Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationGarfield County Community Development Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 lsTols4s-82L2 www.ga rfield-cou ntv.com PRE.APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY TAx PARCEL NUMBER: 2125-142-00-1 25 DATE: Updated May 20, 2019 PROJECT: Main Elk Creek Stream Restoration and Bank Stabilization - Second Phase Floodplain DeveloPment Permit OWNERS/APPLICANT: MeadowCreekLLC PRACTICAL LOCATION: Located off of County Roads 243 and 245, approximately 4 miles northwest of the Town of New Castle. ZONING: Rural (R) TYPE OF APPLIGATION: Floodplain Development Permit I. GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicants are proposing extensive river restoration, bank stabilization, and habitat improvements on several miles of Main Elk Creek as it crosses through the Applicant's ranch property. The Applicant has initiated extensive research on floodplain issues, wetlands and Army Corp of Engineers requirements and permitting. The applicant may request a waiver from requirements for floodplain modeling on this section of the stream as it is currently not mapped by FEMA. II. REGULATORY PROVISIONS APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, as amended (LUDC) including the following Sections: o Section 3-301 - Floodplain Overlay Regulations including but not limited to Section 3- 301 (8X1,2,3), 3-301 (D), 3-301 (EX3), and 3-301 (G). . Section 4-109 - Development in the 100 Year Floodplain, including review criteria. . Table 4 102 - Common Review Procedures and Required Notice . Table 4-201- Submittal Requirements o Section 4-203 - Submittal Requirements as appropriateo Section 4-203 (O) - Flood Plain Analysis III. REVIEW PROCESS The Floodplain Development permit will be processed pursuant to Section 4-103, Administrative Review Process and consistent with Table 4-102 Common Review procedures for Floodplain Development, summarized as follows: A. Pre-application Conference (completed)B. Application SubmittalC. Determination of CompletenessD. Schedule the Director's Decision DateE. Application sent to referral agenciesF. Public Notice for the Director's Decision completed. lncludes mailing to adjacent property owners within 200 ft. and mineral rights owners no the applicant's property.G. Evaluation by Director/Staff resulting in a Staff ReportH. Director's Decisionl. 10 day call up period, after which the Director's Decision become final unless the decision is called up the BOCC for their reviewJ. Once all conditions of approval have been satisfied the Flood Plain Development Permit can be issued. IV PUBLIC HEARINGS AND NOTICE Public Hearing notices shall be posted, mailed and published pursuant to Section 4-101.E X No Public Hearing (Director's Decision with mailed notice only) Planning Commission _Board of County Commissioners _Board of Adjustment Referral agencies may include but are not limited to: Garfield County Consulting Engineer, Garfield County Attorney, FEMA, Army Corp of Engineers. V SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A.General Application Materials including. Application Form including signatures. Proof of ownership (deed and/or title information). Legal Description or reference to appropriate documentation. Authorization to represent as appropriateo Statements of authority are needed for an LLC or Corporationr List of owners of property within 200 ft. with addresses. List of owners of mineral rights on the subject property 2 . Payment of feeso Agreement to Pay Form. Project DescriPtion - narrativc B. Vicinity Map - formatted on I Tz x 11 size for use with public notice C. S1e Plan - to applicable scale, including all proposed improvements and significant existing features such as culverts, bridges and bridge abutments. D. Floodplain Analysis - meeting the requirements of the Land Use and Development Code including Section 3-301 and 4-203 (O). The Floodplain Analysis needs to be completed by a qualified licensed professional engineer and needs to include the engineer's stamp. Some elements may not be applicable based on the lack of floodplain mapping for the area. An explanation - justification in those cases needs to be provided. E. The Application will need to include details and plans for the proposed improvements.F. The Floodplain Analysis will need to address mitigation for improvements and the lack of any impacts from the proposed improvements (i.e. no impact on flooding potential -Zero Rise) G. The Analysis will need to include information on construction practices including staging areas, stock piling areas, protection of water quality from sediment or erosion potential, equipment to be used, and detailed revegetation plans. H. The submittals need to address compliance with the Review Criteria contained in Section 4-109 as aPPlicable. l. The submittals need to include all other existing reports, studies, and permits including but not limited to any past review by the Army Corp of Engineers and wetlands analYses. J. The submittals need to generally address compliance with Section 7-203 Protection of Water Bodies and the exceptions contained therein for certain types of uses An additional pre-application meeting or phone conference with staff is an available option as you prepare your application. That follow-up could also include the County's Consulting Engineer. The Application submittal needs to include 3 hard copies of the entire Application and I Digital PDF Copy of the entire Application (on a CD or USB Stick). Both the paper and digital coþies should be split into individual sections and labelled. Please refer to this pre- application summary for submittal requirements that are appropriate for your Application. VI. APPLICATION REVIEW FEES This application will be subject to the following fees and deposit requirements: Planning Review Fees: $ 400 (Additional Staff time charged at hourly rate of $40.50) Referral Agency Fees: $ tbd (Review fees associated with consulting engineer review) J Total Deposit:$ 400 (additionalfees to be determined by hourly rates) VII. GENERALAPPLICATIONPROCESSING The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the County. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. This summary does not create a legal or vested right. The summary is valid for a six month period, after which an update should be requested. The Applicant is advised that the Application submittal once accepted by the County becomes public information and will be available (including electronically) for review by the public. Proprietary information can be redacted from documents príor to submittal. Pre-application Summarv Prepared bv: r)zuhL r/-/,ç Glenn Hartmann, Senior Planner, CFM Date 4 Authorization Forms Floodplain Letter Colorado River Engineering, Inc  P.O. Box 1301  Rifle, CO 81650  1 06‐20‐2019 Floodplain Letter    June 20, 2019  Mr. Glenn Hartmann    Floodplain Administrator  Building and Planning, Garfield County  108 Eighth Street, Suite 401  Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601  Email: ghartmann@garfield‐county.com      RE: Phase II Floodplain Permit Request – Meadow Creek Ranch (MCR) – Stream Restoration &  Stabilization Project.    Dear Mr. Hartmann:    Colorado River Engineering, Inc. (CRE) has reviewed the proposed stream restoration plans  prepared for Meadow Creek Ranch Phase II, which is similar in purpose and scope to the Phase I  work permitted last year. The Phase II work will be completed by Five Rivers, Inc. and Claffey  Ecological Consulting Inc. who are concurrently seeking a General Permit 12 from the Army Corps  of Engineers. The stream improvements will occur along a 2.5 mile reach of Main Elk Creek and  Elk Creek located approximately 3 miles northwest of the Town of New Castle and immediately  downstream of the reach which was restored under FDPA‐09‐17‐8576. The improvements are  located entirely within the land parcel owned by the Ranch (PIN: 2125‐142‐00‐125). The vicinity  map illustrating the extent of the work is attached as Figure 1.    The project location is not within the Garfield County Floodplain Overlay Zone District. In other  words,  it  is  outside  of  a  FEMA  mapped  “Flood  Insurance  Rate  Map”  or  other  past  studies  completed in Garfield County. However, Section 3‐102.A.2.b. of the Garfield County Land Use  Development Code (LUDC) identifies the need to regulate “development” in unmapped areas.  Research of the definition in Section 15 of the LUDC indicates that the stream restoration project  could be covered under the terminology of “development” and therefore, MCR proposes to seek  floodplain permit approval from Garfield County for the Phase II stream restoration work.      The project improvements will restore and stabilize the creek channel and banks as well as  improve  the  aquatic  habitat.  CRE  has  worked  with  Five  Rivers,  Inc.  and  Claffey  Ecological  Consulting, Inc on similar projects and have observed that construction techniques utilized are  quite effective. Past projects have shown substantial improvement to the aquatic habitat and  floodplain corridor. It is our opinion that a detailed hydraulic analysis for this project is not  needed or warranted because there is not any proposed development related to housing or other  improvements that require the determination of base flood elevations. The work being proposed  Colorado River Engineering, Inc  P.O. Box 1301  Rifle, CO 81650  2 06‐20‐2019 Floodplain Letter  will be completed within the stream channel and impacts will be confined within the ranch  property. This area is included in the FEMA preliminary FIRM map Panel 1105E, dated October  26, 2011 (attached). Portions of the subject property are mapped as “Zone A” meaning this area  is within a 1% annual chance of flooding but no depths or base flood elevations have been  determined.        This stream restoration work will result in a net fill of material in the creek because of the severe  areas of erosion that require extensive bank stabilization as well as the hardened riffle below the  Thompkins Ditch diversion structure which is aimed to improve fish passage above the irrigation  diversion structure. The Thompkins Ditch includes a concrete diversion structure which spans the  width of the creek to back water up into the headgate. This structure creates a barrier for fish to  access Elk Creek above the diversion (Figure 2).       Figure 2: Thompkins (aka Roseman) Ditch Diversion Structure Crossing Elk Creek.    