumble and T. Schueler.
Wang, L., J. Lyons, P. Kanehl, R. Bannerman, and E. Emmons 2000. Watershed Urbanization
and Changes in Fish Communities in Southeastern Wisconsin Streams.Journal of the
American Water Resources Association.36(5): 1173-1187.
Wang, L., J. Lyons, and P. Kanehl 2001. Impacts of Urbanization on Stream Habitat and Fish
Across Multiple Spatial Scales.Environmental Management. 28(2):255-266.
Water Resources Survey, Gallatin County, Montana. State Engineer’s Office, Helena, Montana.
January 1953 (reprint as of June 1961).
85