HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocuments 10-4-22 Site Plan ApplicationGallatin County Regional Park
Aquatic Delineation Report
Prepared For:
Allied Engineering Services, Inc
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Prepared By:
PO Box 1424
Bozeman, MT 59771
406.539.7244
briana@sundogeco.com
August 24, 2022
Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1
Site Description ......................................................................................................................................... 1
Methods .................................................................................................................................................... 2
Results ........................................................................................................................................................... 2
Vegetation ................................................................................................................................................. 3
Delineated Wetlands ................................................................................................................................ 3
Soils ........................................................................................................................................................... 4
Hydrology .................................................................................................................................................. 4
Water Bodies ............................................................................................................................................. 4
Uplands ..................................................................................................................................................... 4
Threatened and Endangered Species ........................................................................................................... 4
Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 4
References .................................................................................................................................................... 6
List of Figures and Tables
Figure 1: Location of the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site relative to Oak Street, Baxter
Lane, Ferguson Lane and Davis Lane in Bozeman, Montana. ....................................................................... 1
Table 1: List of plant species observed at the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site. .................. 3
Table 2: Wetland characteristics identified at the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site. ........... 3
Appendices
Appendix A – Project Area Maps
Appendix B – Wetland Delineation Map
Appendix C – Wetland Determination Data Forms
Appendix D – Site Photographs
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 1
Introduction
A routine wetland delineation and investigation of waters of the U.S. was conducted by Sundog
Ecological Inc on July 21st, 2022, for Allied Engineering Services, Inc. on behalf of Gallatin County. This
delineation was conducted as part of due diligence for construction of a maintenance building on site.
The purpose of this wetland delineation was to investigate the project area, identify areas meeting the
technical guidelines for wetlands, delineate the extent of wetlands within the project area and classify
these wetland habitats. This report describes the methodologies used, summarizes results of the
wetland investigations, and provides technical documentation for all delineated wetlands and
watercourses within the project area. Figures referred to in text are included in Appendices at the end
of the report.
Site Description
The Gallatin County Regional Park wetland delineation site is located in the northeast quarter of Section
3, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, in Bozeman, Montana. Upland communities are dominated by
smooth brome and balsam poplar bordering an irrigation ditch. Wetlands communities are dominated
by watercress, mint and Baltic rush. One wetland and one upland were identified within project
boundaries.
Figure 1: Location of the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site relative to Oak Street, Baxter Lane, Ferguson Lane
and Davis Lane in Bozeman, Montana.
Directions to site: From Main Street, head west following US-191 towards Four Corners. Turn right on to
North 19th Avenue, following for 1.9 miles. Turn left onto Oak Street. Continue on Oak Street for 1 mile
turning Right onto Davis Lane. Follow Davis Lane for 0.2 mile, turning left onto Vaquero Parkway. The
Dinosaur Park and Gallatin County Maintenance Building site are on the left.
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 2
Methods
This wetland delineation was conducted using a routine on-site-approach in accordance with standard
practices outlined in the 1987 Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Wetland Delineation Manual
(Environmental Laboratory 1987) and by Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 (ACOE 2010). The study
evaluated the presence or absence of indicators of three wetlands parameters described in the ACOE
Wetland Delineation Manual. Under the delineation procedures outlined in these manuals, an area
must exhibit characteristic wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and hydrophytic vegetation to be considered
a wetland. If field investigation determines that any of the three parameters are not satisfied, the area
does not usually qualify as a wetland. Wetlands were classified according to the Cowardin classification
system (Cowardin et al., 1979). Non-wetland water bodies such as streams were classified according to
flow regime (perennial, seasonal, etc.) and substrate (rock bottom, unconsolidated bottom, etc.)
according to the Cowardin system (Cowardin et al., 1979).
Prior to conducting field studies, available background and supplementary reference materials were
reviewed, including aerial photographs and maps from: Google Earth Pro, National Wetlands Inventory,
Montana Natural Heritage Program, the Gallatin County Soil Survey, Web Soil Survey, the National
Wetlands Plant List and plat and topographic maps. Site maps used for assessment of the Gallatin
County Regional Park wetland delineation site are included in Appendix A.
As part of a delineation report, data forms and technical information are required by the ACOE to
document three parameters for any area determined to be wetland. A total of two data points were
observed. Wetland boundaries were drawn utilizing field data, aerial photographs and topographic
boundaries. Data forms for sample locations are provided in Appendix B. Representative photographs
of sample locations and delineated wetlands are provided in Appendix C.
Results
The following discussion provides an overview of each of three wetland components inventoried at the
Gallatin County Regional Park wetland delineation site. In July 2022, one wetland area was identified
and delineated within the project boundaries. All potential areas of impact were assessed for dominant
hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and evidence of wetland hydrology. Wetland areas outside of the
project limits were not assessed. Overall, two data points (1 wetland, 1 upland) were investigated to
determine the wetland/upland boundary within the project area. Data points were placed in and along
the wetland/upland boundary.
One wetland type was identified within the project boundaries in immediate proximity to Spring Ditch.
The location of identified wetlands and upland/wetland sample points are shown on Exhibit 1, Appendix
B. Data forms for sample locations can be found in Appendix C and photographs of sample locations in
Appendix D.
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 3
Vegetation
Approximately eleven (11) plant species were identified at data point locations at the Gallatin County
Regional Park delineation site (Table 1). Plants observed at these locations are listed on their respective
wetland data forms located in Appendix C. One Montana state listed noxious weeds was observed on
site. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) is considered a priority 2B noxious weed and a management plan
should be developed and implemented to curtail its spread.
Table 1: List of plant species observed at the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site.
Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Type 1 represents a palustrine emergent wetland community dominated by mint, watercress,
balsam poplar and Baltic rush. All observed wetlands were associated with the fringes of a seasonal
irrigation ditch (Spring Ditch) which originates from the Farmers Canal. The total amount of palustrine
emergent wetland identified on site was 0.031 acres.
Table 2: Wetland characteristics identified at the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site.
Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status
Bromus inermis smooth brome UPL
Carex vulpoides common fix sedge OBL
Cirsium arvense Canada thistle FAC
Juncus balticus Baltic rush FACW
Mentha arvensis wild mint FACW
Nasturium officinale Watercress OBL
Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass FAC
Populus balsamifera balsam poplar FAC
Rumex crispus curly dock FAC
Sonchus arvensis Field sow-thislte FACU
Veronica anagallis-aquatica blue water spedwell OBL
Site General Location Cowardin Class Primary Hydrology Dominant Vegetation
Upland throughout project area none none smooth brome, balsam poplar
Wetland Type
1 irrigation ditch fringes palustrine
emergent surface water mint, watercress, balsam
poplar, Baltic rush
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 4
Soils
One soil map unit was observed within the project limits of the Gallatin County Regional Park Sierra Vista
wetland delineation site. Based on soil descriptions, the Meadowcreek loam 0-4% slopes, is typically
found along stream terraces and alluvial fans and are common throughout the Gallatin Valley. Observed
wetland soils were silt loams in texture with matrix hues of 10YR, matrix values of 3 to 4 and matrix chroma
of 2 or less. Redox concentrations were observed throughout wetland soils within the project boundaries.
Hydric soil indicators were depleted matrix (F3). Detailed soil descriptions for wetland and upland sample
locations are provided on wetland delineation data forms and can be found in Appendix C.
Hydrology
Primary indicators of wetland hydrology observed were soil saturation (A3), (see completed data forms in
Appendix B). The secondary indicators of geomorphic position (D2) and Positive FAC-neutral test (D5)
were also observed on site.
Water Bodies
The Spring Ditch is the primary driver of hydrology on site. The irrigation ditch varies in width from
three to seven (3 to 7) feet wide and one to two feet (1 to23) feet deep. This ditch originates from the
Farmers Canal (originating at the Gallatin River) and is controlled via headgate. The ditch is used
seasonally, generally open during the irrigation season and flows from south to north across the
property.
