Sleepy Hollow Side Channel Feasibility Study - ucsrb.org · The project will inform designs which, when implemented, will provide lasting phases leading to implementation, including

Upper Columbia Regional Application 2017

Sleepy Hollow Side Channel Feasibility Study

Chelan County Natural Resource Department

411 Washington Street, Suite 201

Wenatchee, WA 98826

Erin McKay (509)630-5303

[email protected]

PRISM # 17-1202

HWS # Not Created

Anticipated Request - SRFB: $ 53,125

Anticipated Request – Source Pending: $ 9,375

Anticipated Request for Proposal: $ 62,500

Anticipated Other Funding/Contributions/Matches: $ 0

(Name Source, if applicable)

Anticipated TOTAL Project Budget: $ 62,500

Sleepy Hollow Side Channel Feasibility Study: Responses to RTT and Review Panel Questions

1. Will you include the entire floodplain in the study to gather more information?

While originally focused on just the side channel, the scope of data collection has expanded to include

the floodplain and associated floodplain channels. This would include piezometers in the floodplain and

monitoring of high flows within the 37 acre floodplain protected by the CDLT conservation acquisition

(including the northern portion of the floodplain containing a small side channel and barn). Updated map

showing additional piezometer locations is included.

2. Is funding for the acquisition in place?

Funding for the acquisition is pending the State Legislative Budget Agreement, which unfortunately

will not be available by the time of this submission (June 30). Availability of funds will be known shortly

thereafter, in time for review and selection of SRFB proposals. Indications are favorable for the

acquisition of the property, and we are moving forward with the project on the premise that CDLT will be

able to purchase the land. If the funding for the acquisition is not made available in the Legislative

Budget, we will withdraw this application for SRFB funding. CCNRD will update UCSRB and SRFB of

updates to availability of funds as soon as we have a definitive answer.

3. How will this side channel act in high flows? If high flows come through at high velocity, it could

be hard to get anything to stay put. How many project alternatives will be identified?

This proposal was formulated with some ideas of what appropriate side-channel improvement actions

might look like. With input from the RTT, and further consideration of the channel dynamics, we

understand that consideration of a greater range of alternatives will be necessary. Alternatives could

range from placement of apex jams at the inlet, as generally mentioned in the Lower Wenatchee River

Reach Assessment project identification of this site, to structures to collect wood that is naturally moving

down river, to in-channel placement of wood structures to promote scour-pool formation and increase

channel complexity in the upper side channel. Alternatives will also include restoration potential for the

smaller floodplain side channel located north of the main side channel. Rather than collecting data and

running models to support any preconceived alternatives, the focus of this project will be on letting the

information gathered guide the development of realistic alternatives.

4. What is the most limiting life stage for species you are targeting? When would they be most likely

to be present, and at what size/life stage?

This project targets all three listed species, which are present in the juvenile life stage year round in

the project area. While the side channel functions as a high-flow channel, opportunities to improve low

flow over-winter habitat could benefit all three target species in the juvenile rearing stage. See periodicity

chart below from the Lower Wenatchee River Reach Assessment illustrating the use of this area by spring

Chinook, steelhead, and bull trout.

Changes to original proposal include:

Expand scope of data collection to include entire floodplain and floodplain channels.

Consider broader range of alternatives based on input from RTT. Let data and site analysis drive

alternatives rather than approaching with alternatives already in mind.

15% match funding will not come from Tributary Committee; alternative match funding sources

are being identified.

Questions

Answers

Information

Resource

REGIONAL INFORMATION 1 What Upper Columbia

subbasin is the project

in?

Wenatchee Wenatchee

Entiat

Methow

Okanogan

2 What project category

is your project?

Design Only Restoration

Design Only

Restoration/Protection

Protection

Assessment

Monitoring

3 What Assessment Unit

is the project in? Wenatchee River 04: Lower Wenatchee

Click Here for

Assessment Unit

names

4 What rank restoration

and/or protection

priority is the

assessment unit the

project is located in?

3

Click Here for table of

Assessment Unit ranks

5 What is the primary

species the project will

target?

Steelhead

Steelhead

Spring Chinook

Bull trout

6 What secondary

species will the project

will target?