Riffles, lateral bars, bank toes and coir banks are the features that require fill below the ordinary  high‐water line; the fill consists mainly of large river cobbles. There will be no increase of the  historic floodplain because fill is being placed in areas that have been severely eroded. It is our  opinion that the proposed project meets the purpose of the floodplain overlay requirements as  identified in Section 3‐102.A of the Garfield County LUDC. In our opinion, the project will improve  the floodplain corridor through the property as well as have a net improvement to the water  quality  and  aquatic  habitat. Table  3‐301  of  the  LUDC  identifies  that  bank  restoration  and  stabilization are permitted uses within the floodway and floodplain.  Colorado River Engineering, Inc  P.O. Box 1301  Rifle, CO 81650  3 06‐20‐2019 Floodplain Letter    Section 3‐301 of the LUDC deals with floodplain overlay regulations. Each code identified in the  Pre‐Application Summary is addressed below:    3‐301.A – Use Restriction    1. This section identifies that bank restoration and stabilization work is permitted in the  floodway and 100‐year floodplain.    3‐301.B – General Standards    1. N/A ‐ no new construction or substantial improvement to existing structures is being  proposed.  2. N/A ‐ no new construction or substantial improvement to existing structures is being  proposed.  3. N/A ‐ no new construction or substantial improvement to existing structures is being  proposed.  3‐301.D – Floodway    1. While the proposed work will result in fill material being placed in the floodway, this fill  will be placed in areas that have experienced degradation of the stream channel due to erosion  from  high  runoff  and  agricultural  activities.  The  fill  will  also  be  placed  downstream  of  the  Thompkins Ditch diversion structure to improve fish passage into the higher reaches of Elk Creek.  The restoration work will return the channel to conditions that existed prior to erosion events as  well as stabilize the stream banks to prevent future degradation. No significant changes to flood  elevations outside the ranch property will result from this work. Section 3‐301.A permits this type  of work in the floodway.  2. N/A  3. N/A  3‐301.E – Standards for areas of shallow floodway    3. N/A – No structures requiring drainage are being constructed.   3‐301.G – Alteration of Watercourse    1. The  restoration  work  being  proposed  was  designed  considering  sediment  transport,  erosion, deposition and channel migration. The work aims to restore and stabilize the stream  Colorado River Engineering, Inc  P.O. Box 1301  Rifle, CO 81650  4 06‐20‐2019 Floodplain Letter  channel to prevent further erosion and improve aquatic habitat by configuring pools, riffles and  lateral bars at appropriate widths to maintain stability. The riffles and lateral bars are low profile;  this creates a narrower channel during low flows caused by water diversions from the creek but  also provides channel capacity to handle high flow events.   2. No change to the 100‐year floodplain is anticipated from this work. The work aims to  restore the channel to historic conditions.  3. This area is not mapped as a FEMA floodplain; preliminary mapping includes this area as  Zone A meaning no base flood elevations have been determined. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers  General Permit 12 is concurrently being sought for this work. The work is confined to the  landowner’s property and will have no impact to upstream and downstream landowners.   4. Stream restoration work was designed by Matt Weaver of Five Rivers, Inc who has  extensive experience in this type of stream restoration work. It is our opinion that the design  follows best management practices and industry standards for this type of restoration work. The  design is consistent with other restoration work that CRE has been involved with.   5. This area is currently not mapped as a FEMA floodplain. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers  General Permit 12 is concurrently being sought for this work. The proposed activities will meet  the applicable requirements, similar to the completed Phase I.  6. This work will restore the channel to historic conditions and will have no impact on  upstream or downstream landowners as the work is confined to the applicant’s property. If a rise  were to occur from the addition of fill material, any impact would be confined to the applicant’s  property; no structures would be impacted. FEMA preliminary maps designate this area as Zone  A, meaning no base flood elevations have been determined.  7. The flood‐carrying capacity of Main Elk Creek and Elk Creek will not be diminished by the  work  being  proposed  under  this  permit  application.  Any  required maintenance will be  performed.   Section 4‐203(O) of the LUDC includes details for a floodplain analysis, which we are seeking an  exemption from. Any impact to base flood elevations cannot be assessed because base flood  elevations have not been determined. Each point will be addressed below:    1. This  point  is  not  applicable  since  this  area  is  not  currently  been  mapped  FEMA.  Preliminary FEMA FIRM maps do include this area; however, base flood elevations have not been  determined. Additionally, no structures are being built.   2. N/A  3. N/A  ! ! C o lorado Rive r C o l o r a d o River ElkCreekMain Elk Creek27 35 29 31 15 25 34 4 13 20 7 26 8 36 30 12 18 5 19 3 14 2 22 17 2423 32T5S R90WT5S R91WT5S R90WT6S R91W T5S R91WT6S R91W NEWCASTLE Upper Lower Source: US National Park Service, Copyright:© 2013 National GeographicSociety, i-cubed, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, EarthstarGeographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and theGIS User Community 4Legend CITIES STREAMS Meadow Creek Ranch SECTIONS LAKES MAJOR RIVERS TOWNSHIPS Document Name: Vicinity Map.mxd Meadow Creek Ranch Phase II Drawn by: WAR Approved by: CM Date: 6/19/2019 0 0.65 1.30.325 Miles Vicinity Map Figure:PO Box 1301Rifle, CO 81650Tel 970-625-4933 1 Client: West Elk CreekJOINS PANEL 0700JOINS PANEL 1110JOINS PANEL 1108JOINS PANEL 1115JOINS PANEL 1085T. 5 S.T. 6 S.T. 5 S.T. 6 S.R. 92 W.R. 91 W.ZONE AZONE ALIMIT OF STUDYGarfield CountyUnincorporated Areas080205Garfield CountyUnincorporated Areas080205Garfield CountyUnincorporated Areas080205Garfield CountyUnincorporated Areas080205BUFORD RDMAIN ELK RDBUFORD RD279000m E278000m E276000m E275000m E280000m E277000m E4383000m N4384000m N4385000m N4386000m N4387000m N4388000m N4389000m N2415000 FT2405000 FT2410000 FT1640000 FT1645000 FT1650000 FT1655000 FT 39º 33' 45''107º 33' 45'' 39º 33' 45'' 107º 37' 30'' 107º 33' 45'' 39º 37' 30'' 107º 37' 30'' 39º 37' 30''1564893217363324341625123511141315232621272228102920COMMUNITYNUMBERPANELSUFFIXCONTAINS:(SEE MAP INDEX FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT)Federal Emergency Management AgencyFLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPFIRMNotice to User: The Map Number shown belowshould be used when placing map orders; theCommunity Number shown above should beused on insurance applications for the subject community.EFFECTIVE DATEMAP REPOSITORIESRefer to Map Repositories list on Map IndexEFFECTIVE DATE OF COUNTYWIDEFLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPEFFECTIVE DATE(S) OF REVISION(S) TO THIS PANELFor community map revision history prior to countywide mapping, refer to the CommunityMap History table located in the Flood Insurance Study report for this jurisdiction.To determine if flood insurance is available in this community, contact your insurance agentor call the National Flood Insurance Program at 1-800-638-6620.MAP NUMBER08045C1105EPRELIMINARYGARFIELD COUNTY,COLORADOAND INCORPORATED AREASGARFIELD COUNTY 080205 1105 ENFIPNATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAMPANEL 1105EPANEL 1105 OF 2075500 20000FEET300 6000METERSMAP SCALE 1" = 1000'1000300NOTES TO USERSThis map is for use in administering the National Flood Insurance Program. It doesnot necessarily identify all areas subject to flooding, particularly from local drainagesources of small size. The community map repository should be consulted forpossible updated or additional flood hazard information.To obtain more detailed information in areas where Base Flood Elevations (BFEs)and/or floodways have been determined, users are encouraged to consult the FloodProfiles and Floodway Data and/or Summary of Stillwater Elevations tables containedwithin the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) Report that accompanies this FIRM. Usersshould be aware that BFEs shown on the FIRM represent rounded whole-footelevations. These BFEs are intended for flood insurance rating purposes only andshould not be used as the sole source of flood elevation information. Accordingly,flood elevation data presented in the FIS Report should be utilized in conjunction withthe FIRM for purposes of construction and/or floodplain management.Coastal Base Flood Elevations shown on this map apply only landward of 0.0’North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). Users of this FIRM should beaware that coastal flood elevations are also provided in the Summary of StillwaterElevations table in the Flood Insurance Study Report for this jurisdiction. Elevationsshown in the Summary of Stillwater Elevations table should be used for constructionand/or floodplain management purposes when they are higher than the elevationsshown on this FIRM.Boundaries of the floodways were computed at cross sections and interpolatedbetween cross sections. The floodways were based on hydraulic considerations withregard to requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program. Floodway widthsand other pertinent floodway data are provided in the Flood Insurance Study Reportfor this jurisdiction.Certain areas not in Special Flood Hazard Areas may be protected by flood controlstructures. Refer to Section 2.4 "Flood Protection Measures" of the Flood InsuranceStudy Report for information on flood control structures for this jurisdiction.The projection used in the preparation of this map was Universal TransverseMercator (UTM) zone 13. The horizontal datum was NAD 83, GRS 1980spheroid. Differences in datum, spheroid, projection or UTM zones used in theproduction of FIRMs for adjacent jurisdictions may result in slight positionaldifferences in map features across jurisdiction boundaries. These differences do notaffect the accuracy of this FIRM.Flood elevations on this map are referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of1988. These flood elevations must be compared to structure and ground elevationsreferenced to the same vertical datum. For information