Uplands
One upland sample point (paired with one wetland sample point) was documented within the project
area and is shown on accompanying project/site maps (Appendix B). Sample points were used to assist
in establishing wetland boundaries and to determine/verify upland-wetland boundaries. Vegetation
within the uplands was dominated by smooth brome and balsam poplar. Soils were a very dark greyish
brown (10YR 3/2) and lacking redox concentrations. Textures were silt loam to large cobbles, with some
mixing (likely from ditch cleaning) and similar to descriptions found in NRCS Soil Survey information
provided in Appendix A.
Threatened and Endangered Species
A review of USFWS Information, Planning and Consultation database for the site listed the Canada Lynx
North American wolverine and grizzly bear as threatened and endangered species in the area. Monarch
Butterfly is also listed but considered a Candidate species. Construction of a maintenance building at
the Gallatin County Regional Park is not expected to impact either of these species as there are no
critical habitats for them within the project area.
Summary
This Wetland Delineation Report for the Gallatin County Regional Park provides baseline information
that will assist in developing practices to minimize wetland impacts during the site infrastructure and
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 5
development process. One wetland and one upland type were identified within the project boundary.
Wetland components total 1,354 square feet, or 0.031 acres. 3,707 square feet, or 0.085 acres, an
additional 537 square feet, or 0.012 acres would be impacted outside of the project area (totaling 0.09
acres). Wetland areas were limited to a narrow fringe bordering Spring Ditch. Identified wetlands were
classified as palustrine emergent wetlands.
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 6
References
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water
habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S.D.I Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington D.C.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. Washington, DC.
Lichvar, R.W., M. Butterwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. The National Wetland Plant List.
2014 Update of Wetland Ratings. Phytoneuron 2014-41:1-42.
Reed, P.B. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). Biological
Report 88(26.9), May 1988. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S.
Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer
Research and Development Center
Websites
Montana Natural Heritage Program website. Accessed in August 2022 at http://mtnhp.org/mapviewer
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey. Gallatin County, Montana. Accessed
August 2022 at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory website. Accessed August 2022 at:
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html.
US Fish & Wildlife Service. Information for Planning and Conservation. Accessed August 2022 at:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
Appendix A
Aerial Overview of Gallatin County Regional Park
Topographic Overview of Gallatin County Regional Park
National Wetland Inventory – Mapped Wetlands at Gallatin County Regional Park
Soils of Gallatin County at Gallatin County Regional Park
Gallatin County Regional Park
3000 ft
N➤➤N
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetlands
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team,wetlands_team@fws.gov
Wetlands
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Other
Riverine
August 23, 2022
0 0.1 0.20.05 mi
0 0.2 0.40.1 km
1:7,523
This page was produced by the NWI mapperNational Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site.
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Gallatin County
Area, MontanaNatural
Resources
Conservation
Service
August 4, 2022
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
Soil Map..................................................................................................................8
Soil Map................................................................................................................9
Legend................................................................................................................10
Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11
Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11
Gallatin County Area, Montana.......................................................................13
53B—Amsterdam silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes......................................13
510B—Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes......................................14
References............................................................................................................16
4
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
Custom Soil Resource Report
6
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
Custom Soil Resource Report
7
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
8
9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
50601905060200506021050602205060230506024050602505060260506027050602805060290506030050603105060190506020050602105060220506023050602405060250506026050602705060280506029050603005060310493290 493300 493310 493320 493330 493340 493350 493360 493370 493380
493290 493300 493310 493320 493330 493340 493350 493360 493370 493380
45° 41' 46'' N 111° 5' 10'' W45° 41' 46'' N111° 5' 6'' W45° 41' 42'' N
111° 5' 10'' W45° 41' 42'' N
111° 5' 6'' WN
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84
0 30 60 120 180
Feet
0 5 10 20 30
Meters
Map Scale: 1:638 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana
Survey Area Data: Version 25, Sep 2, 2021
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 3, 2009—Sep 1,
2016
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
10
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
53B Amsterdam silt loam, 0 to 4
percent slopes
0.3 21.1%
510B Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4
percent slopes
1.1 78.9%
Totals for Area of Interest 1.4 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
Custom Soil Resource Report
11
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Custom Soil Resource Report
12
Gallatin County Area, Montana
53B—Amsterdam silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 56ws
Elevation: 4,400 to 5,550 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Amsterdam and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Amsterdam
Setting
Landform:Stream terraces
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Loess
Typical profile
A - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam
Bw - 8 to 15 inches: silt loam
Bk - 15 to 42 inches: silt loam
2C - 42 to 60 inches: very fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 4 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high (0.20
to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:35 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R044BB032MT - Loamy (Lo) LRU 01 Subset B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Blackdog
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Stream terraces
Custom Soil Resource Report
13
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS355MT - Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: No
Quagle
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Stream terraces
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS357MT - Limy (Ly) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: No
Bowery
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Landform:Stream terraces, alluvial fans
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS355MT - Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: No
Meagher
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Landform:Stream terraces, alluvial fans
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS355MT - Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: No
510B—Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 56vt
Elevation: 4,200 to 5,950 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Meadowcreek and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Meadowcreek
Setting
Landform:Stream terraces
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Alluvium
Custom Soil Resource Report
14
Typical profile
A - 0 to 11 inches: loam
Bg - 11 to 25 inches: silt loam
2C - 25 to 60 inches: very gravelly sand
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 4 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Somewhat poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table:About 24 to 42 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R044BP815MT - Subirrigated Grassland
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Blossberg
Percent of map unit:10 percent
Landform:Terraces
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS365MT - Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Beaverton
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Stream terraces, alluvial fans
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS354MT - Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
15
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
16
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf
Custom Soil Resource Report
17
Appendix B
Exhibit 1 – Mapped Wetland Boundary of Gallatin County Regional Park
Appendix C
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Determination Data Forms
2 -
3 -
4 -
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is > 50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 1
1
1
Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
1
1
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrologic Vegetation
DP 1w
0.0 0.0
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
15
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
30
10
10
5
5
5
5
3
0
0
0
0
20
Yes No
Healthy plant communiy along shallow, slow moving ditch water.
4######FAC
0.0%
50.0%
0.0%
80.0%15
######FAC
0.0%
0.0%15 15
0.0%40 80
0.0%28 84
10 405
0 0
41.1%FACW 93 21913.7%FACU
2.35513.7%FACW
6.8%OBL
6.8%OBL
6.8%FAC
6.8%OBL
4.1%FAC
0.0%
0.0%
73
0.0%
0.0%
0
, or Hydrology
Prevalence Index = B/A =
1.
2.
3.
4.
(A/B)
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Applicant/Owner:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Sampling Date:
Lat.:Long.:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
1.
2.
Remarks:
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Are Vegetation
(B)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Soil Map Unit Name:
Datum:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
NWI classification:
Remarks:
Tree Stratum
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
R
Absolute% Cover
Are Vegetation
Section, Township, Range: S
significantly disturbed?
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
naturally problematic?
Slope:
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
, Soil
Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
% /
, Soil
Hydric Soil Present?
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Subregion (LRR):
Indicator
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
HydrophyticVegetationPresent?
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Dominance Test worksheet:
City/County:
Percent of dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
State:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
, or Hydrology
DominantSpecies?
Rel.Strat.Cover
Wetland data point along ditch fringe.
0 0.0%
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
21-Jul-22Gallatin County Maintenance Building Bozeman / Gallatin
Gallatin County MT
5 E2 S3B Schultz
Ditch concave
NAV88-111.085358445.6957304LRR E
Meadowcreek loam , 0 to 4% slopes none
Populus balsamifera
Populus balsamifera
Mentha arvensis
Sonchus arvensis
Juncus balticus
Nasturtium officinale
Carex vulpinoidea
Poa pratensis
Veronica anagallis-aquatica
Rumex crispus
(Plot size:30 ft.
(Plot size:15 ft.
(Plot size:5 ft.
(Plot size:
)
)
)
)
VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants.
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers
Good mottles at 5 inches within very organic and rooty soil profile.
DP 1w
3
0
Soil saturated to surface with ground water observed at 3 inches.