Spring Chinook

Bull trout

Steelhead

Spring Chinook

Bull trout

Other (please name)

7 What regional PCSRF

Metrics will be

implemented with this

project?

The side channel connects 37 acres of floodplain and

increases access to 2,700 ft. of side channel.

The total length of instream habitat treated will be about

2,700 ft., or approximately .5 miles.

Click Here for regional

PCSRF Metric

definitions

8 What Primary

Ecological Concern

does the Project

Address? (not required

for protection projects)

Side channel and floodplain connection is the #1 ranking

ecological concern in the Lower Wenatchee, and is the

primary concern the project addresses.

Click here for

Ecological Concern

definitions

9 What other Ecological

Concerns does the

Project Address (not

required for protection

projects?

The project also addresses riparian condition, which is the

#2 ecological concern in the lower Wenatchee

See above

10 What is the rank

priority of the primary

ecological concern this

project addresses in

the assessment unit it

occurs (not required for

protection projects)

#1

Click here for table of

Ecological Concern

ranks by assessment

unit

11 Where is the project? 47.469772 Lat. -120.368908 Long.

http://www.ucsrb.org/Assets/Documents/Library/Recovery%20Resources/Assessment%20Units.pdf



http://www.ucsrb.org/Assets/Documents/Library/Plans/UCSRP/RestorationProtection_PrioritiesTable_2014BS.pdf

http://www.ucsrb.org/Assets/Documents/Library/Plans/UCSRP/RestorationProtection_PrioritiesTable_2014BS.pdf

http://www.ucsrb.org/Assets/Documents/Library/Recovery%20Resources/PCSRF%20Metrics.pdf



http://www.ucsrb.org/Assets/Documents/Library/Recovery%20Resources/Ecological%20Concerns.pdf



http://www.ucsrb.org/Assets/Documents/Library/Plans/UCSRP/EC_Tables_2014BS.pdf




Regional Technical Team - Summary Information Click here for complete RTT scoring criteria

QUESTION SUMMARY INFORMATION

1 In one sentence, what is

the purpose of your

project?

The purpose of this project is to gather data to inform future projects that will

increase year round rearing habitat for spring Chinook, steelhead, and bull trout,

and high flow refuge for juvenile salmonids.

2 Location of the

Restoration Project

Location of the project is the side channel on river left of the mainstem lower

Wenatchee from RM 2.3-3. The lower Wenatchee is a steelhead MaSA and

supports steelhead at all life stages, and spring Chinook, steelhead and bull trout

juvenile rearing throughout the year. The side channel could provide critical

transitional and peripheral habitat and high flow refugia for juveniles of all three

listed species.

3 In one sentence, identify

what you are going to do

Complete data collection and hydraulic modelling to inform future side channel

habitat improvement projects.

4

How long will it take for

the benefits of the project

to be realized and how

long are they estimated

to persist?

The project will inform designs which, when implemented, will provide lasting

benefits (50+) years that will be seen within a year of implementation. The

phases leading to implementation, including the proposed data collection, may

take 2-3 years depending on funding cycles.

5

Benefits to Freshwater

Survival or Capacity

The project will lead to improvement of side channel habitat that will ideally

increase success of juvenile salmonids in reaching the adult stage where

spawning and productivity can occur.

Protection Projects Only

1 Project Protection Type? (List one: Fee Simple or Conservation Easement)

2 Placement of Protection

Project – spawning and

rearing

(Describe how your proposed protection project is sited within a priority

spawning/rearing area.)

3 Placement of Protection

Project – habitat quality

(Describe the extent to which the project protects high-quality habitat or habitat

that can be restored to high quality with appropriate restoration actions.)

4 Threat (Describe the potential development threat to the property if it is not protected.)

5 Benefits to freshwater

survival

(Describe what habitat values would be lost and to what degree would that loss

reduce freshwater survival and/or distribution of target species at the project

scale?)