regarding conversionbetween the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 and the North AmericanVertical Datum of 1988, visit the National Geodetic Survey website athttp://www.ngs.noaa.gov or contact the National Geodetic Survey at the followingaddress:NGS Information ServicesNOAA, N/NGS12National Geodetic SurveySSMC-3, #92021315 East-West HighwaySilver Spring, Maryland 20910-3282(301) 713-3242To obtain current elevation, description, and/or location information for bench marksshown on this map, please contact the Information Services Branch of the NationalGeodetic Survey at (301) 713- 3242, or visit its website at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov.Base map information shown on this FIRM was derived from NAIP Orthophotographyproduced with a one meter ground resolution from photography dated 2009.This map reflects more detailed and up-to-date stream channel configurationsthan those shown on the previous FIRM for this jurisdiction. The floodplains andfloodways that were transferred from the previous FIRM may have been adjustedto conform to these new stream channel configurations. As a result, theFlood Profiles and Floodway Data tables for multiple streams in the FloodInsurance Study Report (which contains authoritative hydraulic data) may reflectstream channel distances that differ from what is shown on this map.Corporate limits shown on this map are based on the best data available at the timeof publication. Because changes due to annexations or de-annexations may haveoccurred after this map was published, map users should contact appropriatecommunity officials to verify current corporate limit locations.Please refer to the separately printed Map Index for an overview map of thecounty showing the layout of map panels; community map repository addresses;and a Listing of Communities table containing National Flood Insurance Programdates for each community as well as a listing of the panels on which each communityis located.For information on available products associated with this FIRM visit the MapService Center (MSC) website at http://msc.fema.gov. Available products mayinclude previously issued Letters of Map Change, a Flood Insurance Study Report,and/or digital versions of this map. Many of these products can be ordered orobtained directly from the MSC website.If you have questions about this map, how to order products, or the NationalFlood Insurance Program in general, please call the FEMA Map InformationeXchange (FMIX) at 1-877-FEMA-MAP (1-877-336-2627) or visit the FEMAwebsite at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip. NOTICE TO MAP USERS FEMA maintains information about map features, such as street locations and names, in or near designated flood hazard areas. Requests to revise information in or near designated flood hazard areas may be provided to FEMA during the community review period, at the final Consultation Coordination Officer's meeting, or during the statutory 90-day appeal period. Approved requests for changes will be shown on the final printed FIRM.Zone D boundaryFloodway boundary1% Annual Chance Floodplain Boundary0.2% Annual Chance Floodplain Boundary*Referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988LEGENDSPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS (SFHAs) SUBJECT TOINUNDATION BY THE 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOODZONE AZONE AEZONE AHZONE AOZONE ARZONE A99ZONE VZONE VEZONE XFLOODWAY AREAS IN ZONE AEOTHER FLOOD AREASOTHER AREASZONE XZONE DThe 1% annual chance flood (100-year flood), also known as the base flood, is the flood that hasa 1% chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The Special Flood Hazard Area isthe area subject to flooding by the 1% annual chance flood. Areas of Special Flood Hazardinclude Zones A, AE, AH, AO, AR, A99, V, and VE. The Base Flood Elevation is the water-surfaceelevation of the 1% annual chance flood.No Base Flood Elevations determined.Base Flood Elevations determined.Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding); Base Flood Elevationsdetermined.Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually sheet flow on sloping terrain); averagedepths determined. For areas of alluvial fan flooding, velocities also determined.Special Flood Hazard Areas formerly protected from the 1% annual chanceflood by a flood control system that was subsequently decertified. ZoneAR indicates that the former flood control system is being restored to provideprotection from the 1% annual chance or greater flood.Area to be protected from 1% annual chance flood by a Federal floodprotection system under construction; no Base Flood Elevations determined.Coastal flood zone with velocity hazard (wave action); no Base Flood Elevationsdetermined.Coastal flood zone with velocity hazard (wave action); Base Flood Elevationsdetermined.The floodway is the channel of a stream plus any adjacent floodplain areas that must be kept free ofencroachment so that the 1% annual chance flood can be carried without substantial increases inflood heights.Areas of 0.2% annual chance flood; areas of 1% annual chance flood withaverage depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 squaremile; and areas protected by levees from 1% annual chance flood.Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain.Areas in which flood hazards are undetermined, but possible.CBRS areas and OPAs are normally located within or adjacent to Special Flood Hazard Areas.CBRS and OPA boundaryBoundary dividing Special Flood Hazard Area Zones and boundary dividing Special Flood Hazard Areas of different Base Flood Elevations, flood depths, or flood velocities.Base Flood Elevation value where uniform within zone; elevation infeet*Cross section lineTransect lineGeographic coordinates referenced to the North American Datum of1983 (NAD 83) Western Hemisphere1000-meter Universal Transverse Mercator grid values, zone 134989000m N5000-foot ticks: Colorado State Plane Central Zone (FIPS Zone 0502), Lambert Conformal Conic projection3100000 FTBench mark (see explanation in Notes to Users section of this FIRMpanel)River MileBase Flood Elevation line and value; elevation in feet*COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM (CBRS) AREASOTHERWISE PROTECTED AREAS (OPAs)513(EL 987)45° 02’ 08”, 93° 02’ 12”DX5510M1.5AA23 23OCT 26 2011 3.5' WIDE LARGE ROCK27'CONCRETE WEIRSPILLWAY HEADGATE FLUME DITCHLARGE ROCK N Construct harned riffle using a combination of 60 cubic yards of 2-3' rock, 8-12" cobble and 4 to 8" native streambed cobble. The riffle would be constructed to have several grade breaks as would be found in a natural steep riffle. GRADE BREAKS MAIN ELK CREEK DIVERSION PROPOSED FISH PASSAGE IMPROVEMENT MEADOW CREEK RANCH NEW CASTLE, CO. 5740.86 5741.06 5744.86 20'31' Raise water surface elevation of plunge pool below weir to el. 5741. Raise streambed elevation of existing pool tailout approximently 2.5' by placing approximately 40 cubic yards of 4 to 12" cobble to the elevation of upstream end of hardened riffle. 5738.48 MAIN ELK CREEK DIVERSION DRAWN BY: Matt Weaver DATE: 4/26/19 8950 Chapman Road, Bozeman, MT 59718406.209.1970 SCALE 1" = 15' Five Rivers, Inc. MEADOW CREEK RANCH Elevations shown on drawing in red are existing. ELEVATIONS Diversion Apron 5741.06 Spillway 5740.86 Existing Streambed @ Riffle 5738.48 Proposed Elevation of Constructed Riffle 5740.60 Existing W.S.E Below Diversion 5738.90 Proposed W.S.E. Below Diversion 5741.00 Proposed Elevation Change for Riffle +2.12' Proposed Elevation Change for W.S.E. +2.10' EXISTING STREAM SUBSTRATE EXISTING WSE PROPOSED WSE 2.1' POOL TAILOUT PLUNGE RAISE TAILOUT LARGE ROCK/COBBLE HARDENED RIFFLE PROPOSED HARDEND RIFFLE X-SECTION (NOT TO SCALE) Supplemental Information Colorado River Engineering, Inc  P.O. Box 1301  Rifle, CO 81650     1 2019‐06‐20 Phase II Supplemental Info  June 20, 2019  Mr. Glenn Hartmann  Floodplain Administrator  Building and Planning, Garfield County  108 Eighth Street, Suite 401  Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601  Email: ghartmann@garfield‐county.com      RE: Phase II Floodplain Permit Request – Meadow Creek Ranch (MCR) – Stream Restoration &  Stabilization Project.    The following information is being provided to support a Floodplain Development Permit for stream  restoration activities on Main Elk Creek and Elk Creek. This work is Phase II to work completed under  FDPA‐09‐17‐8576. It is our understanding that Garfield County staff have conducted a site visit to  view the completed Phase I work to better understand the methods and results of the work being  performed. This permit is being sought to further improve the aquatic habitat of Main Elk Creek and  Elk Creek as well as restore streambanks from erosion caused by agricultural operations and previous  high‐water events.     1. General Application Materials    a. Proof of Ownership ‐ Deed attached to this supplemental report.  b. Authorization to represent – attached.  c. Statement of authority for LLC ‐ attached  d. Signatories   e. Agreement to pay form – attached  2. List of Property Owners within 200 feet of the subject property (Attached Figure 3)    a. Account R015086  Owner MAIN ELK CREEK RANCH LLC  Physical Address 3132 243 COUNTY RD  NEW CASTLE 81647  Mailing Address 42600 R MANCINI DRIVE STERLING HEIGHTS, MI 48314    b. Account R150243  Owner BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT  Physical Address Not available  SILT 81652  Colorado River Engineering, Inc  P.O. Box 1301  Rifle, CO 81650     2 2019‐06‐20 Phase II Supplemental Info  Mailing Address 2300 RIVER FRONTAGE ROAD SILT, CO 81652    c. Account R013261  Owner BRANNAN PROPERTIES INC  Physical Address 2025 245 COUNTY RD  NEW CASTLE 81647  Mailing Address 401 W REDONDO BEACH BLVD GARDENA, CA 90248    d. Account R130308  Owner DAWSON, CLARENCE F TRUST & DAWSON, BETTY S TRUST  Physical Address 2175 245 COUNTY RD  NEW CASTLE 81647  Mailing Address 2175 COUNTY ROAD 245 NEW CASTLE , CO 81647    e. Account R013246  Owner 4J LLC  Physical Address 2101 245 COUNTY RD  NEW CASTLE 81647  Mailing Address 1793 COUNTY ROAD 245 NEW CASTLE, CO 81647    f. Account R015116  Owner ALPINE TRUST & ASSET MGMT DIV OF ALPINE BANK AS TRUSTEE FOR  TRUST UNDER WILL OF HENRY P WILLIAMS JR FBO WILLIAMS, ERIC C  Physical Address Not available  NEW CASTLE 81647  Mailing Address 225 N 5TH STREET GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501    g. Account R015110  Owner RYDEN, LOISE REVOCABLE TRUST  Physical Address 3869 245 COUNTY RD  NEW CASTLE 81647  Mailing Address 963 COUNTY ROAD 229 SILT, CO 81652    h. Account R015159  Owner ROBERTS, WARREN W TRUST & ROBERTS, CARLA R TRUST  Physical Address Not available  Colorado River Engineering, Inc  P.O. Box 1301  Rifle, CO 81650     3 2019‐06‐20 Phase II Supplemental Info  NEW CASTLE 81647  Mailing Address 4450 COUNTY ROAD 245 NEW CASTLE, CO 81647    i. Account R013262  Owner SOWIEJA, THOMAS J  Physical Address 2435 245 COUNTY RD  NEW CASTLE 81647  Mailing Address 2435 COUNTY ROAD 245 NEW CASTLE, CO 81647    3. List of mineral owners on the subject property    a. See the attached email from Karp Neu Hanlon indicating all mineral rights are  owned  by  Meadow  Creek  Ranch.  