Soil Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except in MLRA 1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox depressions (F8)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydrology
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Salt Crust (B11)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Frost Heave Hummocks (D7)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
3
3
1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
organic and very rooty
very rooty and organic with sand
grey with brigth redox
1
0-2
2-5
5-12
10YR
10YR
10YR
2/1
3/1
4/1
100
100
90 10YR 5/4 10 C M Silt Loam
Silt Loam
Silt Loam
2 -
3 -
4 -
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is > 50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 1
1
1
Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
1
1
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrologic Vegetation
DP-1u
0.0 0.0
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
35
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
55
30
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
Yes No
Mixed grasses with tree overstroy.
3######FAC
0.0%
40.0%
0.0%
75.0%35
######FAC
0.0%
0.0%0 0
0.0%0 0
0.0%73 219
1 45
55 275
61.8%UPL 129 49833.7%FAC
3.8603.4%FAC
1.1%FACU
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
89
0.0%
0.0%
0
, or Hydrology
Prevalence Index = B/A =
1.
2.
3.
4.
(A/B)
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Applicant/Owner:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Sampling Date:
Lat.:Long.:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
1.
2.
Remarks:
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Are Vegetation
(B)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Soil Map Unit Name:
Datum:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
NWI classification:
Remarks:
Tree Stratum
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
R
Absolute% Cover
Are Vegetation
Section, Township, Range: S
significantly disturbed?
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
naturally problematic?
Slope:
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
, Soil
Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
% /
, Soil
Hydric Soil Present?
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Subregion (LRR):
Indicator
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
HydrophyticVegetationPresent?
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Dominance Test worksheet:
City/County:
Percent of dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
State:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
, or Hydrology
DominantSpecies?
Rel.Strat.Cover
Data point approximately 5 feet above wetland data point.
0 0.0%
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
21-Jul-22Gallatin County Maintenance Building Bozeman / Gallatin
Gallatin County MT
5 E2 S3B Schultz
Terrace none
NW 83 -111.085414945.6957487LRR E
Meadowcreek loam , 0 to 4% slopes none
Populus balsamifera
Populus balsamifera
Bromus inermis
Poa pratensis
Cirsium arvense
Lactuca serriola
(Plot size:30 ft.
(Plot size:15 ft.
(Plot size:5 ft.
(Plot size:
)
)
)
)
VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants.
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers
Large cobble, likely from ditch maintenance. No hydirc soil indicators were observed at this sample location.
DP-1u
No wetland hydrology indicators were observed at this sample location.
Soil Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except in MLRA 1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox depressions (F8)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydrology
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Salt Crust (B11)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Frost Heave Hummocks (D7)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
3
3
1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
very dry
very dry
large cobble
1
0-4
4-6
6+
10YR
10YR
3/2
4/1
100
100 Silt Loam
Silt Loam
Appendix D
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Site Photographs
Gallatin County Regional Park Maintenance Building Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 1
Data Point 1
Data Point 1 and 2
Existing Conditions 1
Gallatin County Regional Park Maintenance Building Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 2
Existing Conditions 2
Existing Conditions 3
1
Madeline Good
From:Brian Heaston <bheaston@BOZEMAN.NET>
Sent:Thursday, September 1, 2022 2:37 PM
To:Madeline Good
Cc:Griffin Nielsen
Subject:RE: Regional Park Maintenance Building - CILWR Determination
Attachments:ATT00001.txt; ATT00002.htm
Hello Madline – CILWR are triggered if anticipated water demand for the project exerts a new demand on the municipal
system in excess of 0.25 AF/yr. (Sec. 38.410.130.B BMC). This maintenance facility won’t tip over the trigger threshold,
so no CILWR are needed for this project.
Brian Heaston, PE
Senior Engineer
City of Bozeman - Engineering
20 E. Olive St.
P.O. Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59771
(406) 582-2280
bheaston@bozeman.net
From: Madeline Good <mgood@alliedengineering.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2022 9:20 AM
To: Brian Heaston <bheaston@BOZEMAN.NET>
Subject: Regional Park Maintenance Building ‐ CILWR Determination
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Brian,
I emailed Griffin about this but got an automatic reply that he’s out of office and to contact you for questions regarding
CILWR. I am working on a site plan application for a project at the Gallatin County Regional Park (Tract 3A‐1 of COS
2202B) and was hoping to get a cash‐in‐lieu of water rights determination. The project involves construction of a new
park maintenance building & associated parking off Vaquero Parkway. A concept review application was previously
submitted for the project (application #22104).
The proposed building is 1,281‐sf. I’ve attached the current site plan drawing for reference.
Let me know if there’s any other information I can send. Thanks!
Madeline Good, EI
Staff Engineer
Allied Engineering Services, Inc.
32 Discovery Dr., Bozeman, MT 59718 | Office: 406.582.0221 | Cell: 406.590.8361
2
Email: mgood@alliedengineering.com | Web: www.alliedengineering.com
DUNS: 00‐769‐3724; CAGE: 1GHU7
N1
NOTICING CHECKLIST
NOTICING PROCEDURE
Notice is required for certain projects in order for citizens to participate in decision making which affects their interests and
provides opportunity to receive information pertinent to an application that would not otherwise be available to the decision
maker. The applicant is responsible for posting the project site and mailing a notice per the requirements of the Bozeman
Municipal Code (BMC). Public noticing for comment periods or hearings and associated application information, timing, type, and
location is required by law per Section 38.220.400, BMC. See form N2 Noticing Instructions and Declaration Form on how to notice
your project, send mailings, and post on the project site.
NOTICING CHECKLIST (NON-CERTIFIED MAILINGS)
The following is required materials for applications that do not require certified mail - Site Plan, Master Site Plan, Conditional
Use Permit, Special Use Permit, Variance, Deviation, First Minor Subdivision, Planned Unit Development, Appeals, Zone Map
Amendment, Growth Policy Amendment, Annexation.
1. Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form N1.
2. Legible list of full names and addresses of all property owners within 200 feet of the project site, attached to this
checklist.
Noticing Checklist Page 1 of 1 Revision Date: November 2021
NOTICING CHECKLIST (CERTIFIED MAILINGS)
The following is required materials for applications that do require certified mail - Major and Subsequent Minor Subdivisions.
1. Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form N1.
2. Legible list of full names and addresses of all property owners within 200 feet of the project site and not physically
contiguous (touching a boundary) to the subdivision, attached to this checklist. Clearly label list ADJOINER NOT CONTIGUOUS.
3. Legible list of full names and addresses of all property owners physically contiguous (touching a boundary) including
recorded purchasers under contract for deed to be sent certified mail attached to this checklist. Clearly label list ADJOINER CONTIGUOUS.
PROPERTY OWNER RECORDS
Current property owners of record can be found at the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office in the Gallatin County
Courthouse at 311 West Main Street Bozeman, Montana.
CERTIFICATION AND SIGNATURES
I, _____________________________________________, hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the attached name
and address list of all adjoining property owners (including all condominium owners), within 200 feet of the property located at
____________________________________________________, is a true and accurate list from the last declared Gallatin County
tax records. I further understand that an inaccurate list may delay review of the project.