6 Conditions Affecting the

Project

(Describe if there are any conditions regarding the protection of the property

that could limit the existing high quality habitat, (e.g. cattle grazing)

http://www.ucsrb.org/Assets/Documents/Library/SRFB%20Resources/RTTScoringCriteriaforSRFBProposals2017.pdf

Citizens Advisory Committee – Ranking Criteria and Summary Information For complete CAC ranking criteria click here

CRITERIA SUMMARY INFORMATION

Criterion 1: Benefits to Fish and Certainty of Success (60 pts. as a weighted percentage based upon

RTT score)

Is the project consistent with

the Recovery Plan

Implementation Strategy?

This project is consistent with the Recovery Plan Implementation Strategy in

that it addresses the primary ecological concern in the Lower Wenatchee

Assessment Unit of peripheral and transitional habitat.

Is the project/assessment based

on proven scientific methods

that will meet objectives?

This project will utilize standard and scientifically proven monitoring and

modeling techniques to learn more about groundwater, hydraulics through the

side channel and the floodplain, and inundation frequency and potential. This

collection and analysis of data by professional scientists will inform restoration

potential for the Sleepy Hollow side channel and floodplain.

Are there any obstacles that

could delay the implementation

of this project or study (e.g.

permitting, design)?

The only obstacle that could delay implementation is if the Legislative Budget

does not approve the funding that was originally dedicated for the

conservation acquisition of this property by Chelan Douglas Land Trust (CDLT).

This will be determined by the time this proposal goes through SRFB review,

and the SRFB panel will be notified of approval as soon as

Criterion 2: Project Longevity (30 points)

Who has the responsibility to

manage and maintain the

project? What is the

responsibility of current or

future landowners?

Chelan County Natural Resource Department (CCNRD) will manage and

maintain the project. CDLT, the landowner, is partnering with CCNRD on this

project and may play a role in outreach and assistance with research and data

collection, but is not responsible for carrying out the project. CDLT will also be

a partner on any future restoration actions on this property.

Has the sponsor successfully

implemented projects in the

past?

Yes. CCNRD has successfully implemented multiple large scale side channel

projects in the past including 7 side channel connection projects on the

mainstem Wenatchee and the Lower White Pine project on Nason Creek (to

name a few). CCNRD has implemented over 60 habitat projects in the

Wenatchee and Entiat subbasins.

Are the benefits associated with

the project in perpetuity?

*Will the project last only a few

years?

The benefits associated with this project will last in perpetuity as the

information collected and the alternatives identified will provide a foundation

with which to approach floodplain restoration/habitat improvement in an area

that will be protected in perpetuity. Careful consideration and selection of

alternatives developed through this project will ideally provide long-lasting

benefits in the Sleepy Hollow side channel/floodplain, as the alternatives will be

designed to promote natural processes.

Is there a high risk of failure

associated with this project?

This project does not have a high risk of failure as it is a data collection and

modeling project in an area where more information is needed to identify

restoration potential.

Criterion 3: Project Scope (15 points)

How much habitat is being

protected or gained?

This project will analyze and eventually contribute to potential habitat

improvement in 2,700 linear feet of side channel and 37 acres of undeveloped

floodplain with additional side channel potential.

Are threats imminent? Threats are not imminent.

Is the scale of the proposed

action appropriate?

The scale of the data collection, modeling, and development of alternatives is

appropriate for this area. Identified as the highest priority project area in the

2016 Lower Wenatchee River Reach Assessment, this area deserves this level of

analysis to identify the best options for habitat improvement.

Criterion 4: Community Support (25 points)

http://www.ucsrb.org/Assets/Documents/Library/SRFB%20Resources/APPENDIX_D%202015%20CAC%20Ranking%20Criteria.pdf

*Has there been public outreach about this project to assess the level of community support? *Does the project build community support for salmon recovery efforts? *Is there any community outreach planned during and/or after implementation?

The acquisition and protection of this rare piece of undeveloped floodplain in

the Lower Wenatchee reach was a result of outreach by CDLT and community

support for protection of the floodplain. The proposed project will build on

this momentum to explore further options for enhancing the floodplain habitat

potential, which will help reinforce community support for future protection

and acquisition projects that benefit salmon.

Has the project sponsor

secured landowner

participation or acceptance?

Yes, CDLT is supportive of investigating restoration/habitat improvement

potential on this property.

Will there be public access?

Public fishing access will be established through a WDFW easement once the

acquisition has been completed.

Will the project create benefits

or raise concerns for particular

groups or the community at

large?