The  mineral  interests  were  researched  extensively prior to the purchase of the subject properties.    4. Site Access     a. As illustrated on the attached design sheets (1‐7), the channel of Main Elk Creek  and  Elk  Creek  is  completely  internal  to  the  Meadow  Creek  Ranch property  boundaries. Once on the Ranch property, the creek will be accessed directly.  Access points for equipment are denoted on the attached design sheets.  5. Irrigation ditches crossing the subject property    The irrigation ditches crossing the property where work will be conducted are listed below:   a. W.E. Ditch   b. Thompkins Ditch (aka Roseman)  6. Floodplain Analysis Letter    See attached Engineering letter.  7. Floodplain Review Criteria Section 4‐109    Colorado River Engineering, Inc  P.O. Box 1301  Rifle, CO 81650     4 2019‐06‐20 Phase II Supplemental Info  a. There is no danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage for the  work being proposed. The work is intended to restore and stabilize areas where  severe erosion from agricultural activities and high water have degraded the  channel.  b. N/A – No facility is proposed.  c. N/A – The work is confined within the property owned by the applicant. There is  minimal risk of material being swept onto other lands.  d. N/A – There is no change in the use, the work only aims to restore the channel  and is therefore consistent with existing and anticipated development.   e. N/A – None of the proposed work will impact the ability of ordinary or emergency  vehicles to access the property during times of flood.  f. N/A – The proposed work will have no impact to governmental response during  or after flood conditions.   g. There are no changes anticipated to the height, velocity, duration, rate of rise, or  wave action of the floodwaters. The sediment transport will be improved by the  work being proposed by recreating a riffle/pool environment and increasing the  stability  of  the  streambanks  which  will  reduce  undercutting  during  high  flow  events.  h. N/A  i. N/A  j. N/A      8. Protection of Waterbodies Section 7‐203    a. Minimum setback is not applicable, all work proposed is below the Ordinary High  Water  Line  and  a  U.S.  Army  Corp  of  Engineers  General  Permit  12 has  been  acquired.  b. N/A all work proposed is below the Ordinary High Water Line.  c. N/A all work proposed is below the Ordinary High Water Line.  d. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers General Permit 12 is concurrently being sought for  the  proposed  stream  restoration  work  on  Meadow  Creek  Ranches.  A minor  grading  permit  will  be  obtained,  if  required,  for  the  purpose  of  bonding  revegetation activities.   ! !EastElkCreekElkCreekMainElkCreekWestElkCreek WEST,WILLIAM E& STACIE A 4JLLC ALPINE TRUST & ASSETMGMT DIV OF ALPINEBANK AS TRUSTEE FORTRUST UNDER WILL OFHENRY P WILLIAMS JRFBO WILLIAMS, ERIC C 4J LLC RINKER,STACEY GREENE,THAD W &DENISE J THURMAN,MATTHEWEDWARD KING,NATHAN B& ALINA4JLLC 4J LLC PRISTAS,PAUL J &JEAN (GAY)HENDRICKSON,MARK &JENNIFER D BURNINGMOUNTAIN LAND& CATTLE LLC BRANNANPROPERTIESINCBUREAUOF LANDMANAGEMENT NEWCASTLE,TOWN OF RYDEN, LOIS EREVOCABLETRUST BATES,KELLY &EMILY HULTQUIST,JOSEPH H& GINGER J WILSON,BETTY N BUREAUOF LANDMANAGEMENT NELSEN,CHRISTINE LROBERTS, WARREN WTRUST & ROBERTS,CARLA R TRUST WHATLEY,SAM B JR MARJANEN,NATHAN & NICOLE HAMANN,JERROD C ROBERTS, WARREN WTRUST & ROBERTS,CARLA R TRUST ROBERTS, WARREN WTRUST & ROBERTS,CARLA R TRUSTGILMORE,COLIN CASS, LYNN E& ISABEL M &JASMINE M BUREAUOF LANDMANAGEMENT FERRIN,CLEYO W& ROSIE B WUERKER,LISA S VANHOOSE,MATTHEW L& VONNIE J RUTLEDGE, PAUL E &BELVEDERE, ELISE M HOPKINS,BRIAN R& KAY C NEUTZE,JAMES T SRAMEK,ANNETTE LAURETTE,ALAN J KRAUTH,LEE E &MARY C SHAW,DIANE K SIMMS,JUDITH I BUREAUOF LANDMANAGEMENT BUREAUOF LANDMANAGEMENT MCNEAL,FRED ABARNETT,FELICIA C TERRELLFAMILYTRUST CHOWDRY,PHYLLIS L CHOWDRY,PHYLLIS L VIXRANCH CO GRASSVALLEYRANCH LLC BUREAUOF LANDMANAGEMENT WEST ELKRANCH LLLP GILDA MANCINIMILLELOT CHILDREN'STRUST AGREEMENT BUREAUOF LANDMANAGEMENT BUREAUOF LANDMANAGEMENT BUREAUOF LANDMANAGEMENT BUREAUOF LANDMANAGEMENT MAINELK CREEKRANCH LLC FARIS, JACKDARRELL &LOIS DUFF GAVITO,JOSEPH E &JULIE A BERSHENYI,STEPHANIE M WALKER,SALLY A MEADOWCREEK LLC Upper Lower Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP,swisstopo, and the GIS User Community4 Legend MEADOW CREEK RANCH PARCELS STREAMS Document Name: Property Ownership Map-jtp.mxd Drawn by: JT Approved by: CM Date: 6/20/2019 PO Box 1301Rifle, CO 81650Tel 970-625-49330.250.50Miles Client: Figure: Property Ownership Meadow Creek Ranch Phase II 3 Meadow Creek LLC Mineral Rights and Ownership Deeds 1 Wendy Ryan From:Tim Casey <tim@mmabreck.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 18, 2017 11:02 AM To:Mike Claffey (mclaffey@acsol.net); Wendy Ryan Subject:FW: Colorado River Engineering, Inc. - Invoice Job #1156 Mike and Wendy,  Language from Patrick Baker, our attorney who conducted the mineral rights exam,  for the Garfield County application. Please let me know what additional information you require.  Thanks,  Tim   Timothy J. Casey  Mountain Marketing Associates, Ltd.  PO Box 2340  100 S. Ridge Street, #105  Breckenridge, CO 80424  W (970) 453-2571  Fax (970) 453-5490  Cell (970) 390-0859  E-mail = tim@mmabreck.com www.mmabreck.com From: Patrick L. Barker [mailto:plb@mountainlawfirm.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 5:44 PM To: Tim Casey Subject: RE: Colorado River Engineering, Inc. - Invoice Job #1156 Prior to acquiring title to the subject properties in 2016, a principal of each of the Applicants retained the  services of 1) an independent title abstractor to ascertain and obtain copies of all instruments of record in the  office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder which pertain to title of the subject properties’ mineral estates,  and 2) a Colorado licensed attorney to examine such instruments to provide an opinion on the status of  title.  The licensed attorney determined that one party held an undivided interest in title to the mineral  estates.  Based upon the attorney’s opinion, Applicant Meadow Creek, LLC accepted from that party a deed  conveying such undivided interest.  As such, title to the subject mineral estates is vested in Applicant Meadow  Creek, LLC.  Applicant Meadow Creek, LLC has actual notice of the application submitted by Applicant Main Elk  Ranch, LLC and, therefore, no further notice to Meadow Creek, LLC from Main Elk Ranch, LLC is necessary.  Patrick L Barker 201 14th Street, Suite 200, P.O. Drawer 2030, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 T: 970.945.2261 x112/F: 970.945.7336 www.mountainlawfirm.com  This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If  you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information  Mineral Rights Claffey Ecological Consulting, Inc Report In Support of USACE General Permit 12 and Garfield County FDPA Claffey Ecological Consulting, Inc. Wetlands-Streams-Wildlife-404 Permitting-NEPA _____________________________________________________________________________________ 970-640-3783 mclaffey@acsol.net June 17, 2019 Mr. Travis Morse U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District Colorado West Section 400 Rood Avenue, Room 200 Grand Junction, Colorado 81521 DA Permit Number: SPK-2017-00295 Dear Travis: Attached is an application for RGP 12 verification for Phase 2 of the Meadow Creek Ranch Aquatic Habitat Improvement Project in Garfield County, Colorado. This second and final phase of the project is on the Lower Ranch which extends from just upstream of the Newcastle-Buford Road (CR 245) to the downstream property line. We completed Phase 1 in 2018 which you were able to visit in August of last year. We are also submitting an application for a floodplain development permit to Garfield County. I am attaching a letter of authorization signed by Mr. Tim Casey the property owner’s representative and a separate form signed by the property owner, Mr. Mark Magidson, authorizing Tim Casey and me to submit applications for the project. Five Rivers, Inc designed the habitat improvements and stabilization work proposed and will provide supervision during construction. The work is much the same as upstream with pools, constructed lateral bars, riffles, and stabilizing eroded streambanks. However, we also have a concrete irrigation diversion for the Thompkins Ditch (aka Roseman Ditch) which creates a fish block for trout, at least brown trout in the fall. We developed plans to address this problem to allow better fish passage. I have coordinated with Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) to obtain their input on the plans for the fish passage, and will provide CPW a complete copy of this application. If we receive input on the fish passage we can address, we will modify the plans accordingly. We are also working to coordinate with the Thompkins Ditch Company. Thanks you in advance for your consideration of this application. If you would like to review the project let me know, perhaps we can coordinate that review with Ben Felt of CPW. Matt Weaver and I reviewed the project, including the Phase 1 work, with Glenn Hartmann, Garfield County Floodplain Coordinator in April, 2019. Sincerely, Michael Claffey Claffey Ecological Consulting, Inc. Copy Furnished: Mark Magidson, Meadow Creek LLC Tim Casey Ben Felt, CPW Glenn Hartmann, Garfield County Wendy R yan, Colorado River Engineering Matt Weaver Claffey Ecological Consulting, Inc. & Five Rivers, Inc _____________________________________________________________________________________ 970-640-3783 mclaffey@acsol.net MEADOW CREEK RANCH AQUATIC HABITAT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Phase 2 – Lower Ranch Elk Creek and Main Elk Creek, Garfield County Regional General Permit 12 Application & Support for Garfield County Floodplain Development Permit Application June 17, 2019 Prepared on behalf of: Meadow Creek LLC Submitted to: Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District