_______________________________________ __________________
Signature Date
CONTACT US
Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building
20 East Olive Street
Bozeman, MT 59715
phone 406-582-2260
fax 406-582-2263
planning@bozeman.net
www.bozeman.net/planning
Owner Name Owner Address City State Zip
WHEELER INVESTMENT GROUP LLC 83 W FIELDVIEW CIR BOZEMAN MT 59715‐7189
FURST VINCENT J & MARY C 3675 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6124
MONTANA OPTICOM LLC 144 QUAIL RUN RD BOZEMAN MT 59718‐5926
STINNETT WILLIAM 1627 W MAIN ST # 336 BOZEMAN MT 59715‐4011
3779 BAXTER LLC 3779 BAXTER LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8669
LUSSIER MATHEW E & MARCON KENYA B 1187 BUR AVE BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6123
CITY OF BOZEMAN PO BOX 1230 BOZEMAN MT 59771‐1230
SHEEHAN LISA 3924 BAXTER LN UNIT 1 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8073
DAVIES DAN & JAN 3924 BAXTER LN UNIT 2 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8073
FROST WOODROW J 3924 BAXTER LN UNIT 3 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8073
VUKONICH VRILLYN M 701 HARLAN ST UNIT E56 LAKEWOOD CO 80214‐2327
LAMBERT RONALD D & CARA W 3944 BAXTER LN UNIT 5 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8072
SHAFER WADE R & KATHLEEN A 3944 BAXTER LN UNIT 6 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8072
MOOR ALISON M 3944 BAXTER LN UNIT 7 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8072
ZIMMERMAN ROBIN L TRUSTEE 7307 SOUTH AVE MIDDLETON WI 53562‐3732
CLIFTON SHORT KENDALL J & SHORT DANIEL L 3930 BAXTER LN UNIT 9 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8071
NOPPER THOMAS ANTHONY & C DENISE 140 HITCHING POST RD BOZEMAN MT 59715‐8027
AAKER DON M & DIANE M 78970 INDIAN WOOD CT LA QUINTA CA 92253‐2866
SWINNEY ROBERT W II & TAMMERA J 143 FARMLAND CROSSING BELGRADE MT 59714‐9175
MICHAEL GREGORY C & OLGA M 3910 BAXTER LN UNIT 13 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8070
PFAFF THERESA R 3910 BAXTER LN UNIT 14 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8070
TALLON ROBERT J 3910 BAXTER LN UNIT 15 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8070
WATERS GEOFFREY LANDELLS & MICAELA RAMOS 12808 NW DIAMOND DR PORTLAND OR 97229‐3790
BARGE JONATHAN D & AMANDA W 137 S 5TH ST E MISSOULA MT 59801‐2719
DOYLE JAMES & JANE 6701 CARNOUSTIE CT RAPID CITY SD 57702‐9542
HULS DALE R & GAIL D 3876 BAXTER LN UNIT 19 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8069
KERN JULIA 3817 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6126
STINNETT WILLIAM 1627 W MAIN ST # 336 BOZEMAN MT 59715‐4011
AMATO SANDI LVNG TRT 9290 WARDLEY PARK LN BRENTWOOD TN 37027‐4465
TRUNORTH PROPERTIES LLC 6730 TAWNEY BROWN LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7745
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SOUTHWEST MONTANA 3864 BAXTER LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8054
CAMPECHE SHORES DEVELOPMENT LLC PO BOX 3088 GALVESTON TX 77552‐0088
BRAUER KARLA & FREDERICK E 2632 GELDING LN LIVERMORE CA 94551‐8824
FOLGERT MARIE 2300 TOWER ST MISSOULA MT 59804‐6377
FORBES PHILLIP J & MARLYS & SEAN 3829 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6126
LINDSAY MATT 3821 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6126
HERTZOG BLAKE 3683 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6124
EQUITY TRUST COMPANY CUSTODIAN FBO 945 ANTELOPE RIDGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714‐8163
ZIMMERMAN JACLYN MARIKO 3801 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6126
MICHAEL OLGA M & GREGORY C & KATHERINE 1216 MEAGHER AVE BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7067
LETANG ROBERT & WANDA & BLEILE LISA M 3753 LOLO WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8256
FORTUNE KEITH & MICAELA 3735 LOLO WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8256
KLINE MATT 3825 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6126
JOSSI FRED 3655 W ANTHEM WAY STE A109‐291 ANTHEM AZ 85086‐2557
OAK SPRING COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC 2504 W MAIN ST STE 2B BOZEMAN MT 59718‐4073
CITY OF BOZEMAN 121 N ROUSE AVE BOZEMAN MT 59715‐3740
KINGSBURY KODI & EAMES JODY 1294 MEAGHER AVE BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7067
SHINING MOUNTAIN LUTHERAN CHURCH 1710 VAQUERO PKWY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7380
LEE ANGELA 7150 SCHAFER RD BOZEMAN MT 59715‐7777
MOORE COLLIN & ABIGAIL JOY 3725 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6125
BANK OF BOZEMAN PO BOX 10070 BOZEMAN MT 59719‐0070
DAVOS STEPHANIE 4067 OPAL ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6187
HELTON WILLIAM MELVIN III & CHIRAPORN SUNGTHONG 1226 HUNTERS WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6042
3779 BAXTER LLC 3779 BAXTER LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8669
ODELL MAXWELL M & ECHO M 3813 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6126
BRIDGER PROPERTIES LLC 15900 OLD PIERCE RD FAIRHOPE AL 36532‐6714
BEHAN DAVID & STEPHANIE 16802 NE 120TH TERRACE KEARNEY MO 64060‐7461
SCHELHAMMER PROPERTIES LLC 1251 CRABAPPLE DR BOZEMAN MT 59715‐4264
SEIFERT DONALD F & CHRISTIN E 2124 GALLATIN GREEN BLVD APT 4 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7151
FORSYTHE ELWOOD G & GAIL A 2146 GALLATIN GREEN BLVD APT 5 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7152
BUTE KEVIN M 404 FLINT ST LAYTON UT 84041‐3601
DAVID & PAULETTE MCLELLAND FAMILY TRUST 1529 ELISE CT WALNUT CREEK CA 94596‐5468
Gallatin County Regional Park Maintenance Building ‐ Noticing Addresses
KOOLMAN SCOTT A & KRISTIN L 2162 GALLATIN GREE BLVD APT 8 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7154
STITT EUGENE W & TERRI J 11791 FLORAL HALL PL FISHERS IN 46037‐3722
STANLEY LAURA M 9400 STAR LN BOZEMAN MT 59715‐9281
LEGGE KENT W & JULIE S TRUSTEES 21366 MAIN DR WOODLAKE CA 93286‐9637
DUFF RANDELL J 2188 GALLATIN GREEN BLVD APT 12 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7153
PERKINS VICKIE LEE, RESSE CODY, KATE BENF 7675 SHEDHORN DR STE B BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7742
WICKLAND LEIF 335 CLIFDEN DR BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6719
YANCEY BLAKE TODD 3753 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6125
RAZZANO DARRYL N & SUSAN I 4027 OPAL ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6187
GUZA EDWARD J & TAYLOR LESLIE 3777 LOLO WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8256
CLARK KRYSTAL 3290 WINTER PARK ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3408
BENNETT TODD E 1680 DAVIS LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3400
SMITH ANTHONY 1670 DAVIS LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3400
MGME ENTERPRISES INC PO BOX 2948 GREAT FALLS MT 59403‐2948
CALDERON CASSINA CHRISTINA & CESAR 1650 DAVIS LN UNIT A BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3400
FORD FAITH 1650 DAVIS LN UNIT B BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3400
WOOD CAROLINE BACH 1630 DAVIS LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3400
KEMMER MATTHEW G52 DRY FLY LN BOZEMAN MT 59718
DUPONT GREGORY M 3255 BREEZE LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3406
BRESTER GARY W & COLLEEN A 430 COMFORT LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐9141
PRESNELL GLENN FRANK JR TRUSTEE 23 STAR FERN THE WOODLANDS TX 77380
MAY KAREN ANNE 7025 10TH AVE NW SEATTLE WA 98117‐5242
WALTER VICTORIA 3285 BREEZE LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3406
RUSSO NICHOLAS 3260 WINTER PARK ST UNIT A BOZEMAN MT 59718
SCHULTZ KASEY & DAVID 3260 WINTER PARK ST UNIT B BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3408
CLARK JONATHAN B & ALICE V & JONATHAN B 3713 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6125
RENTME JK LLC PO BOX 11850 BOZEMAN MT 59719‐1850
TSCHACHE RHETT 3657 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6124
WARD MELISSA 1026 NEW HOLLAND DR BOZEMAN MT 59718‐5906
DUNN KEVIN P & LOUISE LIBERTELLI 337 HYLANDE DR GREAT FALLS MT 59405‐4139
MCKENZIE KYLE 2144 CURTIS ST DENVER CO 80205‐2519
SMITH DOUGLAS L 20505 NORRIS RD MANHATTAN MT 59741
GRESHAM EDWIN THOMAS III 433 CHRISTOPHER WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6330
SWENSON JANET M 4959 DURSTON RD BOZEMAN MT 59718‐9499