The project could benefit the fishery local fishery and in combination with

shoreline access for fishing, could greatly benefit recreational fishing

opportunity. The project also benefits the greater community at large, by

protecting and improving the natural resources that lend residents of the

Wenatchee Valley a high quality of life. The project should not raise concerns

for any particular group or the greater community.

What is the breadth and

strength of the partnership

supporting the project

(technical support, financial,

and in-kind contributions,

labor)?

This project will be building on the work of CDLT, who went through the SRFB

process to secure funding for the floodplain acquisition. This represents a

great investment by SRFB and other state funding sources, and these

contributions will be even more effective with the exploration of habitat

improvement potential on this property. CCNRD will have the support and

institutional knowledge of CDLT as well additional financial contributions from

entities providing match for this grant.

Criterion 5: Economics (20 points)

Does the project represent an

opportunity for economic

benefit?

Potential habitat improvements in this area will contribute to the draw of the

Wenatchee Valley and its opportunities for nature-based recreation.

Additionally, any contract restoration work would likely be undertaken by local

contractors, contributing to the local economy. This work builds on

investments already made by RCO and other funders, increasing the economic

efficiency of the project.

Will this project help the region

move closer to delisting or

reduce regulatory intervention?

Because it addresses the highest priority project for habitat improvement in the

Lower Wenatchee, undertaking this project is a necessary step to improve

reproductive success and move all listed species closer to recovery. All listed

species are present in most life stages in this area, and the project represents a

good opportunity to provide habitat benefits for these species.

Is the project budget clearly

defined and reasonable?

The project scope is clearly reflected in the proposal budget, and is a

reasonable ask for a project designed to provide the information necessary to

move forward into a well-planned design project.

How much benefit does the

project create for the dollars

invested?

The project provides the benefit of completing a necessary step in addressing

restoration priorities in the Lower Wenatchee, and is a relatively small

investment compared to the investment of acquiring and protecting the

floodplain. Completing this step will allow the next phase of project design to

be completed at a lower cost (design would only require selection of a

preferred alternative), but with greater likelihood of success due to the careful

analysis completed in this step.

Appendix C-2: Planning Project Proposal

Page 1

Manual 18, Salmon Recovery Grants March 2017

Appendix C-2:

Planning Project Proposal

List all related projects previously funded or reviewed by RCO:

Project # or

Name Status

Status of Prior Phase Deliverables and

Relationship to Current Proposal?

#16-1790 In progress CDLT conservation acquisition of the property

pending

Choose a status

Choose a status

Submit this proposal as a PRISM attachment titled “Project Proposal.”

Project brief. 1.

Chelan County Natural Resource Department is proposing a data collection and

hydraulic modelling project for the Sleepy Hollow side channel on the Lower

Wenatchee River. Baseline data is needed for effective habitat project development

for this 2,700 linear foot side channel accessing 37 acres of unconfined and protected

floodplain.

Project location. 2.

The Sleepy Hollow side channel is located on the Lower Wenatchee River at RM 2.2-

3. The site is on river left, just west of the city of Wenatchee.

Problem statement. 3.

The lower Wenatchee River has experienced widespread fish habitat degradation

over the years due to channel modification, private land development, road and

Project Number 17-1202

Project Name Sleepy Hollow Side Channel Feasibility Study

Sponsor Chelan County Natural Resource Department

Planning Type Conceptual Design/Feasibility Study


Page 2


railway construction, and intensive agricultural practices. According to the 2016

Lower Wenatchee Reach Assessment (Tetra Tech 2016), approximately 35% of the

lower Wenatchee River is confined by the railroad, 31% of the channel banks are

entirely cleared of vegetation, 19% is riprapped, and 16% is in a natural vegetated

state. Additionally, as of 2006, 62% of the floodplain has been developed for either

agriculture or urban development.

Several limiting factors resulting from these historic and current conditions

contribute to the limited productivity of ESA listed salmonids. The primary limiting

factors in the lower Wenatchee are a reduction of off-channel habitat and

disconnection of floodplains, and degradation of riparian habitat (UCRTT 2014).