Western Colorado Regulatory Section & Garfield County 1 I. Introduction Meadow Creek LLC proposes a creek restoration and fishery habitat improvement project on Main Elk Creek and Elk Creek on the lower 2.5 miles of Meadow Creek Ranch. This application is for Phase 2 of a voluntary restoration project. Phase 1 on the upper 2.7 miles was completed in 2018 under DA permit SPK-2017-00295 and Garfield County Floodplain Development Permit 09-17-8576. Meadow Creek Ranch LLC purchased the property in the fall of 2016, and retained Claffey Ecological and Five Rivers Inc to review the site and develop a creek restoration plan in 2017. We completed design for Phase 2 in the fall of 2018 and spring of 2019. The property was formerly owned by Exxon Corporation and was leased to agricultural operations and those operations continued, with cows and hay production on the upper ranch, and sheep and hay production on the lower ranch. The cattle operation on the upper ranch will discontinue this June, and for 2019 only hay production will continue on the Upper Ranch. A sheep operation will continue to operate on the lower ranch. The Upper and Lower Ranch sections are divided by County Road 245, the Buford-New Castle Road. In 2018, we also constructed several thousand feet of riparian fencing on the upper ranch to keep cows out of the riparian areas. The creek channel and adjacent riparian communities have been heavily impacted by agricultural production over the years. We also conducted extensive weed control on the entire ranch in the spring and fall of 2018, and will continue that control in 2019. The Roberts Family now holds the agricultural lease on the entire ranch and will control weeds. We request authorization of this project under Regional General Permit 12 and a Floodplain Development Permit through Garfield County. Matt Weaver of Five Rivers and Michael Claffey met with Glenn Hartmann of Garfield County in April 2019 to review the Phase 1 work completed on the Upper Ranch and the proposed work on the Lower Ranch. The Corps of Engineers Colorado West Regulatory Office staff reviewed Phase 1 portions of the completed work and on-going work on the Upper Ranch in August 2018. Comments on the work completed by both the Corps staff and Mr. Hartmann were positive. II. Applicant Mark Magidson, Meadow Creek LLC, 1411 Mockingbird Place, Los Angeles, CA 90069 Contact Person/Owner Agent: Tim Casey, Meadow Creek LLC, c/o MMA Associates, Breckenridge, CO 80424 (970) 453-2571 tim@mmabreck.com Physical Address – 1862 243 County RD, New Castle, CO 81647 Aquatic Habitat Design: Matt Weaver Five Rivers, Inc (406) 209-1970 mattweaver406@gmail.com 2 Project Engineer for County Application Chris Manera and Wendy Ryan Colorado River Engineering, Inc (970) 625-4933 III. Project Area Description – Phase 2 Project is located in: Sections 15, 22, 23 and 26, Township 5 South, Range 91 West, of the 6th principal meridian, Garfield County, Colorado Upstream limit: 39.609426, -107.583044 Downstream: 39.591978, -107.564310 The project area is located at 5,670 to 5,780 feet above msl in Garfield County approximately 4 miles NW of New Castle, Colorado. Main Elk Creek joins West Elk Creek in the project reach just upstream of the Buford-New Castle Road (CR 245) forming Elk Creek. Elk Creek is a primary tributary of the Colorado River, and drains the south side of the Flat Tops including Clinetop Mesa and Deep Creek Point (See quad copy attached). Between the higher elevations of the Flattops and the project area, Main Elk Creek flows through a steep, narrow, limestone gorge or canyon. The creek leaves the canyon approximately 3 miles upstream of the Upper Ranch. Elk Creek includes three channels, East Elk, Main Elk, and West Elk. Meadow Creek Ranch (MCR) lies along Main Elk Creek and Elk Creek downstream of the confluence with West Elk Creek. The entire ranch includes approximately 5 miles of stream corridor. The project area segments of the ranch are adjacent to BLM lands, and downstream of the property boundary are other private lands along the creek corridor. Land use in the project area is primarily agricultural and semi-arid shrublands managed by the BLM on the adjacent hillslopes. The project area is shown in Figure 1 (USGS topo) and Figure 2 is aerial view of the project area with property boundaries. The morphology of the project reach is divided into four reaches. Upstream of Buford - Newcastle Road (CR 245), Main Elk Creek flows through a narrow canyon with the toe of the adjacent hillslopes reaching down to a narrow floodplain terrace. A narrow band of riparian vegetation is present including narrow leaf cottonwood and box elder with oakbrush along the banks in locations. Wetland habitat is sparse in this reach with a few sandbar willows along the streambank in locations. The gradient is moderate at 1% with steeper sections at 1.3% and the substrate is medium to large cobble with a D-50 of about 8 inches, with larger material common. The bankfull width is about 40-45 feet. This reach actually has some of the better aquatic habitat for trout on the ranch, primarily because the narrow canyon excluded agricultural (cows) in this section. This confined reach is about 3,000 feet in length. Downstream of CR 245, the valley opens up and Elk Creek meanders through the floodplain. There are point bars and low floodplain terraces which are primarily hay meadow/pastures. In some locations steeper hillslopes reach down to the streambank. The substrate is smaller cobble with a D-50 of 4-6 inches. Gradient is lower than above the bridge, at about 0.5%. 3 This reach is approximately 4000 linear feet. The bankfull width is at 40 to 45 feet in riffles and runs but up to 90 to 100 feet in the large meanders. The next reach is more confined as the adjacent hillslopes extend to the creek channel, and it appears the creek has cut through colluvial fans or debris flow fans on both sides of the channel. Sinuosity is low and the meanders are not present as in the reach just upstream. It appears there are abandoned meanders in the downstream section, but the change occurred long ago. The channel makes a meander to the north at the lower end. The substrate is larger cobble than above with a D-50 of 6 to 8 inches and the gradient is 1.2%. The bankfull width is about 40 feet but narrower in a few locations. The reach extends down to the Thompkins Ditch diversion, and is 1,850 feet in length. Oakbrush and narrow leaf cottonwood are the dominant vegetation along the streambanks. The next reach extends downstream of Thompkins Ditch (aka Roseman Ditch) diversion to the property line. The channel is not as confined or entrenched in this reach as just above. The south side of the channel has low floodplain terrace with a cottonwood gallery riparian forest in old abandoned meander, but there is also a cobble dike on the south bank restricting access to the terrace during high flow events. The channel in the dike section is entrenched. Sinuosity is low, and the substrate is medium to large cobble with a D-50 of 8 inches. The bankfull width is about 40 feet. The gradient is lower than just upstream with an average of about 0.7%. This reach is approximately 2,830 feet in length. The entire project reach is 2.2 miles in length, and includes Main Elk Creek and Elk Creek. The riparian habitat includes narrow leaf cottonwood and box elder, with pasture grasses in the under story. The adjacent hay meadows and pastures are a mix of alfalfa, smooth brome, orchard grass, and Kentucky blue grass. The adjacent hillslopes which extend into the meadows are sagebrush and oakbrush. Wetlands are very limited in the project reach with a few areas of sandbar willow on the streambanks. Three man-made structures cross the creek channel in the project reach: the County Road 245 Bridge in the upstream, a ranch access bridge near the downstream property line, and the Thompkins Ditch diversion. The Thompkins Ditch diversion is a concrete dam across the channel, 4 feet high, with a concrete chute on the south bank. The Thompkins Ditch Company maintains and operates the diversion and sends irrigation water downstream to properties down valley. The diversion appears to be a fish block, preventing upstream movement by spawning brown trout in the fall, and most likely rainbows in the spring. The main concrete wall is a 4 foot vertical drop with little to no plunge pool. The concrete chute on the south bank has a good plunge pool but the chute itself is narrow and high velocity with shallow depths in the fall. The channel is not as degraded as on the Upper Ranch as described in the 2017 application. The Upper Ranch was a cattle operation with free access to the channel by cows while on the ranch in spring, early summer fall and winter. The Lower Ranch has been managed as a sheep operation for years which tend to be less damaging to the channel and streambanks, and also better overall land management practices. 4 The creek channel is degraded with eroding stream banks, unstable meander sections, shallow pools, and overwide sections. A slump or large bank failure just downstream of the CR 245 bridge on the right descending bank is active and continues to add fine sediment to the reach. Water quality appears to be good in Elk Creek, although mid to late summer temperatures are not conducive for trout due to irrigation diversions. The watershed above in the canyon is limestone (CNHP Garfield County Report), so water chemistry could be good for a trout fishery. Discussions with Ben Felt, CPW biologist, indicated large numbers of brown trout were sampled downstream of the Ware and Hinds irrigation diversion on Elk Creek (downstream of this property) during the fall of 2016 when the fish were moving up from the Colorado River. Trout Unlimited and CPW, with cooperation from the Ware and Hinds Ditch Company, constructed a fish bypass around the Ware and Hinds diversion in 2018. We had channel cross-sections surveyed by BookCliff Survey in the spring of 2019 prior to runoff, with additional survey work around the Thompkins Ditch diversion. A USGS gage was operated for a short time on the Upper Ranch (upstream end of the property) which had available flow data from 1990 to 1997. We contacted the USGS for any additional data, but the only data available were published on-line. Several drainages enter Main Elk Creek below this gage; therefore, discharge in the project area was higher than recorded at the gage station. There were three flow events in the 7 year span for which the gage recorded flows near 1,200 cfs with 1997 as the highest. This year (2019) could be a major flow event on Elk Creek. The Colorado at Glenwood Springs was at 16,700 cfs on June 14, 2019 which is over 6000 cfs above the median daily statistic (https://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/dv?referred_module=sw&site_no=09085100 ), and the large, upstream reservoirs were still filling. 