FEDYK TED & TARA 1232 FERGUSON AVE BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6192
DAHLHAUSER CHRISTOPHER 3791 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6125
SCHELHAMMER PROPERTIES LLC 1251 CRABAPPLE DR BOZEMAN MT 59715‐4264
KOLTZ DAN & REBECCA 3771 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6125
STOPKA ALEXIS LPO BOX 1262 BELGRADE MT 59714‐1262
VEIL GLENN ALLEN JR & ALISON MAIKI 1384 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3508
MILLER SCOTT & MARK LEE 1502 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718
BAUMANN JOHN Q & EMILY A 3296 HIGHLANDS TRL LEBANON OH 45036‐9442
FLANDERS MILL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC 3731 EQUESTRIAN LANE STE 203 BOZEMAN MT 59718
NELSON CAROLYN & ISAAC 1794 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3513
QUALLS HUGH L & HOLLY HPO BOX 1733 HAWTHORNE NV 89415‐1733
STRAND NICOLE M & TIMOTHY R 3172 LILY DR BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6088
CHASE SETH DANIEL & VENACATACHELLUM VALERIE 1533 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3411
MARSH RYAN C 1487 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3414
MULLERLEILE KEVIN SCOTT & ALICIA DIANE 1980 VAQUERO PKWY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7754
BURGES JEFFREY W & KAREN E TRUSTEES 2658 DEL MAR HEIGHTS RD # 558 DEL MAR CA 92014‐3100
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SOUTHWEST MONTANA 3864 BAXTER LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8054
GERBER JUSTIN R & JENIFER A 3641 LADUKE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6124
GRANT KYM & ROBERT 303 MITCHELL WAY THE COLONY TX 75056
STOPKA ALEXIS LPO BOX 1262 BELGRADE MT 59714‐1262
CUNNEEN MICHAEL S & CARLA 1410 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3507
CALL TYLER & MOLLIE 1758 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3513
SALVETTI ARTHUR J JR & INA CO TRUSTEES 1780 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3513
STACK JOSHUA D & CHAN ROXANA LOO 4100 SICKLE CT BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3515
LAKE ADRIANE & MICHAEL 3017 JOHN DEERE ST BOZEMAN MT 59718‐5918
ALLEE BRYCE & VICTORIA 1560 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3411
WEST WINDS MASTER HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION PO BOX 1862 BOZEMAN MT 59771‐1862
NEUBERGER WILLIAM & JAIME 1463 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3414
DIXON JEFFREY 4 UPPER MDW GRANBY CT 06035‐2937
HENRY DOUGLAS D & HART KAILA 1325 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3413
ANDERSON ETHAN M & DANIELLE M 3686 TSCHACHE LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐2065
GREEN GARY E & SHARON K 3656 TSCHACHE LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐2065
FLANDERS MILL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC 325 GREENHILLS RANCH RD BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7303
GALLATIN ESTATES LLC 500 HAUGLAND RANCH RD BELGRADE MT 59714‐9367
PURDON JAMES F & JEANNE W TRUSTEES 1926 VAQUERO PKWY BOZEMAN MT 59718
DRIGGERS JEFFREY & CHANDRA 880 SANDERS AVE UNIT G BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7452
FRASER KYLE & WILBERT WHITNEY 140 GALLATIN DR # A BOZEMAN MT 59718‐9324
HOPKINS LINDSAY & JACOBSEN BRENT 1850 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3514
BROADWATER ROBERT K II & RENEE L 1898 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3514
BLANTON CALLIE & VINCE 1910 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3516
BECKER DONALD & SUZANNE 1599 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3411
ALLEVATO NICOLAS GIUSEPPE & PHAM MARY 1559 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3411
BRIGHT DEVELOPMENT LLC 1351 STONERIDGE DR STE C BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7079
LEWENDAL JAKE ANDERS & MAKENZIE 3675 TSCHACHE LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐2065
SMITH CHRISTOPHER PAUL & TABAR MARIE 3626 TSCHACHE LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐2065
SYVERSON KENDRA BRYNN & JEB ALAN 237 PAINTED HILLS RD BOZEMAN MT 59715‐8070
SWARD ELI W & COURTNEY V 1328 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3508
SAYER JOSEPH P & AMI M RUSSELL 1536 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3509
CHASE JESSE 2246 BOOT HILL CT STE 1 BOZEMAN MT 59715‐7248
BARTLING JOSHUA TAYLOR & ALYSSA JOY 1427 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3414
MAJORS MATTHEW DAVID & ELIZABETH ANN 1401 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3414
IBES GREGG A & KIM 6479 US HIGHWAY 93 S PMB 626 WHITEFISH MT 59937‐8238
BAJAKIAN KYLE 1952 VAQUERO PKWY BOZEMAN MT 59718
BRIGHT DEVELOPMENT LLC 1351 STONERIDGE DR STE C BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7079
SNIPES EDRIS ANN CO TRUSTEE 25082 ALICIA DR DANA POINT CA 92629‐2412
LYON PAYTON 3695 TSCHACHE LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐2065
SHAY WILLIAM SCOTT & LINA PAOLA 419 SANDERS AVE BOZEMAN MT 59718‐6203
STOPKA ALEXIS LPO BOX 1262 BELGRADE MT 59714‐1262
MILLER SYDNEY & MING ANDREW 10047 FLORENCE CIR NAPLES FL 34119‐9819
DINGMAN BRYON 8645 LOOKFAR WAY BOZEMAN MT 59715‐7780
CHASE GILL & COS PERAZA ALEJANDRA 1674 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3510
JACOBSEN BRENT & HOPKINS LINDSAY 1850 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3514
HALL KEVIN & KATHERINE 1540 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3411
TENGDIN ROLF E & KYLA M 3290 BREEZE LN BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3406
SKOGEN MICHAEL 2246 BOOT HILL CT STE 1 BOZEMAN MT 59715‐7248
DANIELS TALON 1369 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3413
DIXON JEREMY & SONG STELLA 21 WHITFIELD RD SOUTHAMPTON NY 11968‐2510
EVENSON ANNA & NICHOLS KIRK S 1976 VAQUERO PKWY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7754
ONEILL ANDREW & BEATRICE 1936 VAQUERO PKWY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐7754
SAVAGE DONOVAN & JODY PO BOX 6431 BOZEMAN MT 59771‐6431
WATSON ERIC D & ROSANNA P TRUSTEES 1356 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3508
STORM KIRSTEN & KIM PAUL & ANNE M 1560 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3509
DECOSSE MINDY 2963 WARBLER WAY APT 4 BOZEMAN MT 59718‐8870
COOPER MATTHEW & LYNZE 1622 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3510
KIRSCH ERICH ALLYN & TOBI KATHERINE 1810 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3514
OLIVER KYLE & JACLYN 1880 RYUN SUN WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3514
MATHEWS JODIE K 6241 FOX RUN DR IDAHO FALLS ID 83402‐5876
OLTROGGE KEVIN & SHANNON 4312 SMOHAWK TRL BILLINGS MT 59106‐9403
DES JARDINS SUSAN L 1383 BORA WAY BOZEMAN MT 59718‐3413
CHASE COVENANT INVESTMENTS LLC 2246 BOOT HILL CT STE 1 BOZEMAN MT 59715‐7248
CROSSING 2 COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC 40 E MAIN ST STE 210 BOZEMAN MT 59715‐4778
SAVAGE DONOVAN & JODY PO BOX 6431 BOZEMAN MT 59771‐6431
SMC LLC 1276 N 15TH AVE STE 103 BOZEMAN MT 59715‐3289
UTILITY EASEMENT
Gallatin County, GRANTOR, in consideration of $ 1.00 and for other and valuable
considerations, receipt of which is acknowledged, grants to The City of Bozeman, a municipal
corporation of the State of Montana, with offices at 121 North Rouse Avenue, Bozeman,
Montana 59715, GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, a perpetual utility easement for the use
of each and every person, firm or corporation, whether public or private, providing or offering to
provide telephone, electric power, gas, internet, cable television or other similar utility or service,
the right to the joint use of an easement for the construction, maintenance, repair, and removal of
their lines and other facilities, in, through, and across a strip of land situated in Gallatin County,
Montana, 10, feet wide to be located on the following described real property: TRACT 3A-1
OF CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY No. 2202B, LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST ONE-
QUARTER OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 5 EAST, PRINCIPAL
MERIDIAN MONTANA, CITY OF BOZEMAN, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA
The easement is more particularly described on the attached Exhibit(s) “EXHIBIT OF
10’ WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT” which by this reference is made a part hereof.