These limiting factors are reach based, and directly impact listed fish species by

limiting peripheral and transitional habitat needed for refugia during high flow and

denying cover and channel complexity needed for juvenile rearing. Secondary

limiting factors in the lower Wenatchee are watershed based, and include reduced

instream flows and high summer water temperatures. The focus of this project is to

address the primary limiting factor and the highest priority ecological concern in the

lower Wenatchee, with a feasibility study to determine potential actions to increase

peripheral and transitional habitat in the Sleepy Hollow side channel.

List the fish resources present at the site and targeted by the project. 4.

Species

Life History Present (egg,

juvenile, adult)

Current Population Trend

(decline, stable, rising)

Endangered

Species Act

Coverage (Y/N)

Spring

Chinook

Juvenile, adult Stable Yes

Steelhead Egg, juvenile, adult Rising Yes

Bull trout Juvenile, adult Declining/Stable Yes

Describe the limiting factors, and limiting life stages (by fish species) that 5.

the project expects to address.

As described above, much of the lower Wenatchee has been disconnected from

floodplain and side channel habitat. This has limited rearing (summer and winter) and

high-flow refugia habitat for juvenile spring Chinook, steelhead, and bull trout in a reach

that all three species pass through twice in their lifetime. Warm summer water

temperatures are also a limiting factor in the lower Wenatchee, and recognizing the

importance of groundwater and hyporheic inputs contributing to cold water refugia in

side channels is an important consideration for biological success.

The lower Wenatchee is a MaSA for steelhead, and is known to support all life stages.

Steelhead are present at all life stages in the lower Wenatchee in April and May, when

high-flow refugia is critical during spring run-off events that create hazardous conditions


Page 3


in the main channel. Juvenile spring Chinook and bull trout are also present in this reach

during spring high-water events and similarly need the protection of off channel refugia.

Juveniles of all three species are present year round in the reach, and rely on the cover,

food availability, and cooler water temperatures provided by groundwater feeds in side

channel habitat. Juvenile spring Chinook rear over winter in the lower Wenatchee, and

out-migrate in the spring, while steelhead and bull trout rear here year-round (Tetra

Tech 2016). Improved habitat in the Sleepy Hollow side channel would benefit all three

listed species in the juvenile rearing stage, especially as over-wintering habitat. As the

lower Wenatchee has significant loss of or degraded riparian habitat and off channel

habitat, protecting and improving this type of off-channel habitat is critical for successful

life cycles in this reach and in reaches and tributaries upstream.

Project goals and objectives. 6.

A. What are the project’s goals?

The goal of this project is to collect baseline data that will inform future habitat

restoration actions and lead to conceptual project designs to enhance year round

peripheral and transitional habitat for juvenile and adult spring Chinook, steelhead,

and bull trout in a rare stretch of the lower Wenatchee that still has connected

floodplain and will be protected against development. The project outcome will be

improved side channel habitat for successful rearing of the three targeted species, as

well as increased quantity of the high-flow and over-wintering refugia required by

juvenile salmonids present in the lower Wenatchee.

B. What are the project’s objectives?

Objectives of the project are:

1. Identify project alternatives to benefit juvenile spring Chinook, steelhead,

and bull trout through improvement of side channel and floodplain

habitats.

2. Collect data on groundwater levels through the existing side channel and

the floodplain side channel area to better understand if groundwater can

be incorporated into future restoration actions to provide cooler summer

water sources and warmer winter augmentation.

3. Quantify the timing and extent of inundation of the main side channel

and the floodplain, and sediment distribution to improve understanding

of side channel/floodplain hydraulics, hydrology, and sediment transport.

4. Complete base flow, 2 year, 10 year, and 100 year hydraulic modelling

using 2016 LiDAR, to assess existing flow connectivity, identify

impairments, and inform the drafting of restoration alternatives.


Page 4


5. Continue landowner and stakeholder outreach to gain support for future

side channel improvement projects and possibly expand the scope of

acceptable actions.

What are the assumptions and constraints that could impact whether the 7.

sponsor achieves the objectives?

This project assumes that CDLT will be able to purchase fee ownership of the 37

acres of floodplain with the funding awarded by RCO and WWRP. In 2016, CCNRD

worked with CDLT and adjacent landowners to gain access to the side channel and

install two game cameras and staff gages to monitor water levels in the channel as

the river rises. CCNRD expects this cooperation with CDLT and landowners to

continue throughout the data collection process.