5 IV. Purpose and Need The purpose and need of the project is to improve aquatic habitat in Main Elk and Elk Creeks and stabilize the stream channel on the lower 2.2 miles of Meadow Creek Ranch. The creek has been impacted by agricultural operations over the years and from major flow events, channel avulsions, and bank erosion upstream. The reach has been affected by bank erosion within the project reach, and from upstream. The 2011 event, and possibly earlier events, deposited an excessive amount of bedload of smaller cobble in the reach downstream of CR 245, where the gradient is low. Pools are generally shallow except for a few decent pools, and the channel in many sections is overwide, particularly for the limited flow regime the channel sees during the irrigation season. The aquatic habitat is impacted by irrigation diversions during late summer. The depleted stream flows, combined with the changes in stream morphology to shallow pools and overwide riffles and runs, limits aquatic habitat. The two large meander sections have excessive bedload which is causing bank erosion on the right descending banks resulting in near vertical, unvegetated streambanks. The amount of material (small cobble) and the unstable conditions of the meander and point bars will lead to mobilization of some of that bedload and additional filling of the channel downstream. The Thompkins Ditch diversion appears to be a fish block for trout moving upstream. The concrete dam creates a block to fish passage, and the chute on the right descending bank would be potentially be passable only at certain flow levels. In the fall when brown trout are moving upstream to spawn, it is unlikely they would be able to move upstream past this diversion. Trout 6 Unlimited and Colorado Parks and Wildlife recently completed a fish bypass channel for the Ware and Hinds diversion structure, which is downstream approximately 2 stream miles. We propose to develop fish passage on the Thompkins Ditch with this project by building a hardened riffle just downstream of the diversion structure to back the water surface elevation up and allow fish passage over the structure. The project uses natural channel design and techniques Five Rivers and others have employed throughout the west. Natural functioning riffles and lateral bars are used to control grade and maintain scour in pools excavated in the appropriate locations. Pools provide adult habitat in winter and in late summer providing a low flow and temperature refuge when irrigation diversions deplete flows. The pool tail-outs (downstream end of pool as it transitions to riffle or run) will create good spawning habitat, and appropriate sized gravels will be sorted and spread in the tail-outs where possible. The existing riffles are stabilized and the constructed lateral bars help to narrow the channel in locations to improve the width-depth ratio. Eroded stream banks are stabilized using a cobble toe and revegetated with nursery willow plantings. V. Project Description The proposed work is shown on the attached figures (sheets 1-7) superimposed on aerial imagery. Typical cross-sections and profiles are included (Figures 3 and 4). The hardened riffle at the Thompkins Ditch is included with a profile showing the proposed elevations. All work is managed in the field by Five Rivers, Inc and Matt Weaver directs the equipment operator on all in-stream work. The equipment operator has over 20 years of experience in this type of work and he has completed stream habitat projects throughout the west. The project primarily uses native material excavated from pools to build lateral bars. However, larger material (8 to 18 inch) cobble is imported to stabilize eroded streambanks, and to add existing riffles for stabilization. In addition, 2 to 3 foot rock would be imported for the hardened riffle to allow for fish passage at the Thompkins Ditch diversion. On Sheets 1-3, starting upstream of the CR 245 bridge at station 1+00 and downstream to station 31+00, a series of pools and adjacent lateral bars are proposed. Material excavated from the pools is used to form the lateral bars which are shaped to remain stable, maintain scour in the pools at higher flows, and decrease the width-depth ratio at low flows to improve habitat conditions. The cross-section for station 7+50 shows a typical pool and lateral bar. The bar is well below bankfull elevation, thus will remain stable but at low flows helps decrease the width- depth ratio improving habitat in the pool. Station 31+00 is just upstream of the CR 245 bridge. At station 13+50 an eroded streambank is stabilized using large cobble excavated from the adjacent pools and placed approximately 2 feet above the streambed. The cobble is then planted with 100 nursery willows. 7 Photo 1. Section of the first reach upstream of County RD 245, taken from road at about station 15+50 Approximately 140 feet downstream of the CR 245 bridge there is a large slump or slide area on the right descending bank (sheet 3, station 34+80). The slump occurred between 2014 and 2016 (aerial interpretation) most likely due to a breach in an irrigation ditch upslope of the bank. The slump is unstable and creates an eroded, unvegetated streambank for approximately100 linear feet, which releases fine sediments into the creek. The streambank is stabilized by placing a two foot lift of stream cobble excavated from the downstream pool, and then facing the cobble with 8 to 18 inch cobble to prevent scour. Two hundred and fifty containerized willows are planted behind the large cobble, and the 2 foot lift is seeded with a native seed mix. We also seed the upper sections of the slump with an upland seed mix. 8 Photo 2. Slump downstream of CR 245 bridge Starting at station 36+25 and extending downstream to station 43+00 a series of pools and adjacent lateral bars are constructed in the same manner as described above. The pools are relatively narrow and situated under overhanging cover of cottonwoods. At about station 42+80 is the start of a large meander in the channel. The meander received a good deal of small cobble deposition during upstream events on the left descending bank or point bar, and the right descending bank has eroded to a near vertical bank about 6 to 8 feet high. We propose to stabilize the eroded bank by adding a 2 foot lift of stream cobble excavated from pools upstream and then face the cobble with 8 to 18 inch larger material. Two hundred and fifty nursery willows would be planted behind the larger cobble and the cobble lift seeded with a native seed mix (see below for mixes). The point bar was also used as a gravel borrow area in the past for ranch roads. The point bar would be graded to a more stable configuration, adding about 25 cubic yards of material to fill the borrow areas, and then seeded with a native seed mix, and planted with 100 nursery willows. Cross-section for station 43+75 shows the proposed work for the point bar. At the downstream end of the meander (station 45+80) an existing riffle would be stabilized with 8 to 12 inch cobble. The riffle is enhanced with the additional material to prevent the point bar from mobilizing and filling the channel downstream. The material is blended into the riffle with no change in the elevation but material added and shaped to keep the riffle in place. 9 Photo 3. Riffle to be stabilized at downstream end of meander, meander in background and portions of eroded bank on left side of photo. Taken from about station 46+00 From station 46+00 downstream to station 56+50, a series of pools and lateral bars would be constructed. At station 52+50 an existing riffle is stabilized with 8 to 12 inch cobble to maintain the riffle and keep the upstream bar from mobilizing material downstream. There is a good pool with overhead shade just upstream of the proposed riffle stabilization and the riffle work will help maintain this pool. 10 Photo 4. Taken from about station 52+00 downstream, the riffle downstream would be stabilized at station 52+50 The next large meander starts at station 56+50. The right descending bank is severely eroded for about 230 linear feet downstream, and we propose to stabilize the bank with a 2 foot lift of cobble excavated from the proposed pools in this reach, and then placing 8 to 18 inch cobble in front of the cobble lift. Five hundred nursery willows would be planted behind the larger cobble in the 2 foot lift. The point bar has received a large amount of small cobble from upstream events which has created the bank erosion. In addition, material has been removed from the bar in the past for gravel on ranch roads. In some locations, piles of material remain. The point bar would be graded and filled in at locations to shape an appropriate bar for this meander. The piles of material would be removed and about 50 cubic yards of material excavated from pools will be added to fill the areas previously excavated. The bar would be seeded with a native mix and 250 nursery willows planted. Any areas vegetated on the point bar would be left in place with no grading. 