The GRANTOR states that he possesses the real property described above and that he has
a lawful right to grant an easement thereon.
The GRANTOR further agrees that the GRANTEE may peaceably hold and enjoy the
rights and privileges herein granted without any interruption by the GRANTOR.
The terms, covenants, and provisions of this easement shall extend to and be binding
upon the heirs, executors, administrators, personal representatives, successors, and assigns of the
parties hereto.
DATED this day of , 20 .
By:
Grantor
STATE OF MONTANA )
)ss.
County of Gallatin )
On this day of ,20 ___, before me, the undersigned, a Notary
Public for the State of Montana, personally appeared , known to
me to be of and the person whose name is subscribed to
the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the within instrument for
and on behalf of .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial Seal the
day and year first above written.
(SEAL)
Notary Public for the State of Montana
(Printed Name)
Residing at
My Commission Expires / /20
ACCEPTED:
__________________________
CITY OF BOZEMAN
by ________________________
City Manager
ATTEST:
City Clerk
STATE OF MONTANA )
)ss.
County of Gallatin )
On this ________ day of ___________________, 20 , before me, a Notary Public for
the State of Montana, personally appeared JEFF MIHELICH and MIKE MAAS, known to me to
be the City Manager and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Bozeman and the persons whose
names are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that they executed the
same for and on behalf of the City of Bozeman.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial Seal the
day and year first above written.
(SEAL)
Notary Public for the State of Montana
(Printed Name)
Residing at
My Commission Expires / /20
MEMO
32 Discovery Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 582‐0221 Fax (406) 582‐5770
Project Name: Gallatin County Regional Park Maintenance Building
Project Number: AESI 22-002
Date: September 13, 2022
Re: Sanitary Sewer & Domestic Water Demand
MEMO DETAILS:
The purpose of this memo is to outline the estimated average daily & peak hour sanitary sewer
demand as well as the maximum & average daily domestic water demand for the proposed site
development of Tract 3A-1 COS 2202B. The demand estimate is based on guidelines provided in the
Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) Circular 4 and the City of Bozeman Design
Standards and Specifications.
The proposed improvements involve construction of a 1,280-sf park maintenance and storage building
at the Gallatin County Regional Park. Existing water and sanitary sewer mains (both 8” diameter) are
located in Vaquero Parkway. New water and sewer services will be provided to the structure via the
existing mains located in Vaquero Parkway.
Sanitary Sewer Demand
An average wastewater flow rate of 13 gallons per day per employee was assumed as outlined in
MDEQ-Circular 4 Table 3.1-1 “Typical Wastewater Flows from Commercial, Industrial, and Other
Nonresidential Sources”. The peaking factor was calculated based on the formula provided in section
V.B.6 of the COB Design Standards and Specifications. Please see the attached calculations for
additional information. A summary is provided below.
Assumed number of employees = 3
Average day demand = 39 gpd
Peaking factor (P=0.003) = 4.453
Peak hour demand = 0.12 gpm
09/13/2022
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Memo Page 2
Domestic Water Demand
An average daily water usage rate of 13 gal/day/employee was assumed for the proposed development
and is consistent with the average wastewater flow rate given by MDEQ-Circular 4. A maximum day
to average day ratio of 2.3:1 and a peak hour to average day ratio of 3:1 was used as outlined in
section V.A.4 of the COB Design Standards and Specifications. Please see the attached calculations
for additional information. A summary is provided below.
Assumed number of employees = 3
Average daily demand = 39 gpd
Maximum daily demand = 90 gpd
Peak hour demand = 0.08 gpm
Please contact Madeline Good and/or Rory Romey at 406-582-0221 or
mgood@alliedengineering.com; rromey@alliedengineering.com with any questions or if additional
information is required.
Storm Drainage
Design Report
Regional Park Maintenance Building
Bozeman, Montana
September 27, 2022
Prepared by:
Madeline Good, EI
Rory Romey, PE
Gallatin County Regional Park – Maintenance Building
September 2022
Project: 22‐002
Bozeman Office . 32 Discovery Drive . Bozeman, Montana 59718 . Ph: (406) 582-0221 . Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 1
Table of Contents
1 Project Overview and Background ......................................................................................... 2
2 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Pre-Development .............................................................................................................. 2
2.2 Post Development ............................................................................................................ 3
3 Post Development Hydraulics ................................................................................................. 3
3.1 Inlet and Gutter Capacity ................................................................................................. 3
3.2 Ponds ................................................................................................................................ 3
4 Maintenance Plan .................................................................................................................... 5
Table 1 - Pre-Development Hydrology ........................................................................................... 2
Table 2 - Post Development Hydrology ......................................................................................... 3
Table 3 - Inlet and Gutter Summary (25-year event) ...................................................................... 3
Table 4 – Retention Pond Sizing .................................................................................................... 4
Table 5 – Pond Stage-Storage ......................................................................................................... 4
Attachments:
Exhibit 1.1 – Vicinity Map - Topo
Exhibit 1.2 – Aerial Map
Exhibit 2.1 – Post Development Drainage
Appendix A – Supporting Calculations
Appendix B – Storm Drainage Plans
Gallatin County Regional Park – Maintenance Building
September 2022
Project: 22‐002
Bozeman Office . 32 Discovery Drive . Bozeman, Montana 59718 . Ph: (406) 582-0221 . Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 2
1 Project Overview and Background
The subject property is known as the Gallatin County Regional Park, located in the NE ¼ of
Section 03, Township 02S, Range 5E. Vicinity maps showing the project location and extents are
provided with Exhibits 1.1 and 1.2. The proposed site improvements will involve construction of
a maintenance building and associated parking lot along Vaquero Parkway, west of the existing
Dinosaur Park Playground. A new retention pond will be provided east of the proposed
maintenance building to meet the water quality and peak runoff rate requirements.
The following sections describe the proposed stormwater design and its compliance with the
current City of Bozeman (COB) storm drainage standards. Current regulations dictate that peak
runoff rates for the post-development condition are mitigated to pre-development for the 10-year
event. Stormwater collection and conveyance infrastructure is sized for the 25-year event.
2 Hydrology
The rational method was utilized to estimate peak runoff rates for conveyance sizing as outlined
by the City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications. A weighted runoff coefficient “C”
was determined based on a combination of open space (C=0.2), gravel (C=0.8), and pavement
(C=0.95). The time to concentration was estimated using the overland flow method from the City
of Bozeman Design Standards and TR-55 for shallow concentrated flow. A more detailed breakout
of the basin data is provided in Appendix A. Basins, flow paths, and the general site layout for the
post-development condition can be found on Exhibit 2.1.
2.1 Pre‐Development
A single basin (Basin A) was assumed for the proposed improvement area with consistent basin
boundaries between the pre- and post-development site conditions for the purpose of pond sizing.
The maintenance building site currently consists of a gravel parking lot and undeveloped open
space. Basin A was conservatively assumed to be entirely open space prior to the proposed
development. Stormwater runoff sheet flows northwest across the gravel lot to a minor drainage
path paralleling the northern property boundary. From here, runoff continues to flow
west/northwest. A summary of the pre-development hydrologic conditions is provided in Table 1;
more detailed information providing a time to concentration breakout and intensity is provided in
Appendix A.