Project details. 8.

A. Provide a narrative description of the proposed project.

The Lower Wenatchee Reach Assessment identifies Reach 3 (RM ) as one of the

reaches on the lower Wenatchee with a considerable amount of historic floodplain

that is now disconnected, and gives this reach the greatest potential for restoration

in the lower Wentachee (Tetra Tech 2016). The project ranks #1 in the prioritized list

of habitat projects in the assessment. The primary restoration action types for the

reach are listed in the Assessment as protecting and maintaining habitat, riparian

restoration, floodplain reconnection, and placement of habitat structures. In 2016,

Chelan-Douglas Land Trust secured funding from RCO for a conservation acquisition

of a 37 acres of the Sleepy Hollow floodplain, and is working toward accomplishing

the first of the restoration actions of protecting and maintaining habitat against

future development. Chelan County Natural Resource Department is working with

CDLT to assess possible restoration actions to improve floodplain processes in the

newly acquired parcel.

The Sleepy Hollow side channel is a 2,700 ft. long side channel with two inlets and

access to 37 acres of protected floodplain, all within the 100 year flood elevation. As

an intact side channel with connected floodplain, the site has potential to be an

important refuge and rearing site for anadromous fish as they pass through this spot

twice during their lifetime. Protection of the area for perpetuity is pending, and as

noted in the Lower Wenatchee Reach Assessment, this area provides a unique

opportunity for improvement of peripheral and transitional habitat. The assessment

notes that “existing side channels are cut off from main channel”, and “reconnecting

side channels and installing large wood structures will increase available rearing

habitat” (Tetra Tech 2016). Data collection to identify the extect to which the side

channels are cut off from main channel, the feasibility of reconnecting them, and the


Page 5


potential for incorporating important groundwater sources into restoration actions is

needed. CCNRD has already begun collaboration with CDLT to initiate monitoring in

the side channel, specifically through installation of game cameras to monitor

seasonal flood flows to inform future hydrologic assessment.

CCNRD is seeking funding to implement a robust ground and surface water data

collection effort along with hydraulic modeling of the project site, to inform the

development of project alternatives in this area of high potential and importance to

listed juvenile salmonids.

Data collection will include:

Piezometer array to document groundwater levels, both in the main side channel

and in the floodplain and smaller floodplain side channel.

Additional game cameras and staff gage data to continuously record site

hydrology. This data will be used to directly calibrate hydraulic modelling efforts.

Collection of sediment conditions within the side channel to perform an analysis

of sediment dynamics. This analysis will inform the ability to scour and maintain

potential side channel inlets and habitat features.

2-Dimensional hydraulic modelling using existing 2016 LiDAR topography to

evaluate site hydraulics, floodplain connectivity, and the potential to create and

maintain side channel features.

A draft alternatives document will be produced describing at least 2-4 project

alternatives with graphics and a brief technical memo. Project alternatives will take

into account the high-flow dynamics in the main side channel, floodplain connection

potential, and fish use potential at different flows. Project elements also include

landowner outreach to ensure continued support of possible side channel

improvement projects and coordination with CDLT to ensure the project is in keeping

with the goals of the conservation acquisition. Deliverables of this project will lead

directly to the next phase of Preliminary Design for habitat improvement in the

Sleepy Hollow side channel.

B. Provide a scope of work and detailed list of project deliverables.

Table 1. Scope of Work

Project Element Deliverables Timeline Entity

Initial research and

information gathering

Creation of database Feburary

2018

CCNRD

Installation/monitoring of

data collection equipment

Data logs from game

camera, piezometers,

and staff gages

November

2018

CCNRD


Page 6


Hydraulic modelling Hydraulic Model

Technical Report

July 2018 Consultant

Draft alternatives report Draft Alternatives

Technical Memorandum

January

2019

Consultant

Landowner Outreach Continued project

support

Ongoing CCNRD/CDLT

C. Explain how the sponsor determined cost estimates.

Costs include all costs to complete implementation of the data collection, stakeholder

outreach, and data analysis. Stakeholder coordination and data collection will be

completed by CCNRD. Hydraulic modeling and development of project alternatives will

be subcontracted by the County. Estimates for subcontracted work are based on actual

costs as proposed by a subcontractor.