11 Photo 5. Meander section viewed from about station 66+00 looking upstream. Eroded right descending bank in background and meander cutoff starting in excavated area in foreground. From station 62+00 downstream to 91+20 a series of pools and lateral bars would be constructed. No work is proposed from 62+00 to 66+00. At 66+20 an existing riffle would be stabilized adding 8 to 12 inch cobble. Existing riffles at station 70+40 and 90+00 are also stabilized in the same manner by adding 8 to 12 inch cobble. The Thompkins Ditch (Roseman Ditch) diversion is located at station 93+50 (Sheet 5). This diversion sends irrigation water to the Thompkins Ditch via the headgate on the right descending bank. The diversion is operated by the Thompkins Ditch Company, and water is diverted under a series of decrees for irrigation in Peach Valley totaling 21 cfs. Also, on the right bank is a concrete spillway or chute, and the concrete dam spans the channel. The left descending bank is a steep bank 20 to 30 feet above the channel. A natural, very large boulder is located on the right descending bank. Sheet 5 shows the proposed work and a detailed enlarged plan is provided including a profile for the proposed work (Figure 5). To enable fish to pass through the structure, we propose to construct a hardened riffle downstream of the structure on an existing riffle just downstream of the plunge pool. The pool tailout is raised as well to create the riffle as shown on the plans. The riffle would be raised to back water surface at the weir to elevation 5,741 using a mixture of 2-3 foot rock, 8-12 inch cobble and 4 to 8 inch native stream cobble. The riffle would have a series of grade breaks downstream of the crest similar to a natural steep riffle. The riffle would raise surface elevation at the spillway or chute to about elevation 5741 to enable fish to pass 12 through the structure. The existing concrete spillway is at elevation 5740.86 (concrete), thus the raise in water surface elevation would reduce velocity through the spillway. The streambed at the riffle would be raised about 2.5 feet, and the water surface elevation about 2.1 feet. The surveyed elevations of substrate or concrete are in red on the plan view. The large rock shown on the plans on the right bank is the natural boulder. Photo 6. The Thompkins Ditch Diversion, May 22, 2019 The proposed work would not affect the diversion structure, or the ditch company’s ability to divert irrigation water. We have contacted the Ditch Company on the project and will be reviewing plans with them in the near future. On the right descending bank just downstream of the diversion is the old floodplain berm of mixed sized cobble constructed by dredging the adjacent channel (sheet 5). The berm is 2-3 feet above the native floodplain terrace, and the creek is incised. The berm would be removed, and the material used to construct two adjacent riffles as shown on the plans at station 94+50 and 95+70. The riffles would restore the streambed, and reduce the bed slope to the upstream hardened riffle helping to maintain elevations in the hardened riffle during peak discharges. The removal of berm would allow the channel to access this floodplain terrace during a major flow event. The area where the berm is removed would be seeded with the native riparian seed mix. 13 Downstream of the lower riffle, two pools are excavated at station 96+75 and at 98+75. The material is hauled out of the channel to an upland disposal site. From station 99+00 downstream to the near the eastern end of the property (station 14+00), a series of pools would be excavated and lateral bars constructed (Sheets 6 and 7). Seed Mixes: General Streambank and Riparian Seed Mix Western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii) Arriba 25% Streambank wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus) SODAR 40% Slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus) SAN LUIS 15% Mountain Brome (Bromus marginatus) Garnet 20% Rate – 25-30 lbs per acre – seed raked into soil, and lightly tracked packed where possible. Lower streambanks – lateral bar edges Streambank wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus) SODAR 40% Western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii) Arriba 40% Fowl bluegrass (Poa palustris) 10% Spike bentgrass (Agrostis exarata) 10 % General Seed Mix – Uplands Also about 50 lb bag of Western Native Seed Montane Erosion Control Mix for upland disturbance areas, equipment access and material storage: Bromus marginatus 45% Elymus trachycaulus 45% Pascopyrum smithii 10% Nursery Grown Willows from Alpine Eco Nursery (40 cubic inch containers) Coyote willow (Salix exigua) 1000 Strapleaf willow (Salix ligulifolia) 500 Whiplash willow (Salix lasiandra) 500 14 Materials The materials used for the project are native stream cobbles ranging in size from 2 inches to 18 inches, imported cobble (8 to 18 inch) and 2-3 foot rock used for the fish bypass at the Thompkins. Table 1. Materials excavated, discharged and area of stream. Design Sheet Area of stream (acre) Total Discharged (yd3) Total Excavated (yd3) Imported For banks and riffles (yd3) (included in Total Discharged) 1 .187 192.7 188.5 5 2 .097 188.5 188.5 0 3 .203 452.1 186.5 265.6 4 .251 356.5 407.5 150 5 .983 373.7 196,7 177 6 .09 170.2 170.2 0 7 .076 122.6 122.6 0 Totals 1.89 1,855.8 1,460.5 597.6 On sheets 2, 6 and 7 the material excavated balances out to material placed for lateral bars. On Reach 1 a minor amount of material (18 inch cobble) will be imported to stabilize the streambank. Sheets 3, 4, and 5 require a large amount of fill discharged as these sheets include the eroded stream banks, riffle stabilization and the hardened riffle for Thompkins Ditch diversion. About 202 cubic yards of material excavated from pools would be hauled to a nearby upland area. A total of 1,855.8 cubic yards of cobble and native stream gravels is discharged into WOTUS. Of that total 1,258.2 is native stream bed material excavated from pools, and 597.6 is imported material, including about 20 cubic yards of 2-3 foot rock for the hardened riffle at the Thompkins, and 577.6 cubic yards of 8 to 18 inch cobble for the designated sites on the plans (streambanks, riffle stabilization, and the hardened riffle). A tracked excavator run by an operator with extensive experienced in stream channel work would complete all work in the channel. Tandem trucks will deliver materials to the project area near each site for use, and a tracked skid steer will bring the materials to the stream edge, where the excavator will tram them into the stream. Matt Weaver will be on site while the work is completed. Aquatic habitat on the Lower Ranch will be improved and the stream stabilized where banks are eroding and the meanders sections are unstable. The fish block at the Thompkins Ditch Diversion would be eliminated or at least fish passage greatly improved, and available stream miles for spawning trout from the Colorado River and lower Elk Creek would be expanded. 15 There is good spawning habitat upstream in this reach and in the lower reaches of the Upper Ranch. VII. Terms and Conditions Item 5 of information required In RGP 12 includes pre-project photos at fixed GPS points depicting the physical setting to be compared with post project photos. These project photos will be submitted with GPS location, bearing and a general description prior to any work. Photos will be taken when high flows this year drop to levels where one can see the channel features. Photos will be submitted from the same points and bearing with each monitoring report. A representative selection of riffles, pools and lateral bar work areas will be selected within each reach, and the bank restoration sites, as well as the Thompkins Ditch. The project has or will comply with the 30 general conditions of RGP 12. Endangered Species Act and Section 106 are discussed below as well as sediment control during construction. The project will also comply with the Garfield County Land Use approvals and Floodplain Development permit issued. We estimate the project will require about 5 weeks to complete and we understand the same seasonal restrictions may be imposed. Endangered Species and Cultural Resources The project would not affect any federally listed species or their habitat protected by the Endangered Species Act. The project area is mapped as potential habitat for Ute Ladies tress’s (Spiranthes diluvialis) (SPDI) but habitat for the species is not present, and all work is conducted in the stream. SPDI is found in wetlands and wetland habitat is very limited on the Lower Ranch. The adjacent meadows are flood irrigated, but the soils are porous and water limited thus irrigation induced wetlands are not present. The habitats along the creek are generally above groundwater and support little wetland habitat. In 2017, the US Fish and Wildlife Service agreed that surveys for this species would not be required for the Upper Ranch project. There were no cultural resources observed on the Lower Ranch project area. The project occurs entirely within the active channel of the creek, and man-made cultural resources would likely not persist. Sediment Control: Work in the river will generate sediment which is unavoidable and the project will incorporate measures to minimize sediment releases. Wheeled vehicles such as trucks and front end loaders will not work in the river. It is expected only one tracked excavator will be working in the channel. If sediment plume becomes excessive, more than the creek flow can dissipate in several hundred feet, the work will stop for duration of time to allow for absorption of the sediment. In the past, that has been anywhere from 10 minutes to ½ hour. Bank restoration work by its nature can generate sediment as often the cobble and gravels have been stripped away by the erosion events, and only soil is being worked. As bank work is completed, small cobble coffer dams can be placed at the upstream end to deflect flows away from the bank while the major excavation work is underway. The bank stabilization proposed 16 includes the placement of a cobble lift in front of the eroded bank, thus excavation into the eroded bank is minimized. Monitoring Reports: A monitoring report will be submitted after high water in the first year after construction (2020) to include all photo points submitted with pre-project photos, and include a brief description of site depicted. A second monitoring report would be submitted after high water 3 years (2023) after construction using the same photo points and a description. VIII. Summary The proposed project on the Lower Ranch at Meadow Creek Ranch will enhance aquatic habitat to improve the fishery, and stabilize the channel on approximately 2.2 miles of Main Elk and Elk Creeks. The fish block imposed by the Thompkins Ditch Diversion will be eliminated to allow fish passage and open up additional miles of the Elk Creek drainage to spawning trout. The proposed project is a land owner voluntary restoration project to enhance aquatic habitat and stabilize the creek channel. Additional photos of Main Elk and Elk Creeks Phase 2, Meadow Creek Ranch Photo A. Main Elk Creek upstream of CR 245 taken at about station 16+50 looking downstream. Photo B. Elk Creek looking downstream form station 37+50 Photo C. Elk Creek form station 43+00 looking upstream, this is at the start of the first large meander and point bar Pool deepened on the right descending bank and lateral bar in submerged area extended on the left descending bank Photo D. First meander with eroded bank in background, from station 44+00 looking south across channel, several large down trees hung up on meander cutoff channel. Photo E. From Station 47+25 looking downstream, pool to be excavated on left descend ing bank and lateral bar on right descending bank. Photo F. On downstream large meander, at