Table 1 - Pre-Development Hydrology
Basin Total
Area (ac)
Impervious
(sf)
Open
Space (sf)
Weighted
C
Tc
(min)
10-yr Peak
Runoff
(cfs)
25-yr Peak
Runoff
(cfs)
A 0.36 0 15,487 0.20 14 0.12 0.14
Gallatin County Regional Park – Maintenance Building
September 2022
Project: 22‐002
Bozeman Office . 32 Discovery Drive . Bozeman, Montana 59718 . Ph: (406) 582-0221 . Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 3
2.2 Post Development
Input parameters and results for the post development drainage basin are summarized in Table 2.
An overview plan showing the drainage areas and infrastructure is provided on Exhibit 2.1. Basin
A encompasses the proposed site improvements, including the maintenance building, gravel
storage area, and proposed parking lot. Basin A will be routed to a proposed retention pond located
east of the proposed parking lot.
Table 2 - Post Development Hydrology
Basin Area
(acres)
Impervious
(sf)
Gravel
(sf)
Open
Space
(sf)
Weighted
C
Tc
(min)
10-yr
Peak
Runoff
(cfs)
25-yr
Peak
Runoff
(cfs)
A 0.36 6,280 5,775 3,432 0.73 6 0.74 0.88
3 Post Development Hydraulics
The post development collection and conveyance infrastructure considers the 25-year design event
as outlined in the City of Bozeman Design Standards. Capacity calculations for the proposed storm
drainage infrastructure are provided in Appendix A.
3.1 Inlet and Gutter Capacity
The maximum allowable water surface for the 25-year event is 0.15-ft below the top back of curb.
The proposed parking lot has a max cross slope of 1.2%; the maximum allowable spread width is
then approximately 20-ft. The gutter flow capacity is based on the HEC-22 gutter flow
methodology for a composite section. Street/gutter capacity is 11.25-cfs for a cross slope of 1.2%
and a longitudinal grade of 1.86%. The calculated peak flow rate is less than the street/gutter
capacity. A 3-ft wide curb cut will be used to convey runoff from Basin A to the proposed retention
pond. The curb cut was modeled as a 3-ft wide weir; the calculated flow depth was 0.20-ft. Sample
calculations are provided in Appendix A. A summary of inlet and gutter flow is provided in Table
3. The proposed curb cut is located at a sag in the curb line.
Table 3 - Inlet and Gutter Summary (25-year event)
Inlet
Cross
Slope
(%)
Calc. Peak
Flow (cfs)
TBC
(ft)
TBC-0.15
(ft)
Calculated
WSE (ft)
Spread
(ft)
Curb Cut A.1 1.2 0.88 4736.90 4736.75 4736.65 11.7
3.2 Ponds
The pre-development and post development basin summaries were previously provided in Section
2. Stormwater runoff from the proposed development will drain to a proposed retention pond on
the east side of the site. The retention pond was sized for the 10-year, 2-hour storm intensity as
Gallatin County Regional Park – Maintenance Building
September 2022
Project: 22‐002
Bozeman Office . 32 Discovery Drive . Bozeman, Montana 59718 . Ph: (406) 582-0221 . Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 4
specified in the COB Design Standards. The water quality volume, which includes runoff
generated from the first 0.5-in of rainfall on impervious areas, is required to be stored and
infiltrated on site. The retention pond sizing calculations are provided in Appendix A. A summary
of the minimum pond sizing and design parameters is shown in Table 4.
Table 4 – Retention Pond Sizing
Pond
Minimum Required
Retention Volume
(CF)
Water Quality
Volume
(CF)
Actual Pond
Bottom Area
(SF)
Actual Storage
Volume
(CF)
1 760 502 379 1,028
A summary of the pond stage-storage relationship is outlined in Table 5. The storage volume was
determined based on a volume analysis completed in Autodesk Civil 3D. Table 5 shows the pond
provides adequate storage to control the post-development runoff rates for the 10-year, 2-hour
event. In the event that the pond overtops, runoff will sheet flow south/southwest across the
existing gravel lot and either infiltrate or evaporate.
Table 5 – Pond Stage-Storage
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Storage (cf)
0.00 4735.00 0
0.10 4735.10 39
0.20 4735.20 82
0.30 4735.30 129
0.40 4735.40 180
0.50 4735.50 234
0.60 4735.60 293
0.70 4735.70 357
0.80 4735.80 424
0.90 4735.90 496
1.00 4736.00 573
1.10 4736.10 654
1.20 4736.20 740
1.30 4736.30 831
1.40 4736.40 927
1.50 4736.50 1028
Geotechnical test pits were completed by AESI within the Regional Park fenced dog park area,
approximately 1,500 feet west of the proposed maintenance building, on October 20, 2014. The
test pits were generally excavated to a depth of 8-ft. Groundwater was encountered between 4.00
to 4.25 ft below ground surface. Clean, sandy gravel was encountered between 1.5 to 2 ft below
ground surface. Additional data was obtained from the Geotechnical Report included in the Park
View Crossing Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat application (COB project No. 21158). The test
bore location map included in the report shows borehole ST-32 is located within the Regional
Gallatin County Regional Park – Maintenance Building
September 2022
Project: 22‐002
Bozeman Office . 32 Discovery Drive . Bozeman, Montana 59718 . Ph: (406) 582-0221 . Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 5
Park, in the general location of the proposed maintenance building. The boring was performed on
September 21st, 2001 and indicated a groundwater depth of 9-ft below existing ground. The bore
hole consisted of a “poorly graded sand with gravel” lens from 1.5-ft below ground surface (BGS)
extending to 3-ft BGS followed by a “poorly graded gravel with sand and silt” lens starting 3-ft
BGS and extending to the bottom of the borehole (approximately 10.5-ft below existing ground).
The proposed retention pond bottom is approximately 2-ft below existing ground and therefore,
groundwater is not anticipated to be an issue.
4 Maintenance Plan
All proposed storm drainage features will be privately owned and maintained by Gallatin County.
Storm infrastructure generally consists of a curb cut and retention pond. Gallatin County (property
owner) will be responsible for the inspection and maintenance of all stormwater facilities located
within the project limits. The following maintenance plan outlines the proposed inspection and
cleaning schedule for the storm drainage facilities at the Regional Park Maintenance Building.
Retention Basin
o Inspection: Every 6-months and after large rainfall events
o Cleaning/Maintenance Schedule: Annually or as needed based on inspection
Remove sediment & litter/debris from all components of the retention basin.
Inspect the basin for signs of erosion and repair eroded areas accordingly.
Observe drain time following rainfall events to determine if the facility is
clogged. If the observed drain time is longer than 72 hours, corrective action
must be taken to return the retention basin to the design drain time.
Regularly mow/manage all vegetation associated with the retention basin
and remove all clippings or other organic matter.
Remove sediment/debris from in-flow paths.
Inspect all components of the retention basin in accordance with an
approved inspection form. Refer to the Montana Post-Construction Storm
Water BMP Design Manual for additional information and example forms.
Curb Cut
o Inspection: Every 6-months and after large rainfall events
o Cleaning/Maintenance Schedule: Annually or as needed based on inspection
Clear curb cuts when partially covered with sediment, vegetation, and/or
debris. Maintenance is often needed during fall after leaves have fallen.
Ensure snow is not built up over curb cuts, clear snow and ice as necessary
during winter months.