Table 2. Cost Estimate

Task Cost estimate

Data collection (database, installation of equipment,

monitoring of equipment)

$12,000

Hydraulic Model $25,000

Draft Alternatives $8,500

Landowner outreach and Stakeholder Coordination $7,000

Project Administration Management $10,000

Indirect $2,500

Total $62,500

D. How have lessons learned from completed projects or monitoring

studies informed the project?

Effectiveness monitoring of the 7 off-channel habitat projects completed by CCNRD

in the lower Wenatchee has shown that an understanding of subsurface groundwater


Page 7


conditions is essential for gaging the potential benefits of groundwater and

hyporheic flows in extending the “usable period” for juvenile fish in both summer and

winter. For example, piezometer data at the Cashmere Pond project (2009) provided

valuable data to assess seasonal pond levels and potential side channel discharge.

Regionally, similar piezometer data has also been used to inform design at the Tyee

off-channel project in the Entiat River (2012), and is currently being collected at large

side-channel projects proposed by the Bureau of Reclamation also on the Entiat

River.

Monitoring has also shown that an understanding of local sediment and bed mobility

dynamics is important to informing side channel inlet geometry, wood placement,

and scour potential. In large and powerful rivers like the mainstem Wenatchee, large

depositions of sand and gravels within recently constructed side channels can limit

the lifespan and function. Promoting scour and mobility of materials through the

site will be key to improving overall project function.

Finally, the development of 2D hydraulic modelling has become a critical tool in

evaluating river and floodplain flow interaction in designing side channel and

floodplain connections. Real-world data (staff gage, game cameras, spot survey) are

important data sources for the accurate calibration of these models. As +/- 1 foot of

water can make the difference between connected habitats and stranded fish, it is

important to have the best data possible to ensure model accuracy and subsequent

design.

If the project includes an assessment or inventory (NOTE: project may extend 9.

across a wide area and cover multiple properties).

A. Describe any previous or ongoing assessment or inventory work in your

project’s geographic area and how this project will build upon, rather

than duplicate, the completed work.

B. If a design is NOT a deliverable of this grant, please describe how this

project meets all of the required criteria for filling a data gap that are

list in Section 2 of Manual 18.

If the project includes developing a design or a feasibility study: 10.

A. Will a licensed professional engineer design the project?

Yes

A licensed professional engineer will provide the hydraulic modelling

results and draft alternatives. CCNRD will carry out other data

collection activities in consultation with CDLT and the consultant

doing the modelling. CCNRD has carried out this type of data

collection for many past and current projects.


Page 8


B. If the project includes a fish passage or screening design, has the

project received a Priority Index (PI) or Screening Priority Index (SPI)

number? N/A


Page 9


C. Will you apply for permits as part of this project’s scope?

No

Permits will be sought upon development of premliminary designs,

which is not in the scope of this proposal.

For fish passage design projects: N/A

i. If you are proposing a culvert or arch, will you use stream

simulation, no slope, hydrologic, or other design method?

Please describe.

ii. Describe the amount and quality of habitat made accessible if

the barrier is corrected.

iii. List additional upstream or downstream fish passage barriers, if

any.

Explain why it is important to do this project now instead of later. 11.

It is essential to collect data to inform the development of effective habitat projects.

As each stage of developing, designing, and implementing successful, process-based

restoration projects takes time, it’s important to begin with the baseline data needs

as soon as possible in order to prepare for the project design and implementation

that will tangibly benefit fish.

The Sleepy Hollow side channel and floodplain presents an opportunity to address

the highest priority for protecting biological productivity, which is allowing natural

floodplain processes such as stream channel migration, instream complexity, and

floodplain function to occur (UCRTT 2014). With the pending conservation

acquisition by CDLT, this area also presents an opportunity to address the highest

priority for habitat restoration, which is to improve off channel habitat and floodplain

process to provide juvenile rearing and refuge habitat. This project is necessary to

determine the extent to which these strategies can be applied in this area to address

these two priorities.