Station 58+75 on point bar looking across channel (SW) at eroded streambank, not small size of cobble on bar in right corner. Photo G. Riffle, pool, riffle sequence looking upstream, constructed June 2018 on Phase 1 of Meadow Creek Ranch Photo H. Riffle Pool, riffle constructed Phase 1, MCR, June 2018 in Reach 1 with larger native material available in streambed. Riffle on left side of photo extends to a longer run. Photo I.. Thompkins Ditch diversion, June 5, 2018. Concrete apron below dam, break in concrete, and spillway or chute in foreground. This is during runoff, at lower flows and during diversions, the only water passing the structure is in the concrete spillway. Taken from right bank on large boulder looking north Downstream Limit for 2018 Work Upstream for Phase 2 Downstream Phase 2 Phase 2 Project Area Copyright (C) 2009 MyTopo SCALE 1:48000 0 1 2 MILES 0 1000 2000 3000 YARDS 0 1 2 3 KILOMETERS Declination MN 10.32° E  MN Location: 039° 35' 40.21" N 107° 34' 03.74" WName: NEW CASTLE Date: 06/14/19 Scale: 1 inch = 4,000 ft. Copyright (C) 2009 MyTopo Figure 1 Meadow Creek Ranch Phase 2 4J LLC DAWSON, CLARENCE F TRUST & DAWSON, BETTY S TRUST SOWIEJA, THOMAS J BRANNAN PROPERTIES INC BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT RYDEN, LOIS E REVOCABLE TRUST ROBERTS, WARREN W TRUST & ROBERTS, CARLA R TRUST BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT MEADOW CREEK LLC BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Meadow Creek Ranch Stream Restoration Lateral Pool Riffle Equipment Access Gravel Removal Diversion Irrigation Structure Pipe Slump Willow Placement Areas ConcreteDiversion Parcels 0 0.13 0.250.06 Miles / Created by North Line GIS 4/8/19 (0 + 0 0 ) (1+00 )(2+00)(3+00 ) (4+00) (5+ 0 0 ) (6 + 0 0 ) (7 + 0 0 ) (8+ 0 0 ) (9 + 0 0 ) (1 0 + 0 0 ) (1 1 + 0 0 ) (12+00) POOL EXCAVATION SITE LATERAL BAR PLACEMENT N MAIN ELK CREEK DESIGN SHEET 1 DRAWN BY: Matt Weaver DATE: 10/28/18 8950 Chapman Road, Bozeman, MT 59718406.209.1970 SCALE 1" = 100' Five Rivers, Inc. MEADOW CREEK RANCH FLOW FISHERIES HABITAT IMPROVEMENT SHEET 1 - STA. 0+00 to 12+00 MEADOW CREEK RANCH Place large cobble excavated from adjacent pool at toe of 50' long eroding stream bank. Cobble would placed to an elevation approximately 2' above streambed elevation. 100 container willows would be planted within placed cobble. EQUIPMENT ACCESS POINT N FISHERIES HABITAT IMPROVEMENT SHEET 2 - STA. 12+00 to 24+80 MEADOW CREEK RANCH FLOWMAIN ELK CREEK DESIGN SHEET 2 DRAWN BY: Matt Weaver DATE: 10/28/18 8950 Chapman Road, Bozeman, MT 59718406.209.1970 SCALE 1" = 100' Five Rivers, Inc. MEADOW CREEK RANCH POOL EXCAVATION SITE LATERAL BAR PLACEMENT (1 2 + 0 0 ) (1 3 + 0 0 ) (14+00) (15+0 0 ) (16+00) (17+00) (18+00)(19+00) (20+00) (21+00) (22+00 ) (23+00)(24+0 0)(24+8 0) EQUIPMENT ACCESS POINT POOL EXCAVATION SITE LATERAL BAR PLACEMENT N FISHERIES HABITAT IMPROVEMENT SHEET 3 - STA. 24+80 to 55+00 MEADOW CREEK RANCH EQUIPMENT ACCESS POINT (55+00)(24+8 0)(25+0 0)(26+00)(27+00)(28+00)(29+00)(30+00)(31 + 0 0 ) (3 2 + 0 0 ) (33 + 0 0 ) (3 4 + 0 0 ) (35+00) (36+00)(37+0 0)(38+00)(39+00)(40+00)(41+00)(42+00)(43+00)(44+00)(45+00)(46+00)(47+00)(48+00)(49+00)(50+00)(51+00)(52+0 0) (53+00 ) (54+00) EQUIPMENT ACCESS POINT SLUMP AREA Place a 2' lift of cobble from down stream pool excavation along toe of slump. Place 8 to 18" cobble in front of stream cobble. Plant with 250 container willows. Place 30 yards of 8 to 12" cobble to stabilize existing riffle and prevent bedload in large upstream bar from mobilizing and filling channel downstream. Place 20 yards of 8 to 12" cobble to stabilize existing riffle and prevent bedload in large upstream bar from mobilizing and filling channel downstream. Place 2' lift of 8 to 18" cobble along toe of 8' high eroding bank. Plant 200 container willows. MAIN ELK CREEK DESIGN SHEET 3 DRAWN BY: Matt Weaver DATE: 10/28/18 8950 Chapman Road, Bozeman, MT 59718406.209.1970 SCALE 1" = 100' Five Rivers, Inc. MEADOW CREEK RANCH FLOWA .10 acre gravel deposition area resulting from a channel avulsion. The site has been used as a gravel borrow site for ranch roads. It's proposed that the excavated areas and gravel piles be re-graded and the site restored to a natural floodplain configuration, seeded with native riparian grass species and planted with 100 container grown native willows. Approximately 25 cubic yards of fill from pool excavation at 36+50 would be added to fill existing gravel borrow areas. IRRIGATION DIVERSION FISHERIES HABITAT IMPROVEMENT SHEET 4 - STA. 55+00 to 78+00 MEADOW CREEK RANCH N POOL EXCAVATION SITE LATERAL BAR PLACEMENT MAIN ELK CREEK DESIGN SHEET 4 DRAWN BY: Matt Weaver DATE: 10/28/18 8950 Chapman Road, Bozeman, MT 59718406.209.1970 SCALE 1" = 100' Five Rivers, Inc. MEADOW CREEK RANCH EQUIPMENT ACCESS POINT IRRIGATION PIPE (55+00)(78+00)(56+00)(57+00)(58+00)(59+00)(60+00)(61+00)(62+00)(63+0 0) (64+00) (65+00) (66+00) (67+00)(68+0 0)(69+00)(70+00)(71+00)(72+00)(73+00)(74+00)(75+00)(76+00)(77+00)Place a 2' lift of cobble from adjacent pool excavations along toe of eroding. Place 8 to 18" cobble in front of stream cobble. Plant with 500 container willows. Place 30 yards of 8 to 12" cobble to stabilize existing riffle and prevent bedload in large upstream bar from mobilizing and filling channel downstream. Place 20 yards of 8 to 12" cobble to stabilize existing riffle and prevent bedload in large upstream bar from mobilizing and filling channel downstream. Excavate pool and haul material to an upland fill site.FLOWA .49 acre gravel deposition area resulting from a channel avulsion. The site has been used as a gravel borrow site for ranch roads. It's proposed that the excavated areas and gravel piles be re-graded and the site restored to a natural floodplain configuration, seeded with native riparian grass species and planted with 250 container grown native willows. Approximately 50 cubic yards of fill from pool excavations at 56+50 and 58+00 would be added to fill existing gravel borrow areas. EQUIPMENT ACCESS POINT (78+00)MAIN ELK CREEK DESIGN SHEET 5 DRAWN BY: Matt Weaver DATE: 10/28/18 8950 Chapman Road, Bozeman, MT 59718406.209.1970 SCALE 1" = 100' Five Rivers, Inc. MEADOW CREEK RANCH N FISHERIES HABITAT IMPROVEMENT SHEET 5 - STA. 78+00 to 99+00 MEADOW CREEK RANCH POOL EXCAVATION SITE LATERAL BAR PLACEMENT Place 20 yards of 8 to 12" cobble to stabilize existing riffle and prevent bedload in large upstream bar from mobilizing and filling channel downstream. EQUIPMENT ACCESS POINT (99+00)(79+00)(80+00)(81+00)(82+00)(83+00)(84+00)(85+00)(86+00)(87+00)(88+00)(89+00)(90+00)(91+00)(92+00)(93+00)(94+0 0)(95+0 0)(96+0 0)(97+00)(98+0 0) Construct hardend riffle grade control structure to backwater existing irrigation diversion structure to provide fish passage over that structure. The riffle would be constructed using 60 cubic yards of a combination of 2 - 3' rock, 8-12" large cobble and 2 - 8" native stream cobble. IRRIGATION STRUCTURE Place 40 cubic yards of cobble upstream of proposed hardened grade control riffle. Excavate pool and haul material to upland fill site. Excavate pool and haul material to upland fill site. Remove existing gravel/cobble berm that was constructed from material excavated from the stream channel. This material would be placed back in the channel to construct the 2 adjacent riffles. The riffles would restore the original streambed elevation and reduce bed slope to upstream constructed grade control riffle. N FL O W FISHERIES HABITAT IMPROVEMENT SHEET 6 - STA. 99+00 to 111+70 MEADOW CREEK RANCH MAIN ELK CREEK DESIGN SHEET 6 DRAWN BY: Matt Weaver DATE: 10/28/18 8950 Chapman Road, Bozeman, MT 59718406.209.1970 SCALE 1" = 100' Five Rivers, Inc. MEADOW CREEK RANCH N POOL EXCAVATION SITE LATERAL BAR PLACEMENT EQUIPMENT ACCESS POINT(99+00)(111+70)(100+00)(101+00)(102+00)(103+00)(104+00)(105+00)(106+00)(107+ 0 0)(108+00)(109+00)(110+00)(111+00)F L O W (111+70)MAIN ELK CREEK DESIGN SHEET 6 DRAWN BY: Matt Weaver DATE: 10/28/18 8950 Chapman Road, Bozeman, MT 59718406.209.1970 SCALE 1" = 100' Five Rivers, Inc. MEADOW CREEK RANCH N FISHERIES HABITAT IMPROVEMENT SHEET 7 - STA. 111+70 to 124+00 MEADOW CREEK RANCHPOOL EXCAVATION SITE LATERAL BAR PLACEMENT EQUIPMENT ACCESS POINT EQUIPMENT ACCESS POINT PROPERTY LINE(124+ 0 0) ( 1 2 3+ 0 0 )(122+00)(121+00)(120+00)(119+00)(118+00)(117+0 0)(116+00)(115+00)(114+00)(113+00)(112+00)FLO W 0 5'10'15'20'25'30'35' 5' EXISTING COBBLE SUBSTRATE 40'45' 7' 5' BASE FLOW WSE BANK FULL WSE7' CONSTRUCT LATERAL BAR RIGHT DESCENDING BANK LEFT DESCENDING BANK SLOPE @ 1.5 :1EXCAVATED POOL MAIN ELK CREEK STA. 7+25 to 7+75 TYPICAL POOL/LATERAL BAR CONSTRUCTION SITE 7+ 0 0 8 + 0 0 POOL EXCAVATION SITE LATERAL BAR CONSTRUCTION SITE AFTER X-SECTION STA 7+50 EXISTING STREAMBED X- S E C T I O N 0 10'20'30'40'50'60'70' 5' 80'90' 7' 5'BASE FLOW WSE BANK FULL WSE 7' RIGHT DESCENDING BANK LEFT DESCENDING BANK MAIN ELK CREEK STA. 43+00 to 45+00 BANK STABILIZATION & FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION SITE EXISTING STREAMBED43+004 4+ 0 0 45+00 X-SECTION AFTER X-SECTION STA 43+75 8-18" COBBLE TOE & CONTAINER WILLOW 2:1 SLOPE& CONTAINER WILLOW 8-18" COBBLE TOE RESTORE GRAVEL BORROW AREA GRAVEL BORROW AREA FILL TO RESTORE EXISTING COBBLE SUBSTRATE 3.5' WIDE LARGE ROCK27'CONCRETE WEIRSPILLWAY HEADGATE FLUME DITCHLARGE ROCK N Construct harned riffle using a combination of 60 cubic yards of 2-3' rock, 8-12" cobble and 4 to 8" native streambed cobble. The riffle would be constructed to have several grade breaks as would be found in a natural steep riffle. GRADE BREAKS MAIN ELK CREEK DIVERSION PROPOSED FISH PASSAGE IMPROVEMENT MEADOW CREEK RANCH NEW CASTLE, CO. 5740.86 5741.06 5744.86 20'31' Raise water surface elevation of plunge pool below weir to el. 5741. Raise streambed elevation of existing pool tailout approximently 2.5' by placing approximately 40 cubic yards of 4 to 12" cobble to the elevation of upstream end of hardened riffle. 5738.48 MAIN ELK CREEK DIVERSION DRAWN BY: Matt Weaver DATE: 4/26/19 8950 Chapman Road, Bozeman, MT 59718406.209.1970 SCALE 1" = 15' Five Rivers, Inc. MEADOW CREEK RANCH Elevations shown on drawing in red are existing. ELEVATIONS Diversion Apron 5741.06 Spillway 5740.86 Existing Streambed @ Riffle 5738.48 Proposed Elevation of Constructed Riffle 5740.60 Existing W.S.E Below Diversion 5738.90 Proposed W.S.E. Below Diversion 5741.00 Proposed Elevation Change for Riffle +2.12' Proposed Elevation Change for W.S.E. +2.10' EXISTING STREAM SUBSTRATE EXISTING WSE PROPOSED WSE 2.1' POOL TAILOUT PLUNGE RAISE TAILOUT LARGE ROCK/COBBLE HARDENED RIFFLE PROPOSED HARDEND RIFFLE X-SECTION (NOT TO SCALE)