FIGURECivil Engineering
Geotechnical Engineering
Land Surveying
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718
PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770
www.alliedengineering.com
REGIONAL PARK MAINTENANCE BLDG
VICINITY MAP
BOZEMAN, MT
1.1
N
FIGURECivil Engineering
Geotechnical Engineering
Land Surveying
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718
PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770
www.alliedengineering.com
REGIONAL PARK MAINTENANCE BLDG
AERIAL MAP
BOZEMAN, MT
1.2
N
Appendix A
Supporting Calculations
AreaArea Open (sf)paved (sf) Overland flow (ft)grade (%)CCf (25‐yr)Tc (min) Length Grade Time (min)PRE‐DEVELOPMENT10‐yr i25‐yr I 10‐yr Q25‐yr QA 1.62 1.95 0.12 0.14 15,4870.3615,487 0 00.20 140.24 109 1.71 0.2 1.1 14.4Area Area POST DEVELOPMENT10‐yr i25‐yr i10‐yr Q25‐yr QOpen (sf) paved (sf) Overland flow (ft) grade (%) C Cf (25‐yr) Tc (min) Length Grade timeA 2.86 3.40 0.74 0.88 15,4870.363,432 6,280 5,7750.73 60.10 72 1.6 0.95 1.1 0.8 13 11.85 0.03C value Tc (min) Tc (hr)Overland Tc (COB Design Standards) Manual ‐ Shallow Concentrated (TR‐55)BasinOverland Tc (COB Design Standards)Tc (hr)Tc (min)C valueManual ‐ Shallow Concentrated (TR‐55)Intensity (in/hr) Peak Q (cfs)Area Gravel (sf)Area Gravel (sf)Drainage Basin OverviewIntensity (in/hr) Peak Q (cfs)Area (sf) Area (acres)Area (acres)Area (sf)
Calculation of Required Volume for Stormwater Pond
Pond ID Proposed Pond
Accepts flow from basins A
(Reference: Bozeman Stormwater Master Plan - 1982)
Design Rainfall Freq. 10 year (see page III - 5 of master plan)
IDF coefficient a 0.64
IDF coefficient b
IDF coefficient n 0.65
Pre-development Calculations Post-development Calculations
CC
Areas (ft2):Open Space 15,487 0.20 Areas (ft2):Gravel 5,775 0.80
Impervious 6,280 0.95
Open Space 3,432 0.20
Total: 15,487 Total: 15,487
total area: 0.36 acres total area: 0.36 acres
composite C: 0.20 composite C: 0.73
Overland tc Overland tc
average slope: 1.71 percent average slope: 1.56 percent
travel distance: 109 feet travel distance: 72 feet
C: 0.2 C: 0.95
Cf (25-year) 1.1 Cf (25-year) 1.1
Overland tc:14.4 minutes Overland tc:0.8 minutes
Shallow Concentrated tc Shallow Concentrated tc
average slope: average slope: 11.85 percent
travel distance: travel distance: 13 feet
shallow concentrated tc:minutes shallow concentrated tc:0.03 minutes
Total tc:14 minutes Total tc:6 minutes
intensity at tc (fig 23):1.62 in/hr intensity at tc (fig 23):2.86 in/hr
pre-devel peak runoff: 0.12 cfs post-devel peak runoff: 0.74 cfs
Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Runoff Release Required
(minutes) (in/hr) Rate (cfs) Volume (cf) Volume (cf) Storage (cf)
6 2.86 0.74 266 41 225
8 2.37 0.61 295 55 239
10 2.05 0.53 318 69 249
12 1.82 0.47 339 83 257
14 1.65 0.43 358 97 262
16 1.51 0.39 375 111 265
18 1.40 0.36 391 124 267
20 1.31 0.34 406 138 268
22 1.23 0.32 420 152 268
24 1.16 0.30 433 166 267
26 1.10 0.29 445 180 265
28 1.05 0.27 457 194 263
30 1.00 0.26 468 207 260
32 0.96 0.25 478 221 257
34 0.93 0.24 489 235 254
36 0.89 0.23 499 249 250
38 0.86 0.22 508 263 246
40 0.83 0.22 517 276 241
42 0.81 0.21 526 290 236
44 0.78 0.20 535 304 231
46 0.76 0.20 543 318 225
48 0.74 0.19 551 332 220
50 0.72 0.19 559 346 214
52 0.70 0.18 567 359 208
54 0.69 0.18 575 373 201
56 0.67 0.17 582 387 195
required detention storage (ft3) =268
Retention Pond Calculations:
Q = CIA
C = 0.73 (post-development)
I = 0.41 in/hr (10-yr, 2-hr storm)
A = 0.36 acres
Q = 0.11 cfs
required retention storage (ft3) =760 ft3
detention pond COB
Pre Paved/Gravel (sf) Post Paved/Gravel (sf) Additional Pavement/Gravel (sf) Water Quality Volume (cf)
0 12055 12055 502
Water Quality Volume
Street/Gutter Capacity ‐ Composite Section
See 4‐11 of HEC‐22 Third Edition
Qw Flow Rate in depressed section (gutter pan), cfs
Q Total Flow Rate, cfs
Qs Flow rate in raised section (street section), cfs
Eo Ratio of flow in the gutter to the total flow (Qw/Q)
Sx Street cross slope, ft/ft
SL Longitudinal Slope, ft/ft
Sw Gutter pan cross slope, ft/ft
W Gutter Width from edge of pavement to flow line, ft
T Overall Spread Width ‐ measured from flow line, ft
Ts Spread Width on Street, ft
Ku 0.376 metric (0.56 English)
n Manning's Coefficient
Maximum Allowable Steet Flow Rate
Ku 0.56 0.376 metric (0.56 English)
n 0.013 Manning's Coefficient
Ts 18.75 Spread Width on Street, ft
Sx 0.012 Street Cross Slope, ft/ft
SL 0.0186 Longitudinal Slope (ft/ft)
Street Flow Qs 9.12 Based on Triangular Section
Maximum Allowable Total flow rate
Sw 0.0625 Gutter pan cross slope, ft/ft
Sx 0.012 Street Cross Slope, ft/ft
W 1.25 Gutter Width from edge of pavement to flow line, ft
T 20 Overall Spread Width ‐ measured from flow line, ft
Sw/Sx 5.208333
T/W 16
Eo 0.1893
Ts 18.75
Q 11.254 Total Flow Rate (cfs)
Basin A
𝐸 ൌ 1
1
𝑆௪𝑆௫
1
𝑆௪𝑆௫𝑇𝑊െ 1
ଶ.
െ 1
𝑄௦ ൌሺ𝐾௨
𝑛ሻ𝑆௫ଵ.𝑆.ହ𝑇௦ଶ.
𝑄ൌ 𝑄௦
1 െ𝐸
Appendix B
Storm Drainage Plans
MEMO
32 Discovery Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 582‐0221 Fax (406) 582‐5770
From: Allied Engineering Services, Inc.
Project Name: Gallatin County Regional Park Maintenance Building
Project Number: AESI 22-002
Date: September 1, 2022
Re: Trip Generation
MEMO DETAILS:
The subject property is known as the Gallatin County Regional Park and is defined as Tract 3A-1 of
COS 2202B. The proposed improvements involve construction of a park maintenance and storage
building with an associated parking lot, located west of the existing Dinosaur Park parking lot. The
area proposed for improvement currently consists of a gravel parking/storage area and is accessed
from an existing driveway approach off Vaquero Parkway. The existing driveway approach is the
proposed access location for the maintenance building. Trip generation estimates for the proposed
development are based on Trip Generation 9th Edition – Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).
The land use closest to the proposed project is for warehousing (Section 150 of ITE manual). The ITE
manual provides the following description for warehousing land use, “Warehouses are primarily
devoted to the storage of materials, but they may also include office and maintenance areas.” The
proposed maintenance building is 1,281 square feet. Table 1 provides a summary of trips generated
based on gross floor area of the proposed maintenance building. It should be noted that the proposed
gross floor area is at the lower end of the range provided in the ITE Manual for trip estimates.
According to the analysis, the proposed development will generate 4 trips on an average weekday.
Table 1. Warehousing Trip Generation Based on Gross Floor Area
Description Method Average
Rate
Total
Trips
%
Entering
%
Exiting
Trips
Entering
Trips
Exiting
Weekday, A.M. Peak
Hour of Generator
Gross Floor Area
per 1,000 SF
(1.281)
0.42 1 65 35 1 0
Weekday, P.M. Peak
Hour of Generator
Gross Floor Area
per 1,000 SF
(1.281)
0.45 1 19 81 0 1
Weekday
Gross Floor Area
per 1,000 SF
(1.281)
3.56 4 50 50 2 2