If the project is a part of a larger overall project or strategy, describe the 12.

goal of the overall strategy, explain individual sequencing steps, and which

of these steps is included in this application for funding.

The data collection and modelling undertaken in this project will be used to inform

the next phase of habitat improvement at the site, which is selection of the preferred

alternative and preliminary permit ready design. Final design and implementation

will follow, as per SRFB Manual 18.


Page 10


Describe the sponsors experience managing this type of project. 13.

Through implementation of over 60 salmon habitat restoration projects in the the

Wenatchee and Entiat subbasins, CCNRD staff has gained many years of combined

experience collecting field data, working with consultants, coordinating with

landowners, stakeholders, and regulatory agencies, and conducting pre- and post-

construction monitoring.

CCNRD has recently engaged in a similar data collection project to inform project

feasibility on the Nason 2.3 oxbow re-connection project. Background data was

collected, a piezometer array installed and monitored, and a database assembled.

This project was subsequestly submitted as a SRFB proposal in 2016 for design and

permitting. Additionally, CCNRD recently contracted with a consultant firm to

produce the 2017 Lower Icicle Creek Geomorphic and Hydraulic Assessment for the

Identification of Protection and Restoration Actions. This report included hydraulic

modeling and draft project alternatives, elements which will also be included in this

proposal.

List all landowner names. 14.

-9th Street Waterfront Investment LLC (purchase by CDLT pending).

-Lurie Burgoon (adjacent landowner downstream)

List project partners and their roles and contributions to the project. 15.

CDLT is a project partner. As previously mentioned, CDLT is in the process of

acquiring the land. CDLT staff will likely assist with landowner outreach and project

development.

Stakeholder outreach. 16.

Extensive public outreach was undertaken by CDLT in preparation for the

conservation acquisition of floodplain property. CDLT has continued working with

landowners to ensure access to the site for intial placement of game cameras to

monitor channel inundation. Landowners are supportive of data collection activities

and potential habitat improvement projects. Downstream landowner outreach will

be important in the design phase, when outcomes of channel connection actions

become clear.

References


Page 11


Tetra Tech. 2016. Lower Wenatchee River Reach Assessment. Prepared for Confederated

Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Nation.

Upper Columbia Regional Technical Team (UCRTT). 2014. Revised Biological Strategy to

Protect and Restore Salmon Habitat in the Upper Columbia Region.

Supplemental Questions

For acquisition and planning combination projects, applicants will need to answer the

acquisition supplemental questions found in the “Restoration, Acquisition, and

Combination Proposal.”

Comments

Use this section to respond to the comments received after the initial site visits and after

submitting the final application.

Response to Site Visit Comments

Please describe how the sponsor responded to the review panel’s initial site visit

comments. RCO recommends that the sponsor list each of the review panel’s comments

and questions and identify the response. The sponsor may use this space to respond

directly to the comments.

Response to Post-Application Comments

Please describe how the sponsor responded to the review panel’s post-application

comments. RCO recommends that the sponsor list each of the review panel’s comments

and questions and identify the response. The sponsor may use this space to respond

directly to the comments.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

T:23R:20

19 20

Sleepy Hollow Side Channel Project Area

´

0 0.1 0.20.05Miles

Proposed Data Collection Placements!. EC Staff Gage!. Piezometer!. Staff Gage w Camera

9th Street LLC

9th Street LLC

BurgoonHarris

T:23R:19 T:23

R:20

ColumbiaRiver

WenatcheeRiver

HorseLake

Wenatchee

3233 34

27

15

22

36

16

25

24

30

19

29

20

28

21

18 17

27

13

31

Sleepy Hollow Side Channel Project Area

´

0 1 20.5Miles

Chelan County

Sleepy Hollow Low Flow Photos (April 2017)

High Flow Photos (from CDLT acquisition proposal)

Channel and pools 400’ from mainstem

Upper Side Channel at 6,500 cfs (just watering up on 5/4/17)

Lower Side Channel at low flow (~4,000cfs on 5/2/17)

Inlet of side channel, water receding after a high-water event in March 2017 (pictured at ~4,200cfs).

Staff gage and game-cam placed by CCNRD and CDLT in fall 2016. Note broad, shallow and homogenous

character of upper side channel.